Quastion about space! (Did American was on moon???)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 06:12 PM
link   
What matterial space engeners using to protect from radiation????


[edit on 27-7-2004 by pushkin]




posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Hmm i recently heard the name of it..but u could probably google it and find it



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Space radiation consists of electrons and ions that have energies between 0.1-10GeV/nucleon. The shields that are used cause the ions to fragment into their nuclear constituents then collide with the nuclei in the shield, transferring energy to the orbital electrons in the atoms of the shield. The shields don't prevent the ions from entering the space craft just control the adverse effects. Polyethlyene and aluminum are used for sure, there are probably others but i don't remember which.



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I know that in 60s it was very heavy metal.

And because of that there was NO moon landing mission.

You see if you put this material aroung all spaceship, then it would be to heavy. If you don't put it at all, then no one will return from moon.!!

So how did USA landed on moon and what it this metal?



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 10:41 PM
link   
The astronauts were in the Van Allen Belt for a very short amount of time and did not have to worry about the radiation you are referring to. And yes, we did land on the moon. Build a bridge and get over it!



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Pushkin is also wrong because it was for the Apollo missions they invented the synthetic materials we use to block radiation today.

And they had radiation suits at that time anyway. It was merely perfected.



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by pushkin
I know that in 60s it was very heavy metal.

And because of that there was NO moon landing mission.

You see if you put this material aroung all spaceship, then it would be to heavy. If you don't put it at all, then no one will return from moon.!!

So how did USA landed on moon and what it this metal?



the metal was thinner than a pice of tin foil. thats how we got to the moon. no wind to rip the foil. simple as that. dont believe everything you read on the internet.



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 11:47 PM
link   
They just use aluminum shells i think right now.the traditional aluminum shells won't cut it during a multi-year mission.

But some scientists are also looking at alternative approaches to safeguard astronauts, ranging from the use of electric fields that create a protective shell around a spacecraft to basic ship design

Spacecraft designers may also use a ship's own cryogenic fluids as a radiation screen by arranging the cargo tanks containing them around crew compartments

The atoms of liquid hydrogen are particularly good as a screen for galactic cosmic rays because they don't fragment into secondary particles as much as heavier elements -- like lead -- do when bombarded by high-energy radiation. Those secondary particles, researchers said, could be just as harmful as space radiation itself.


I think even water could be used to help shield a ship

link



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   
No shadow, they use synthetics, planes are made out of aluminum and you receive more radiation on a plane then you do going to the Moon. (This was the findings they received when the trip was done and they could analyze the experiments set-up to test such things.)



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   
I said I think thats what they used this is what I read off www.space.com

''NASA researchers are working hard to find their away around space radiation, a hazard future astronauts can't avoid if they hope to fly on long missions to Mars and eventually set foot on its surface''.

''Much of their focus is on new and better shielding materials to slap on the outer surface of a spacecraft, since the traditional aluminum shells won't cut it during a multi-year mission''.

I never thought short term space flights even required any protection. Radation shielding in space was never my strong point just thought I would post what I found about it



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Oh I merely mistook you to thinking the aluminum was all.

Yes the aluminum is a good material but not the only material. They have something like "half a millimeter" of some synthetic stuff, which does an excellent job at reducing radiation as well. I think they'll find a better inner-layer than an outer skin.



posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Nasa right now is considering using a titanium alloy to replace the aluminum alloy that is currently in use. Other than that they are moving more toward synthetic skins for future missions.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:42 AM
link   

The astronauts were in the Van Allen Belt for a very short amount of time and did not have to worry about the radiation you are referring to. And yes, we did land on the moon. Build a bridge and get over it!


This is exactly correct....


We (with microwaves, cell phones, jets, etc.) get a daily dose of radiation that is more than the lunar astronauts got in their whole missions!!!


In a bit of macro-evolution, humans can actually withstand many more rads than we could just a decade ago. I'm not saying you can toast marshmellows in a nuclear blast or anything....(well you can, but just for a millisecond, hehe.....
), but we can hold up to the radiation in our environs, and certainly for short trips through the belts....



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 08:18 AM
link   
If you use a normal CRT monitor with your computer you are beeing constantly bombarded with radiation, this is one of things that make LCD monitors more healthy to use.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
They just use aluminum shells i think right now.the traditional aluminum shells won't cut it during a multi-year mission.

But some scientists are also looking at alternative approaches to safeguard astronauts, ranging from the use of electric fields that create a protective shell around a spacecraft to basic ship design

Spacecraft designers may also use a ship's own cryogenic fluids as a radiation screen by arranging the cargo tanks containing them around crew compartments

The atoms of liquid hydrogen are particularly good as a screen for galactic cosmic rays because they don't fragment into secondary particles as much as heavier elements -- like lead -- do when bombarded by high-energy radiation. Those secondary particles, researchers said, could be just as harmful as space radiation itself.


I think even water could be used to help shield a ship

link



Right now they do not have much radiation because they to close to Earth.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Pushkin is also wrong because it was for the Apollo missions they invented the synthetic materials we use to block radiation today.

And they had radiation suits at that time anyway. It was merely perfected.


That day when I post this poster, Friend of mine told me metal that they used, but I forgot what it is. Also I am at the middle beliving that usa landed on the moon. ( Even in statistics 40% of American don't belive that usa landed on the moon)



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Many of you said that on the moon are not very high rediation. Then read this:

www.sundaytimes.co.za...

If ON LOW-ORBIT radiattion is enogh to damage spacecraft. Then think what it can do with human body.

Also I ask few of my friends about this metal that can protect from radiation. It is lead. Only this metal was know in 60s that can protect from radiation. To stand enogh radiation that is on moon you will need at least 15cm walls. but lead is too heavy, SO DID USA GO TO MOON????



posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Yes, we went to the moon. They shielded with lead, but the astronauts did not stay in the danger region for long enough to harm them. It is a very small region of space.

The radiation mentioned in SundayTimes.Co.Za is caused by our magnetic field being weak right now. The Earth's magnetic field is not constant. Also, we've had some big sunspots.

As the others say, don't believe the websites. A lot of us here SAW the moon landings live on tv.


Q

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:57 AM
link   
I've seen designs that propose using good 'ol water to block the radiation during treks to Mars. Not quite sure how that works, but the gist of it is lining the crew modules with water tanks (they have to bring some along, anyway), which would block the rays. I would personally question how safe this water would be for consumption afterwards...

Interesting bit about the macro-evolution, Gazrok. It makes sense...with ever-increasing levels of radiation in the environment, natural selection would tend to favor those less-susceptible to it. I would think this on a longer period, but who knows? Cancer rates have reportedly skyrocketed in the last few decades, although I'd also kind of question those figures. I kinda think that there was probably that much cancer all along, but our medical technology wasn't advanced enough to detect it. If you look 'back then', you'll see that a suspiciously large number of people died of "consumption", or other equally nonexistant diseases.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Q
I've seen designs that propose using good 'ol water to block the radiation during treks to Mars. Not quite sure how that works, but the gist of it is lining the crew modules with water tanks (they have to bring some along, anyway), which would block the rays. I would personally question how safe this water would be for consumption afterwards...

Interesting bit about the macro-evolution, Gazrok. It makes sense...with ever-increasing levels of radiation in the environment, natural selection would tend to favor those less-susceptible to it. I would think this on a longer period, but who knows? Cancer rates have reportedly skyrocketed in the last few decades, although I'd also kind of question those figures. I kinda think that there was probably that much cancer all along, but our medical technology wasn't advanced enough to detect it. If you look 'back then', you'll see that a suspiciously large number of people died of "consumption", or other equally nonexistant diseases.


Thanks, for you interesting article.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join