Of what's become nondisclosure/taboo
Brad Guth
whatever and I'll follow suit. If you can't think of any viable topic
to review, in that case here's another of my not so short list of
topics, although a much simpler list that's extremely narrow per topic
is doable. Unfortunately, I must include a crosspost into
"news.admin.censorship" in order to minimise topic/author stalking.
Of what's nondisclosure/taboo but otherwise absolutely nifty topics
about our moon, such as the first of these three following groups of
topics should keep our MI6/NSA~NASA spooks absolutely ripped;
LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator that's ME-L1/EM-L2 interactive)
Russians mining the moon for He3 and other valuable minerals
S-Band-->Microwave transponders (specifically Chapel Bell transponders)
Physical influx that apparently never existed for our lunar missions
Kodak's photografic chemical emulsion physics-101 that doesn't lie
Color and B&W film sensitivity to the unfiltered near-blue and near-UV
Lunar albedo and color spectrums that shift for no apparent reason
Old images from nearby orbits that are still 100 fold better than KECK
Optical lens and band-pass spectrum filters that weren't utilized
Polarised filters that makes primary reflective surfaces so much
brighter
Illumination spectrums of hot spots that were xenon lamp illuminated
Lunar top-soil or rather iron, carbon and titanimum dust meters thick
Moon-Dirt surface tension physics of extremely dry quicksand = 10 g/cm2
Reactive aspects of basalt, and of secondary/recoil photons
Them marvelous fly-by-rocket landers that don't seem to exist
Hollow rille/geode pockets as future safe-house habitats
The LUNAR-A mission that's still on hold after more than a decade
Javelin Probes that'll never happen until them Apollo cows come home
SMART-1 (white cane and all) that's actually not so very smart after
all
Moon EVAs via earthshine instead of getting primary/secondary TBI to
death
Icy proto-moons that'll go bump in the night, off-loading their DNA/RNA
Of aything having to do with the trillions upon trillions of
photons/atom
Total WW-III upon absolutely anything suggesting upon FTLS
communications
Anything as to suggesting that wizard Einstein wasn't a pagan Jewish
God
(BTW; even Lord Einstein couldn't brown-nose quantify any BIG BANG
theory)
Of course mentioning any of the following as topics or as sub-topics,
or just for merely pulling analogies to/from any of these testy items
will get yourself summarily stalked, bashed and/or receiving their
ultimate banishment treatment, plus all their spermware your PC can
choke down;
The GW Bush desmirk botoxingate and those LLPOF invisible/stealth WMD
Less albedo = global warming (energy-in that doesn't equal energy-out)
Of such High Standards and Accountability that sucks without remorse
So what's the difference; our foreign policy that sucks and blows
Those mutually perpetrated cold-war(s)
Third Reich of the Skull and Bones cult
Global energy domination at any cost
The taking of Iraq oil under the ruse of WMD
Alternatives to fossil and nuclear derived energy
Green/renewable energy density footprints of 20 kw/m2
9/11, TWA flight-800, USN LIBERTY and the 6-Day war
Boeing/TRW/Raytheon and their Phantom Works ABLs
Lose cannons pushing those mainstream "Do NOT Push" buttons
Any negative or positive mention of God, Jews, Catholics, Cathars
Any suggestion that history has been anything but the holy and
terrestrial truth
Any suggestion the BIG BANG theory wasn't the one and only singular
event
Any suggestion as to interstellar or notions of terrestrial recycling
Any mention of other than terrestrial life will get you nuked
As to otherwise suggest or argue upon any of these basic notions from
the following list of deductive reasoning as having been related to
observationology upon Venus, or as related sub-topics in support of
what has been observed about Venus is going to get you nothing but
insurmountable grief;
Various energy options for other life on Venus
Artificial illuminations, as opposed to lightning
Extracting H2O from 4.5e18 kg worth of clouds and haze
The Venus atmosphere that isn't just a bunch of hot CO2
Flying diatoms and of other microbes of Venus
Converting CO2-->CO/O2, via green energy and UV/a
Efficient air conditioning via CO2-->CO/O2
Local transportation via massive rigid airships
How Venusisans go about spanning a massive canyon/rille
Structural items of whatever at 90.5% gravity and 65+kg/m3
The Guth Venus tarmac (Venus Interplanetary Airport)
Complex reservoirs that contain what's obviously not boiling
A massive fluid arch existing on a hot and nasty planet
Silica and basalt composites of structural insulation at R-1024/m
Super insulating micro-balloons at 50 kg/m3, as buoyant and R-2048/m
Electro-mechanical equipment that's just fine and dandy at 811°C
Silica diatoms that remain buoyant while they convert CO2
Effective interplanetary communications without radio
Establishing TRACE-VL2 as a communications transponder
Hiding from Earth may be their only hope of surviving
Sirius/c could be Venus, our icy moon taken from Sirius
UV/a cycle of life, and of what goes around comes around
Best ever airship/UFO and shuttle park-n-ride tarmac
Surface roadbed issues and multiple rock quarry sites
Folks having to make due with too much clean energy
What about those multiple and large parabolic items
Venus before getting geologically hot and nasty
Interplanetary laser communications at 1e15 bps
Observationology interpreted surface features
What's actually hot enough to boil at 100 bar
Terraforming the likes of Venus w/Sedna
Ungreenhouse growing of whatever
Other than human life on Venus
Planetary evolution w/wo God
John Ackerman and FW Taylor
Venus Express
Unfortunately, all of the above and so many other topics are of a
nondisclosure/taboo nature, thus whatever evidence via hard-science is
still being officially and unofficially excluded, and/or the
conditional laws of physics are those having been reapplied as to
discredit whatever imposes a challenge to the mainstream status quo.
Even for an honestly subjective interpretation upon an image of what
looks as perfectly natural rock and of whatever's most likely of a
geological nature isn't permitted, not even in jest, especially if
there's anything nearby looking the least bit artificial. In other
words, all of what's imaged and/or having scientific data associated
isn't worth squat, and it isn't going to be talked about unless you're
getting paid the really big bucks by the MI6/NSA~NASA cultism that's
socially, politically and religiously brown-nosed skewed into the
nearest space-toilet for good.
Therefore, mentioning and/or involving anything that's the least bit
contrary as to the NASA moderated and thereby scripted bible/koran of
whatever it's all about is essentially nondisclosure/taboo. So much for
the salvation of humanity.
~
Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
"In war there are no rules" - Brad Guth
Jonathan Silverlight
<ffge...@yourplace.com> writes
>On 30 Aug 2005 10:32:46 -0700, "Brad Guth" <ieisbr...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>If you'd like to honestly focus upon something/anything, just specify
>>whatever and I'll follow suit.
>>event
>engulfed EVERYTHING. What if it was a "big bang" just in our section
>of the sky? In order for there to be a "big bang" there HAD to be
>something to go BANG! NO ONE has EVER been able to even SHOW how to
>produce something from nothing. Since it is not concievable it
>probably couldn't have happened! Since that is true then there HAD to
>be something BEFORE the "big bang"!
>Soooo on to the idea, suppose OUR section of the Universe went thru a
>black hole type event and after the compression and "big bang" it
>regrouped and made what we now recognize as our section of the whole.
>Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
>there there isn't anything. There is lots of "empty" space between our
>known Galaxys and I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
>section is all there is.
>
1) Responding to Brad Guth is probably a waste of time.
2) This is totally off topic for sci.astro.seti.
3) CAPITAL letters are the mark of a crank.
4) Your misconceptions about the "big bang" seem to be
all-comprehensive.
It _wasn't_ an explosion into something else. It was a creation of all
of space and time, possibly from nothing at all, possibly from something
pre-existing (such as is suggested by the "brane" theory).
"Our" section of the universe is limited by the speed of light
(according to current theory). The whole universe may well be infinite
in space, but (again, according to current theory) not in time.
The space between galaxies is irrelevant, because a creation event would
produce a new space and new time.
--
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.
Jonathan Silverlight
<ffge...@yourplace.com> writes
>On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:59:11 +0100, Jonathan Silverlight
><jsilve...@spam.merseia.fsnet.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>>In message <ks89h1ttgbi6tho1g...@4ax.com>, f/fgeorge
>><ffge...@yourplace.com> writes
>>>
So have many others, I believe :-)
>
>>2) This is totally off topic for sci.astro.seti.
>And EXACTLY what makes you think ANYTHING is OT, have you not read
>what has been going on in this group over the past several YEARS!
Actually, I see the posting is Brad's fault. He didn't post to
sci.astro, and you just trimmed it to the most appropriate. Meanwhile,
anyone who hasn't already kill filed him is laughing at those
extraordinary rambling paragraphs.
>
>>3) CAPITAL letters are the mark of a crank.
>You KNOW what they say about shoes!
>How would you know what I was trying to empasise if I didn't captilize
>sometimes?
_Underlining_? :-) (sometimes done like *this*) Just that Usenet is
still "officially" a text only and ASCII only medium, and SHOUTING is
disapproved of :-)
>
>>4) Your misconceptions about the "big bang" seem to be
>>all-comprehensive.
>So we ARE going to have a discussion about the "big bang" after all?
Why not? (Unless someone tells us to stop)
>
>>It _wasn't_ an explosion into something else. It was a creation of all
>>of space and time, possibly from nothing at all, possibly from something
>>pre-existing (such as is suggested by the "brane" theory).
>But doesn't that then beg the question "where did we come from? IF
>there was something "pre-existing", then what was it, where did it
>come from, etc., etc., etc.?
>
>>"Our" section of the universe is limited by the speed of light
>>(according to current theory).
>Seems short sighted.
But it's the way things seem to work. You can't throw away a century of
theory. Actually, I still like the Charlier cosmology, which allows a
static infinite universe, but it does seem that the universe is
expanding and eventually reaches an unbreakable speed limit.
>
>> The whole universe may well be infinite
>>in space, but (again, according to current theory) not in time.
>Haven't read Peter Lynds have you? I am NOT sure I understand his
>ideas either but I have read summaries of his work.
Now we're getting interesting - and a bit deep for me. But if you
believe in linear time there's evidence that the observable universe
changes with time, and that it had a beginning.
>
>>The space between galaxies is irrelevant, because a creation event would
>>produce a new space and new time.
>But again ONLY for us! How would this interact with the rest of the
>Universe? How do we KNOW that our "big bang" did not interact with
>other areas of the Universe, we just haven't been able to detect it
>yet because of our technology and steadfast beliefs?
I think you're missing it again, at least as I understand current
theory. There are no "other areas of the universe" in this view, but a
whole new universe. And yes, some theories say there is interaction with
other universes, and that's why gravity and so on work the way they do.
That's why I like brane theory. It reminds me of James Blish's novel "A
Clash of Cymbals", in which there is warning of the imminent collision
of two universes. Sadly, I don't think he lived to see his ideas reborn
as a serious theory.
Martin 53N 1W
> In message <h4i9h1lt3r215cm03...@4ax.com>, f/fgeorge
> <ffge...@yourplace.com> writes
>> How would you know what I was trying to empasise if I didn't captilize
>> sometimes?
>
> _Underlining_? :-) (sometimes done like *this*) Just that Usenet is
> still "officially" a text only and ASCII only medium, and SHOUTING is
> disapproved of :-)
I didn't check to see what email reader f/f George is using, but all
those highlightings and smilies show up fine in Mozilla Thunderbird ;)
Meanwhile, good *Big* *Bang* comments.
And /how/ would we /know/ that there was other than _linear_ time for
our existence?
Regards,
Martin
--
---------- OS? What's that?! (Martin_285 on Mandriva)
- Martin - To most people, "Operating System" is unknown & strange.
- 53N 1W - Mandriva 10LE GNU Linux - An OS for Supercomputers & PCs
---------- http://www1.mandrivalinux.com/en/concept.php3
Brad Guth
>I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
>section is all there is.
>Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
>there there isn't anything.
Your ulterior motive as another or secondary ruse is working. It's
making you almost human.
I'd have to agree that perhaps a few little bangs transpired, or
perhaps like that black hole sort of passage that sucks in more ways
than we can understand. Also, from time to time the Oort to Oort zone
encounters with the likes of the Sirius star system should have been
interesting.
What if that once upon a time black hole encounter were merely an
amount or seed of antimatter as having been nicely surrounded by those
nearly resting photons?
Thereby not all that much normal gravity to deal with, just lots of
potential antimatter mass that need not be very large and, thereby a
great deal of empty space within a given black hole, plus horrific
energy differentials to boot that should make something happen to
whatever's capable of passing through.
I'm talking about that seed of antimatter accommodating a nifty cloak
of those photons from 1e-10 nm (roughly the size of an atom) to perhaps
at least 3e5 km if not 9.46e12 km, thus quite a wide spectrum worth of
perhaps as many as 1e100 photons/atom.
If the antimatter core represented 1e30 atoms, than the collective of
those nearly resting photons might become as great as 1e130. Of course
such nearly resting photons would remain somewhat energy dark to our
instruments, especially of that many as having been situated in one
tight little black hole of a spot.
BTW "f/fgeorge"; why are you bothering to having this perfectly honest
to God contribution of yours removed in 6 Days?
>I have some ideas on this: What if there was no "big bang" that
>engulfed EVERYTHING. What if it was a "big bang" just in our section
>of the sky? In order for there to be a "big bang" there HAD to be
>something to go BANG! NO ONE has EVER been able to even SHOW how to
>produce something from nothing. Since it is not concievable it
>probably couldn't have happened! Since that is true then there HAD to
>be something BEFORE the "big bang"!
>Soooo on to the idea, suppose OUR section of the Universe went thru a
>black hole type event and after the compression and "big bang" it
>regrouped and made what we now recognize as our section of the whole.
>Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
>there there isn't anything. There is lots of "empty" space between our
>known Galaxys and I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
>section is all there is.
Brad Guth
>2) This is totally off topic for sci.astro.seti.
topic" as far as yourself and SETI are concerned.
Although I do like the following notions that's totally beyond anything
Einstein.
>"Our" section of the universe is limited by the speed of light
>(according to current theory).
>The space between galaxies is irrelevant, because a creation event would
>produce a new space and new time.
Obviously creation is creation, thus "new space and new time" makes
perfect sense.
How about the same as applied for artificial creation via intelligent
design?
EEtimes2
> I think if we throw out our current ideas we can have a system where
> time is not sliceable, it just is. WE slice it to keep things
> organized in our minds, but if we let go of that then maybe time is
> not how we usually think of it.
> Einstein had an "observation" that I like: a man is on a train, a
> second man is standing on the road watching the train go by. If the
> man on the train starts walking the same way as the train is moving he
> appears to be moving faster than the train, when observed by the man
> on the ground. If however he walks the opposite way that the train is
> moving he appears to be going slower than the train, when observed by
> the man on the road. Is he in fact going faster than the train when
> going forward? Is he in fact going slower than the train when walking
> the other way? It all depends on your point of view or perspective.
> This was all from Einstein's thoughts about the speed of light and his
> ideas that it was an impenetrable barrier. There is new thought that
> maybe it is possible to go FTL, when viewed by someone not a part of
> the journey. The man on the train did not "feel" like he was going
> faster than the train, or slower depending on which way he was moving.
> But to the man on the road he WAS!
This is relativity in a nutshell. Think of one person _relative_ to
another. In the above statement you made, due to time dilation the man
at rest will not see the man on the train move, since his frame of
reference is moving so much slower in comparison to the man at rest.
Unfortunatley your analogy has been used quite a bit, mostly in the
form of two spacecraft relative to one another.
My question is why do so many people would like to just get rid of all
the hard gained knowledge we've learned over the centuries?
Gary Heston
Martin 53N 1W <ml_...@ddnospamddml1dd.co.uk.dd> wrote:
[ ... ]
>Meanwhile, good *Big* *Bang* comments.
>And /how/ would we /know/ that there was other than _linear_ time for
>our existence?
By example; some of the people I work with are clearly functioning in
unreal time.
Some aspects of alternate universes seem to be involved as well.
Gary
--
Gary Heston ghe...@hiwaay.net
The Intel ASCI Red supercomputer placed first in the 11/97 list of
the top 500 supercomputers in the world, at 1.338 TeraFLOPs max.
As of 6/05, it wouldn't make the list.
Brad Guth
Lo and behold, FTL is where we need to get to. Possibly via pushing
secondary FM photons upon a laser beam or waveguide of aligned CW
photons which are essentially an alignment of spinning atoms, whereas
this may become where those FTL packets get their opportunity as to
exit our realm and manage to arrive at some other star system's realm
without it taking so gosh darn long.
Of course the initial photon waveguide of CW photons is going to take
the usual 3e8 m/s to establish. Once established and the secondary FM
photons are taking advantage of this extremely fast conveyor belt of
carrier photons is where the FLT packets do their thing at perhaps 1e15
bps.
Now all we need are a few of those fully robotic laser cannons of
perhaps 0.05 milliradian doing their CW thing from the moon. Of course
the signal path could get disrupted every so often, which sort of means
having polar situated laser cannons that could remain tracked upon a
given star system, or other planet.
As viewed from either lunar pole, what nearby star systems are there
that would accommodate a 100% visual and thus laser tracking
opportunity?
Brad Guth
>all the hard gained knowledge we've learned over the centuries
longevity of life as we know it.
Unfortunately, most all of astronomy fits quite nicely into a rather
spendy and globally polluting space-toilet as far as the lower 99.9% of
humanity is concerned.
Martin 53N 1W
[...]
> I think if we throw out our current ideas we can have a system where
> time is not sliceable, it just is. WE slice it to keep things
> organized in our minds, but if we let go of that then maybe time is
> not how we usually think of it.
We observe 'quantized' effects at the atomic level. Has the question
been resolved for whether or not "time" itself is quantized at some
level or scale?
> Einstein had an "observation" that I like: a man is on a train, a
> second man is standing on the road watching the train go by. If the
[...]
> maybe it is possible to go FTL, when viewed by someone not a part of
> the journey. The man on the train did not "feel" like he was going
> faster than the train, or slower depending on which way he was moving.
> But to the man on the road he WAS!
A further thought to consider is that synchronised events can occur at
distances such that the knowledge that the event should have taken place
'travels' faster than light. However, you can only observe the event
from some time later. (And then again, nothing travels faster than some
good gossip! :) )
Another thought: For a very powerful radar that is quickly scanning
across the sky, can the end of the radar beam travel in the scan
direction faster than light?
EEtimes2
f/fgeorge wrote:
> todays knowledge. It seems to need refining to accomadate todays
> knowledge. I am not sure people want to get rid of all that knowledge,
> people just want it to fit what we now think. And it does not seem to
> do that in all cases.
How doesn't it make sense in context with todays knowledge?? There is
no test failed by Relativity, it's held up very well against thousands
of tests over many decades. It is one of the most thoughly tested
theories and yet you say it doesn't hold up with knowledge of today, I
ask what knowledge contradicts this?
Jonathan Silverlight
<ml_...@ddnospamddml1dd.co.uk.dd> writes
>f/fgeorge wrote:
>[...]
>> I think if we throw out our current ideas we can have a system where
>> time is not sliceable, it just is. WE slice it to keep things
>> organized in our minds, but if we let go of that then maybe time is
>> not how we usually think of it.
>
>We observe 'quantized' effects at the atomic level. Has the question
>been resolved for whether or not "time" itself is quantized at some
>level or scale?
>
>
>> Einstein had an "observation" that I like: a man is on a train, a
>> second man is standing on the road watching the train go by. If the
>[...]
>> maybe it is possible to go FTL, when viewed by someone not a part of
>> the journey. The man on the train did not "feel" like he was going
>> faster than the train, or slower depending on which way he was moving.
>> But to the man on the road he WAS!
Is that your idea? if not, I'd love to see a reference. It sounds a bit
like Martin's radar beam, but I'd like to hear more.
>
>A further thought to consider is that synchronised events can occur at
>distances such that the knowledge that the event should have taken
>place 'travels' faster than light. However, you can only observe the
>event from some time later. (And then again, nothing travels faster
>than some good gossip! :) )
>
>
>Another thought: For a very powerful radar that is quickly scanning
>across the sky, can the end of the radar beam travel in the scan
>direction faster than light?
>
Yes. There's no problem with "things" travelling faster than light; what
is "forbidden" is information travelling faster than light. Suppose your
radar beam scans once every ten seconds and could put a visible spot on
the Moon. We would see the spot moving across the Moon "faster than
light" but someone on the moon wouldn't see it coming.
Brad Guth
Thanks so much for that overwhelming amount of information. However,
I'd asked this direct and relatively simple question:
>>As viewed from either lunar pole, what nearby star systems are there
>>that would accommodate a 100% visual and thus laser tracking
>>opportunity?
>Probably not very many.
This response of your's seems somewhat inadequate, almost as though you
really don't know all that much and thus offer such vague replies as
"Probably not very many", which seems to beg for a wee bit more
information.
Unless our solar system is somewhat tumbling itself along, it seems
that perhaps a good many stars could become continuously laser cannon
targeted from either north/south lunar poles, or perhaps by having an
array of such laser cannons deployed at each of the lunar poles would
essentially nail a great many stars on a 24/7/52 basis, as in year
after year maintaining their CW beams upon any number of at least the
ten closest star systems seems perfectly doable.
Of course technology wise we could have been accomplishing this task as
of at least a couple of decades ago, thus having by now reached out 20
light years with those CW beams that would also have been accommodating
the secondary FM photon packets worth of essentially a digital format
of Earth smut and, we'd certainly have been on the receiving end of
whatever star systems that were still sufficiently alive and kicking
within 10 light years, as for their having been sharing their ET smut
in return.
Via AI/robotic fly-by-rocket landers, as entirely interactively
controlled from our terrestrial facilities that could also remain as
mostly robotic and thereby infrastructure space and energy efficient,
whereas I believe now we're talking a whole lot smarter as Earth
heathens to ET wizards via our lunar deployed laser transceivers,
without having to further pollute mother Earth nor risk a single
astronaut.
Of course newer and obviously improved communication laser cannons
would likely be developed and contributed to the cause, whereas every
year or so something of a narrower divergence and of greater energy and
data throughput or just per using a somewhat better spectrum would
become deployed upon the moon.
BTW; once again your GOOGLE V-Chip worth of usenet spermware is
effectively taking it's toll upon my PC, as having been witnessed by
those that'll testify before any congressional hearing, that'll be
quite interested to know of exactly whom has been a member of the spook
collective that has been dispensing this form of browser
malware/spermware that actually take control of any PC they damn well
feel like trashing.
Brad Guth
>I forgot the term of the pairs one...co-mingled pairs, no...atoms that
>seem to be related although seperated by distance. When you introduce
>a positive charge to one the other distant one also changes to a
>positive charge, for no apparent reason.
Please do share more about such distant atoms that for no apparent
reason align and/or as you say change to a matching charge, whereas
this seems to be using better words of denoting as to how atoms seem to
provide the essential node to node pathway on behalf of all those
quantum string like photons.
Such as one atom/cm3 seems obviously too distant as for any direct atom
to atom interactions, yet photons seem to get such few and far between
atoms spinning up to speed and quite nicely aligned to boot. This
situation gets a wee bit more extreme near a black hole event horizon,
whereas perhaps as few as one atom/m3 becomes the case, though
trillions upon trillions of photons could otherwise coexist/m3,
possibly even as many as 1e100 photons/atom.
Brad Guth
>Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This message >will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Sep 7, 4:12 am).
How about now; still no clue as to what I'm speaking of?
Aperio Acerbus
"Brad Guth" <ieisbr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1125521152.2...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Yeah, we sure need more ozone damage in the north pole. If SUV's, space
shuttle launches, constant rf bombardment aint enough, now we should bring
out the laser cannon's to destroy the rest of it.
Good thinking Einstein.........
Or should I say, Good thinking Oppenheimer.........
EEtimes2
f/fgeorge wrote:
> seem to be related although seperated by distance. When you introduce
> a positive charge to one the other distant one also changes to a
> positive charge, for no apparent reason.
Your talking about entanglement, also sometimes known in fonde terms as
"spooky action at a distance". I don't think you realize that Einstein
was one of the three scientist's to theorize this, with the help of
Podolsky, and Rosen, of course JS Bell found a way to test it. When you
get a chance try googling it, you'll find alot more about it. It
doesn't refer to changing charges of a particle, there is no known way
to do that, but you can have entangled particles that if one is
polarized the corresponding particle polarization is changed.
Don't be so eager to give up, as I've said before, what we have
discovered so far. There's alot to learn and somewhere in all those
discoveries is a breakthrough ready to be found for the person looking
for it.
Brad Guth
>There's alot to learn and somewhere in all those discoveries is
>a breakthrough ready to be found for the person looking for it.
dumbfounded, having only blinders (toilet-paper tubes of tunnel vision
at best), ear plugs and a white cane that's sufficiently skewed by
those conditional laws of physics and, of evidence exclusions and
nondisclosures that takes priority; then what's to be looking for?
MOS disinformation-R-us crapolla?
Brad Guth
Silly me, I didn't know that our MOON had any ozone, much less to spare
or damage?
The discussion that included a laser cannon of 0.05 milliradian and,
previously I'd planned upon 425nm (+/- 25nm) as the CW frequency and FM
band-width, which shouldn't hurt the likes of what extremely little if
any moon/lunar ozone there is. Actually, from time to time a vast
sodium cloud and even good amounts of O2 that can reach a million+ km
is most likely to cause complications for serious laser cannon
communications.
What planet did you say yourself and the likes of "Jonathan
Silverlight" and "Martin 53N 1W" were from?
Didn't you even notice as to how none others offered to correct your
dumbfounded notion of this being a terrestrial based laser cannon?
Is your's the sort of planet where you've been required to utilize only
the conditional laws of physics, and to otherwise exclude upon whatever
evidence comes along that doesn't suit your ulterior motives and hidden
agendas, while otherwise taking every topic that's viewed as a
potential threat as far off-topic as possible?
Is reading comprehension-101 not allowed to be taught on your planet?
I'd suppose the mostly argon atmosphere of our moon is fairly sparse,
yet due to the slight gravity it's actually rather extensive but, as
per laser cannon wise, I believe such argon plus a few other heavy
elements are essentially crystal clear as a "Chapel Bell"
S-band-->microwave transponder, as per having been situated within the
EM-L2/ME-L1 zone, whereas that certainly worked so nicely on behalf of
our NASA/Apollo ruse of the century.
OOPS; sorry about going off my own laser cannon track, allowing in a
wee bit of "Chapel Bell" to bleed in, as I believe that's still one of
those cloak and dagger nondisclosure/taboo items about our Apollo
missions that sucks and blows any thing but the truth, just as your
obviously bigoted brain needs to remain as sequestered within your
incest cloned borg body, that has become even more dumbfounded and thus
easily snookered than most.
I suppose, establishing arrays of moon based robotic laser cannons at
either north/south pole of the MOON or at each of it's LUNAR poles
still isn't computing worth a hoot within your sick mindset that's
perfectly cozy being within the nearest space-toilet that contains all
of that "right stuff" crapolla about our moon?
If you could possibly be a little more negative, as such I believe we
could power up a good portion of this nation with that much negative
energy. We could call it the "Aperio Acerbus Fusion" reactor as fueled
along by mainstream crapolla as reacting with whatever negativity that
yourself and others alike might have to contribute. Thus we'll not ever
require the moon's He3 or any other possible element that could become
energy worthy because, we'll have folks like yourself looking to
extract whatever out of context, just so that whatever's your
contribution is isn't worth used toilet-paper, put it does manage to
create all of that negative energy.
Brad Guth
As usual, that's a big help.
Any further thoughts upon any of the original sub-topics, or perhaps
another one of your own that's in any way related to our moon, Venus or
Sirius?
Perhaps my problem is that I'm just not being critical enough of our
resident warlord's perverted administration that sucks and blows big
time. As that would explain as to why I'm not sufficiently
communicating as to what the real story is all about.
Brad Guth
For the same reasons I've been stalked, bashed and/or banished for some
of my opinions and discoveries that have otherwise represented nothing
but the most positive of motives and need to share and share alike, and
simply because there's so much that interrelated and worth doing
something about. Whereas I certainly have strong interest in the
matters of FTL as applied to interstellar communications, although as
soon as I've involved the usage of our moon for that purpose is where
the mainstream crapolla hits the fan, usenet gets choked down with
their damage-control spermware and, more often than not my PC loses
it's CPU mind and shuts down.
Usage of the moon is still entirely nondisclosure/taboo because we've
not honestly walked upon it's surface, nor have robotic efforts managed
to survive any soft-landing onto such an extremely hostile surface that
offers such large and expansive areas of microscopic quick-sand that's
so dry and so lightly compacted that the surface tension may not be
worth 10 g/cm2. At less than 100 kg/m2 simply isn't going to take
kindly to being walked upon by any 576 cm2 moonboot because, that's
merely at best 5.76 kg worth of support, and even that much is based
upon sinking up to your moonsuit butt. Moonsuit snowshoes or dustshoes
of 84 cm X 28 cm buys you 2352 cm2, which if 10 g/cm2 is involved will
buy you 23.5 kg worth of surface tension support, and that should work
but only if the carbon, iron and titanium dust isn't too lightly
composed and/or not too electrostatic, of which it should be rather
highly electrostatic as well as radon loaded. Thus bedrock as having
been geologically exposed or via meteor impacts is about all that going
to be worth walking upon.
A solar and cosmic arrival rate of just 0.1 mm/year is obviously going
to have amounted to somewhat deep oceans of such moon-dust, not to
mention the rather enormous amounts of meteor impacts and secondary
strewn shards if not third and forth generation related impacts from
each meteor, that plus having been running into whatever attracted
towards Earth is going to be involved in the cosmic morgue of material
as having been deposited, and thus collected upon the lunar surface.
Without moisture nor physical erosion there's no good physics reason
for those accumulations to have decomposed nor have been blown away or
otherwise easily extracted by other than the impacts of whatever
meteors of sufficient size that would have managed to vaporised and or
physically displaced.
Smaller moons have accumulated 1.5 to 5 meters of such dust, and ours
is so much larger and thus more gravity worthy of having attracted and
retained more of the same, not to mention that our moon is so much
closer to the sun that's been the prime contributor of the sorts of
substances of whatever's moon-dust.
Of course, if the moon hasn't been here all that long, and if having
arrived with a frosty thick (I'm suggesting 262 km) layer of ice
certainly would have limited the degree of dust deposits as having been
suggested by all of the folks that have otherwise disregarded Kodak
physics and a good number of other common laws of physics, as well as a
considerable lack of hard-science that simply has not supported their
NASA/Apollo ruse of the century. An icy proto-moon as arriving by
emerging itself out of one stellar Oort zone into and obviously having
survived our Oort zone gauntlet would likely have obtained the sorts of
large diameter but otherwise shallow craters as from such Oort clouds
and Kuiper belts worth of exit/reentry markings that were the result of
the thick layer of ice taking the brunt of the impact force. This
certainly implies a whole lot more than merely having such ice
defending the rocky/basalt core of such a nifty cosmic iceball that
eventually became our moon, and perhaps sole inventory of where we've
obtained our oceans and life within.
Unfortunately, the same old gang of mainstream status quo defenders are
going to utilize their supposed talents and resources to stalk, bash
and/or to banish any notions of a moon that doesn't comply with their
pagan ideology that sucks and blows at the same time. These folks can
be easily identified by their anti-ET and thus anti-God mindset that's
also consistently pro-whatever's been ongoing to bring them their next
bloody buck, be that via their resident warlord(GW Bush) or from those
warm and fuzzy Skull and Bones Third Reich fellows of their O-Ring cult
that otherwise offers absolutely nothing in common with humanity, nor
on behalf of salvaging the environment of mother Earth, other than for
their taking as much as possible without a stitch of remorse as to the
collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, whereas having diverted
such talents and vast resources is the very same as premeditated
murder, as in crimes against humanity as well as against the
environment that's continually taking it's toll as we speak.
We seem to have a certified dipwad of a president, as well as his
partner in crimes against humanity Dick Cheney, that are each obviously
anti-God, especially since "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not
covet thy neighbors oil" means squat, among so many other faults
doesn't comprehend physics nor does he or his staff appreciate the
hard-science as having been accomplished by so many for so long that
it's downright embarrassing. Instead, we're having to build ever higher
and more robust walls thats starting to put just about anything
Communism established to shame. Even Canada was told at our "great wall
of shame" to turn back and not ever bother trying to help our nation
that's in need, especially with their greater compassion and
deliverance than our resident warlord(GW Bush) had going.
Brad Guth
You really are pathetic, as in so dumb and dumber snookered that you're
continually dumbfounded beyond the point of no-return.
Since you're so all knowing, thus you already know that the IR albedo
of the moon offers a good 25%, and you must know that the original
target diameter of the IR laser beam had diverged out to roughly 20 km
(actually it was atmospherically and otherwise jidder influenced to
something far greater). This time you do all the math upon what even a
full m2 worth of whatever retroreflector/mirror had to offer in the way
of returning whatever photons, as directly compared to the total 20 km
diameter area worth of the 25% IR albedo of what the moon itself had to
offer.
Obviously you insist upon excluding whatever Kodak physics, dry
quick-sand physics, thus surface tension and gravity of lightly
compacted dust accumulations plus, having excluded that of whatever
impact related physics. You're also excluding just about every color
image as having been obtained from orbit (via Apollo as well as from
subsequent missions), especially of those containing something that's
artificial and/or that of mother Earth within frame so as to reasonably
insure proper illumination and spectrum/color as for being the truth.
You're also excluding whatever's associated with any such manned or
robotic/AI landers that still offer us nada damn thing as to their R&D
prototypes that you've obviously bought into, as in taking their hook,
line and sinker.
So, please inform us village idiots as to those reflected IR photons as
arriving back from our extremely dark and nasty moon, as supposedly
having those retroreflectors that were never of more than one as
situated within the same laser target zone.
BTW; the moon does offer an amount of exposed bedrock, or at least
impact displaced basalt, as per such having much less than meters thick
dust to contend with. At least I can see those rock like lunar surfaces
from my backyard.
Brad Guth
Thanks for what we've all seen and sort of been there and done that
sort of infomercial ruse. At least this time you've actually
contributed what's worth something for others to look at, which is a
whole lot more than you've previously provided.
Oddly, within their most recent though unverified 2 km speculated
diameter beam arrivals upon their lunar surface, with their 15+km
returning footprint, whereas there's not a bloody stitch worth of
independent IR photon/albedo math to behold. I wonder why that is?
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/apollo.html
This next one is certainly a much nicer and expensive infomercial
contribution that still offers us no independent IR photon/albedo math.
I wonder why that is?
http://physics.ucsd.edu/~tmurphy/apollo/basics.html
There's been all sorts of independent laser rangefinding that
intentionally had nothing whatsoever to do with their targeting upon or
otherwise involving any potential retroreflectors, that which worked
just fine and dandy. I wonder why that is?
Since those retroreflectors weren't specifically band-pass coated, thus
unfiltered nor in any way of offering sufficient area as to have
measurably outperformed the vast amounts of the surrounding IR
reflective lunar surface, thus there's absolutely no terrestrial
hard-science method that'll work unless a megawatt laser beam of
perhaps 0.05 milliradian with nearly zero jitter or of other distortion
factors as it's leaving Earth's atmosphere can accomplish the task of
nailing one of those reflectors, as opposed to that of our receiving
detectors being absolutely swamped with the amounts of natural albedo
reflected photons, only made so much worse off by all of the nearly
white-out zones within which most of the Apollo EVAs took place.
BTW; there's still nothing of any USSR/Russian robotic/AI fly-by-rocket
lander that's verified by other than MOS cloak and dagger worth of
smoke and mirrors as required of perpetrated cold-war crapolla. That is
unless you've got something other to share because, otherwise it's all
purely the words of your pagan cold-way Gods/NASA/USSR that sucks and
blows at the same time.
Sorry that you're so pathetically dumb and dumber (can't accomplish
your own math), as in snookered into being so easily and continually
dumbfounded. Do you also still believe there were WMD?
Next time do yourself a favor by using a search for "albedo" or best
that of "IR albedo" in order to verify if the skewed science and of
those conditional laws of physics are even remotely playing by anything
other than the continued perpetrated cold-war set of rules.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Ftravel.yahoo.com%2Fp-hotel-350882-pine_shadows_motel-i%26action%3Dimgsearch%26page%3D1&imgcurl=us.news2.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Fap%2F20050825%2Fcapt.xaf11008251957.portugal_forest_fires_xaf110.jpg&imgurl=us.news2.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Fap%2F20050825%2Fcapt.xaf11008251957.portugal_forest_fires_xaf110.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fnews%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26u%3D%2F050825%2F481%2Fxaf11008251957&rcurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fnews%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26u%3D%2F050825%2F481%2Fxaf11008251957&name=Yahoo%21+News%3A+Burnt+pine+trees+cast+their+shadows+across+a+forest
BTW No.2; this continuing intellectual buttology and thus crapolla ruse
of a terrestrial photo sucks and blows so much that I'll certainly use
it (along with full credits to your name) as to further demonstrate the
perverted degree to which such pathetic incest cloned borgs will
brown-nose go as to fool only the sorts of fools that have no apparent
brain whatsoever. Take further notice as to how even within our thick
terrestrial atmosphere that there's no apparent illumination fall-off,
yet upon the moon is where our crack Apollo borgs photographed upon all
sorts of nearby illumination hot-spots and otherwise of noticeably
darkened lunar background terrain that was supposedly just as fully
solar illuminated. Also notice as to appreciating the shadow divergence
as being just as crisp as for what had supposedly been Kodak moment
recorded upon the moon, when it should have been much sharper and
obviously of tremendously greater contrast being that there supposedly
wasn't an atmosphere.
Are you still stuck inside of that box?
~
Life on Venus, a Township, Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
Brad Guth
Here's yet another new and improved rant;
>Why are worried about cloud scatter?
What "cloud scatter"? ~ What worried?
>You missed the part about sending up 300 quadrillion (photons) with
>each and every laser pulse.
"This can take anywhere from 2.34 to 2.71 seconds, depending on how far
away the moon is at the time (the earth-moon distance ranges from
351,000 km to 406,000 km). We can time the round trip to few-picosecond
precision, or a few trillionths of a second."
Of anything with regard to the supposed numbers of photons sent and/or
received has absolutely nothing to do with any regard to which photons
if any were derived from something that's artificial or not, whereas
the same degree of photon information as to speed and thereby distance
is exactly the same as if reflected off a 1000 m2 retroreflector or
that of 3.1416e6 m2 worth of 25+% IR reflective and apparently that
thin layer of clumping moon-dirt that looked exactly like 50/50
cornmeal and portland cement.
Therefore the answer is No, I didn't miss a damn thing. Though
apparently you're you still stuck deep within that mainstream
space-toilet?
>Don't care about the Russians, they do what they do.
That's right. Keep up with the evidence exclusions until them Apollo
cows come home. Do you go to a specialized LLPOF church or, do you just
fake that as well?
>I believe that the President thought that there were WMD's. I also
>believe that the Intelligence system was not up to snuff. Too much was
>placed on unverifiable peoples statements.
Obviously you'll believe anything your mainstream status quo has to
say, especially if it's necessary in order to protect your collective
LLPOF butts.
As per IR albedo; "Been there, done that" is yet another of your LLPOF
statements because, if you've supposedly accomplished and thus haven't
contributed any such thing; then pretell what's wrong with this
picture?
Obviously there's a wide margin of the IR spectrum to work with but,
with respect to the IR lasers as having been utilized; What is the
average IR albedo of the moon (eg at 850 nm and perhaps 1650 nm)?
Page 6 and 7 of: http://chjaa.bao.ac.cn/2004/2004_4_1p97.pdf
Reflectivity of Lunar Mare Basalt, Anorthosite and the Whole Moon at
Some Key Wave Bands (this is not quite the same as lunar albedo that
has to take into account the thick layers of carbon, iron and titanium
dust deposits that takes the albedo into the nearest space-toilet),
whereas relatively dust-free lunar anorthosite at 750 nm gets itself up
to 52% (table-3 drops this factor down to 36%), though even 850 nm at
better than 40% isn't exactly half bad reflectivity (of which the 750
nm spectrum also correlates quite nicely to the rather dark
reddish/golden-brown as recorded by Kodak moments having been imaged
from 100+km)
Whole Moon (average) at 750 nm = 27%
Whole Moon (average) at 900 nm = 25%
Therefore the lunar near-IR and 850~900 nm IR spectrums are quite
nicely reflected if the laser rangefinding were to easily target upon
such anorthosite deposits. Whereas having a retroreflector within the
traget zone or not isn't going to represent squat unless you're getting
that beam down to utilizing a 0.025 milliradian laser cannon.
BTW; Just by way of the thick, relatively H2O vapor wet and otherwise
extremely polluted and thus not so clear atmosphere is enough to cause
an optical distortion of most any beam, not to mention upon whatever's
of originating and/or retroreflector jitters, as per imposing a to/from
IR signal degrade of at the very least 20% unless you're talking about
using the Boeing/TRW ABL cannon of 100 MW and 0.5 milliradian from
40,000' off the deck. Thus a terrestrial to/from laser rangefinding
effort might be wise to appreciate a 33% signal degrade for just the
Earthly atmospheric impact, which might just as easily be compensated
by way of simply utilizing more initial energy, or somewhat less
initial divergence.
Even assuming a perfect 2 km worth of a target illuminated diameter
isn't going to be sufficient. At perhaps 200 meters diameter is where
we're starting to get real interesting.
Of course now you're having to call Kodak and of their photographic
physics nothing but liars, simply because of that form of physics truth
can't be allowed to coexist along with your grand perpetrated cold-war
and of the NASA/Apollo ruse/sting of the century.
What's the matter, haven't you killed off your fair share of Muslims or
the likes of Jesus Christ today?
GOT CROSS?
>You missed the show on Discovery last week that debunked all of those
>things! You REALLY need to get a hold of the same kind of camera the
>astronauts used, the show did, and use the same kind of film, the show
>did, and take pictures with it, again the show did.
>The pictures came out very similar to ones the astronauts took and
>even had the non parallel lines in it. I think you are using todays
>standards to try and explain how yesterdays technology was flawed. You
>are forgetting why we no longer use cameras like that, why we no
>longer do lots of things that we used to do. We have new and improved
>ways of doing and looking at and even photographing things that some
>of which were never even thought of back then.
And your bigoted out-of-context point is?
>The World is NOT one big conspiracy theory!
>It IS full of them, but not EVERYTHING is a conspiracy!
BTFW; hardly anything outside of government and external to religion is
of any conspiracy, just plain old simple greed and arrogance running
amuck without a stitch of remorse (just like yourself). Real honest to
'God fearing' and generally hard working folks simply don't have the
time nor take all that much pleasure as they relish within the notions
of perpetrating conspiracies at the demise of humanity, though
obviously you do.
You just keep disregarding Kodak physics and manage to do so without
remorse, just as you intend to keep killing off humanity, allowing
30,000+ innocent humans (mostly children) as to needlessly die each and
every day while hundreds of millions of others (at least 10% of Earth's
population) somehow manage to live their short and miserable lives
within sub-human conditions. This mindset of your's will certainly go
right along with your actions of global pollution and subsequent
global-warming agenda plus anti-ET and thus anti-God paganism of yours
that sucks and blows.
Brad Guth
Here's yet another portion of my improved rant;
This argument is gitting a little like taking a one m2 resolution image
of my face, whereas what you'll get is the monotone average of whatever
was anywhere within that m2, whereas no matters how that sole m2 is
processed it's simply not going to be possible as to extrapolate which
photons were derived off my nose as opposed to those having been
reflected off by bald head or double chin, and certainly no way of
telling which ear is higher or lower than the other, or even if I were
holding one of those full-spectrum 38 mm corner-cube prisms in between
my less than perfect teeth. In other words, you've got to be kidding or
far dumber than just plain old dumb.
As per IR albedo; "Been there, done that" is yet another perfect
example of your LLPOF statements because, if you've supposedly
accomplished and thus haven't personally contributed any such thing;
then pretell what's wrong with this picture?
Obviously there's a wide margin of the IR spectrum to work with but,
with respect to the IR lasers as having been utilized; What is the
average IR albedo of the moon (eg at 850 nm and perhaps 1650 nm)?
Page 6 and 7 of: http://chjaa.bao.ac.cn/2004/2004_4_1p97.pdf
Reflectivity of Lunar Mare Basalt, Anorthosite and the Whole Moon at
Some Key Wave Bands (this is not quite the same as lunar albedo that
has to take into account the thick layers of mostly solar wid deposites
of carbon/soot, iron and titanium dust that takes the albedo into the
nearest space-toilet), whereas relatively dust-free lunar anorthosite
at 750 nm gets itself up to 52% (table-3 drops this factor down to
36%), though even 850 nm at better than 40% isn't exactly half bad
reflectivity (of which the 750 nm spectrum also correlates quite nicely
to the rather dark reddish/golden-brown as recorded by Kodak moments
having been imaged from 100+km.
Whole Moon (average) at 750 nm = 27%
Whole Moon (average) at 900 nm = 25%
Therefore the lunar near-IR and 850~900 nm IR spectrums are quite
nicely reflected if the laser rangefinding were to easily target upon
such anorthosite deposits. Whereas having a retroreflector within the
target zone or not isn't going to represent squat unless you're getting
that beam down to utilizing a 0.025 milliradian laser cannon, thereby
capable of getting thode placebo readings wo/retroreflector as opposed
to the real thing w/retroreflector.
Also, few lasers are purely monochromatic, meaning if an 850 nm laser
were to be utilized, that +/-25 nm could be the case unless that laser
cannon was specifically narrow spectrum band-pass fitered. The more
powerful the laser and more pulse driven the more likely of having a
wider spectrum of available photons to work with, thus somewhat skewed
results.
Just by way of having to deal with the thick, relatively H2O vapor rich
and otherwise extremely polluted and thus not so clear atmosphere is
enough to cause an optical distortion of most any IR beam, not to
mention upon whatever's of originating and/or of retroreflector
geoseismic or other environment induced jitters, as per imposing a
to/from IR signal degrade of at the very least 20% unless you're
talking about using the Boeing/TRW ABL cannon of 100 MW and 0.5
milliradian from 40,000' off the deck. Thus a terrestrial to/from laser
rangefinding effort might be wise to appreciate a 33% signal degrade
for just the Earthly atmospheric impact, which might just as easily be
compensated by way of simply applying more initial energy, or somewhat
less initial divergence.
Even assuming a perfect 2 km worth of a target illuminated diameter
isn't going to be sufficient. At perhaps 200 meters diameter is where
we're starting to get real interesting.
Of course now you're the one having to call Kodak and of their
photographic physics nothing but liars, simply because that form of
physics truth can't be allowed to coexist along with your grand
perpetrated cold-war and of the subsequent NASA/Apollo ruse/sting of
the century.
>You missed the show on Discovery last week that debunked all of those
>things! You REALLY need to get a hold of the same kind of camera the
>astronauts used, the show did, and use the same kind of film, the show
>did, and take pictures with it, again the show did.
>The pictures came out very similar to ones the astronauts took and
>even had the non parallel lines in it. I think you are using todays
>standards to try and explain how yesterdays technology was flawed. You
>are forgetting why we no longer use cameras like that, why we no
>longer do lots of things that we used to do. We have new and improved
>ways of doing and looking at and even photographing things that some
>of which were never even thought of back then.
And your bigoted out-of-context point is?
Obviously if going by this following example is where you don't intend
to even accept the new and improved 8-bit and multi-look per pixel via
NSA radar imaging of Venus; so other than yourself being a negative as
possible (meaning mainstream status quo or bust), what's your point?
And by the way my extremely brown-nosed MI6/NSA friend, I've had the
very same cameras and still own a pair of 5X7 format cameras that are
actually of the true 70 mm format rather than the 50x50 format that
your fellow spooks keep incorrectly referring to as 70 mm.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Ftravel.yahoo.com%2Fp-hotel-350882-pine_shadows_motel-i%26action%3Dimgsearch%26page%3D1&imgcurl=us.news2.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Fap%2F20050825%2Fcapt.xaf11008251957.portugal_forest_fires_xaf110.jpg&imgurl=us.news2.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Fap%2F20050825%2Fcapt.xaf11008251957.portugal_forest_fires_xaf110.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fnews%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26u%3D%2F050825%2F481%2Fxaf11008251957&rcurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fnews%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26u%3D%2F050825%2F481%2Fxaf11008251957&name=Yahoo%21+News%3A+Burnt+pine+trees+cast+their+shadows+across+a+forest
Since the photograph you've offered isn't such a good test case, in
fact it actually sucks as for representing even shadow issues since
none of the shadows are from other than one illumination source that I
can tell, plus there's no obviousls hot-spots of illuminations, and
especially as for your talking about those multiple and converging
shadows upon the moon as though that's perfectly normal even though the
rest of us village idiots would have to have utilized a secondary
source of illumination, although supposedly there was not more than one
primary and extremely intense point-source of illumination.
In that case I've given some further thought as to a couple of other
worthy natural sources of illumination, one of which being obviously
mother Earth, as having been contributing absolute loads of secondary
photons from the moment of earthrise to earthset at up to roughly 50
times the illuminating potential of full moonlight upon Earth (taking
into account that the sparse lunar atmosphere isn't filtering out any
spectrum or otherwise reducing the throughput of available photons as
having been reflected off mother Earth). At least upon Earth I seem to
get a shadow from moonshine that's capable of being photographed, I can
also read newsprint and that's not 1/50th the intensity to work with.
After all, lunar day as viewed from within any naturally or
artificially shadowed and thus sub-freezing zone is essentially every
bit as sky-dark and shadow-black as an absolutely crystal clear as per
any moonless nighttime upon Earth, that is to say if we're talking
about the crisp and extremely contrasty shadowed areas of the natural
golden seddish/brownish asphalt like albedo and natural color of the
moon that you've failed to accept even though it's well documented,
whereas having been illuminated by earthshine must have become rather
impressive. In fact, upon two of the Apollo missions was when the much
brighter orb of Venus was close enough to have created quit a
photographically pesky amount of much more than star like illumination
of it's own, though smaller but 75+% reflective and, since there's no
lunar atmosphere filtering nor otherwise difusing or diminishing the
venusshine influx as being capable of casting a somewhat lesser shadow
but, none the less it should also have been recorded as such by way of
any good number of Kodak moments in which the crisp and deeply
contrasted zones of whatever was getting shadowed from the direct solar
influx should have had a fairly noticeable degree of secondary
earthshine affect along with a much weaker but otherwise photo
recordable venusshine worth of it's own slight shadow generating form
of illumination.
To be giving some additional credit as to the fill-in lighting upon a
nearly coal dark and nasty moon that shouldn't have been the case if
only having the raw solar point-source of illumination to work with,
whereas we might give that credit to the vibrance of earthshine plus
another little touch of photons from venusshine. In fact, doing the
photon numbers seems to be suggesting that such nearby and unfiltered
venusshine alone should have been sufficient for reading newsprint, as
being nearly 50% brighter to the Kodak eye than perceived here upon
Earth.
I forgot to ask if incest cloned borgs even realized the Kodak eye
records a wider spectrum of photons than perceived by the human eye,
and especially of the near-blue and near-UV are considerably more
easily recorded than not. Even a portion of UV-a should have become a
portion of most every EVA Kodak moment, and that's not to mention
what's of secondary/recoil illumination to boot.
Did I forget to mention that your MI6/NSA pecker has been showing
itself, as though it has a screw-you mind of it's own, perhaps even
it's own hidden agenda of sperming whatever is within range. What part
about infomercial LLPOF don't you understand? What part about
governments consistently lying their stinking butts off as a bloody
matter of a fact as you'd care to make of it. Obviously you'd be just
as happy working on behalf of Hitler as for a Pope going postal over
Cathars, and as such what sorts of dastardly deeds without a stitch of
remorse wouldn't you approve of?
Brad Guth
>THIS one actually starts to make sense, thanks for the ongoing tries.
I'm assuming that you're into the quality of words and whatever syntax
because that's all that actually matters, and not otherwise having
anything to do with the actual topic at hand?
>The problem with your statement is not that it is not true, IT IS! The
>problem is that your ear is not going to be reflected back to the
>telescope for reading, it will be reflected to some other point in the
>universe. So yes the telescope will hit a large area but most of that
>large area is not aligned to return that signal back to the telescope.
>It is like a radar image, you shoot it out and only what comes back is
>what you see, hence the development of "stealth" type vehicles. Your
>ear is oriented away from the image so any laser hitting it will just
>bounce harmlessly away. In your particular example your ear would be
>burned off! But the moon, being harder than the laser, will not be
>damaged.
Even if the ABL at 100 MW and 0.5 milliradian did it's thing of zapping
the moon, I'll bet that my ear will not be burned off because, the ABL
illuminated zone would have become 6.7+km in diameter and thus
35.3e6m2.
Thus 100e6/35.3e6 = 2.833 w/m2, and I believe that my ear is a wee bit
smaller than one m2. However, I believe a 0.05 milliradian ABL shot is
going to hurt at 283 w/m2, especially if that's sustained for several
seconds.
Of course, if my ear were quite large and having been optically coated,
say with a relatively narrow band-pass of quality mirrors or even of a
corner-cube prism coating that's extremely well aligned, and if I were
standing perfectly still while my ear was only accepting and thus
reflecting the modified ABL influx of near-UV being 405 nm, and since
the surrounding coal like darkness of the carbon/soot, iron and
titanium dust coated lunar surface of basalt and anorthosite is so
terribly inefficient at such wavelength, not to mention poorly
configured as for reflecting whatever, although volume of those extra
m2 being more than capable of compensation for that sort of deficiency,
thereby the notion of actually detecting my optically band-pass coated
ear as having been configured with all of those corner-cube prisms is
going to sparkle and shine like the star of David, or perhaps rather
like the Sirius star system.
Of course, even way back in those grand old undocumented R&D days of
such marvelous fly-by-rocket machines, the alternative of taking along
a relatively compact and 100% solar powered xenon flash/strobe of 1°
perhaps even 0.5° radian that could have easily be interactively
triggered via microwave signal from Earth, or possibly even via laser
beam triggered would not have represented half the package volume and
not 10% the mass of those extremely hefty retroreflectors. Such a
flash/strobe as a scientific transponder of not all that many joules
worth would have been visible to the naked eye that was looking at the
earthshine illuminated moon. say 100 joules into a millisecond flash
would have represented 100,000 watts of joules worth of photons as
having been focused down to perhaps illuminating 3.5e13 m2 of mother
Earth.
1e5/3.5e13 = 0.285e-8 j/m2 (not including atmospheric losses)
0.285e-8 * 0.75 = .214e-8 j/m2 that'll reach a sufficiently clear
observation zone upon the surface of mother Earth.
The supposed maximum number of photons = 6.626e34 photons/joule (per
watt/sec at 1 Hz)
500 nm = 600^12 hz (600 terahertz)
0.214e-8 * 6.626e34 / 600e12 = 236e9 photons/ms
Give or take whatever additional xenon lamp inefficiencies, or even cut
the original 100,000 joules/ms input to the xenon flash/strobe lamp
down to 1,000 joules/ms and lo and behold, no matters what you've
established more than what's necessary for becoming visible to the
naked human eye. Although, I believe 400 nm would become 100 fold more
visible as to the unfiltered Kodak eye.
The problem with your statement(s) is not that it is not sufficiently
true enough, at least not as to what those corner-cube prisms could
have managed, and it's way more than a little obvious that a xenon
flash/strobe of being easily and effectively focused to 500 milliradian
could have accomplished at a fraction of the space and at so much less
weight than of those robust retroreflectors that quite frankly suck
under the best of conditions.
Therefore, until we're capable of 0.025 milliradian or better than such
laser beam performance that's not becoming distorted by our atmosphere
or via whatever seismic jitters at either end, and preferably of
something other than the IR spectrum that reflects itself rather nicely
off the raw lunar surface, as such we're not going to have much luck
establishing any proof-positive as to those supposed retroreflectors
that didn't even have the benefit of any documented fly-by-rocket
lander as for safely deploying such items.
BTW; the incest cloned spooks and moles worth of MI6/NSA borgs have
been sharing off a bit more of their nifty browser spermware into my PC
again, thus I'll have to reboot fairly soon.
~
Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "In war there are no rules" - In fact, war is the very
reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't been
playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.
Brad Guth
With regard to a sub-topic upon those new and improved fly-by-rocket
landers.
Perhaps the next time around, thus sometime after them Russians have
established their LSE-CM/ISS outpost and global star-wars domination
over most of humanity, whereas instead of our involving a spendy,
inefficient and damn risky fly-by-rocket lander that'll actually
require twice the rocket fuel capacity/kg of those stealth/invisible
R&D prototyped Apollo landers, why not instead power them suckers up
with LLPOF/fusion energy. If push comes down to shove, these damn
things could even become flatulence/fusion powered, thus a good diet of
mostly beans and cabbage could do the trick of giving these marvelous
flying machines essentially an unlimited form of brown-nosed
proof-tested flatulence energy by which a fusion reaction to all of
that biological gas could make all the difference in getting the
necessary tonnage safely down towards the deck and then sufficiently
down-range and maneuvered about while remaining capable so as to having
perhaps another 60 seconds worth of fuel reserves, just in case any of
their massively powerful airframe stabilisation gyros start running a
bit too low of speed as for keeping their hefty multi-tonne
fly-by-rocket spacecraft from otherwise easily tipping over.
There could even be spare room and sufficient/spare rocket thrust as
for their packing along a well shielded cryogenic cash of their banked
bone marrow, plus lots of ductape for patching all of those pesky
micro-meteorite holes, and of course that periscope that'll save the
day as they land somewhere within 10+meters worth of carbon/soot, iron
and titanium dark worth of extremely low surface tension composite of
moon-dust that's also extremely electrostatic charged and otherwise
simply isn't clumping worth a damn.
~
Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Brad Guth
what's China, and even though it may actually become technically easier
for the likes of Russia or China to mine Venus than to mine the Moon,
it seems to merely impose such a notion is taboo, and that goes double
taboo if it includes anything French.
Not that I'm going to personally test this one out but, it seems that
blood doesn't boil so easily on Venus. Since many types of fluids such
as blood are not going to boil so easily while being sequestered at 100
bar, and perhaps even common sweat/excretions are not going to be
nearly as freely flowing as you'd think, thus the biological metabolism
of whatever life upon Venus certainly shouldn't be what you'd think.
I'm not disregarding the hot and nasty aspects, just giving a little
fair and balanced thought as to what's surmountable as opposed to what
isn't.
Once cells are brought into an equalized pressure (meaning inside and
out), of what 100 bar represents as 1450.4 psi is likely going to alter
the way these cells function. The pressure itself isn't all that much
of a factor compared to the anti-science and thus anti-truth mindset of
those that continually claim as to know all there is, yet somehow can't
become the least bit bothered as to contribute their vast wisdom nor
whatever expertise as to the types of life that would be capable of
having survived upon Venus, or that of any other planet or moon that's
potentially capable of hosting ETI. Of course, even diatoms represent
ETI survival and adaptation potential, and certainly a whole lot more
invaluable as to sustaining a carbon based environment in an entirely
positive way, as opposed to humanity that's been nothing but
environmentally damaging and otherwise a horrific drain upon the
natural and geological based energy and even food resources that we're
currently running ourselves out of.
Pretty soon (within another mere geological drop in the evolutionary
bucket of time) we'll not have the required energy resources to even
kill off one another. Then what the heck will we do for our national
pastime sport of bigotry, greed and arrogance?
The overwhelming degree of intellectual as well as biological incest
cloned bigotry, as to being found within USENET and of their
extensively Jewish controlled global media, textbook and biblical
cultism, along with their willingness to point out those in need of a
good cross, as they proceed to brown-nose their way along a terribly
skewed path of disinformation and denials, along with imposing whatever
social/political/religious conditional laws of physics and evidence
exclusions is further proof-positive that I've uncovered the absolute
motherload of what's potentially still surviving and/or of visiting ETs
as having been making usage of whatever Venus has to offer. None of the
hard-science or of applied physics that I've taken into consideration
is in of itself in any way newer than or different than what was
available as of 6 years ago, or even as of 36 years ago with respect to
our moon, Mars and especially of nearby Venus as having been updated by
the Magellan mission was simply good icing upon the existing cake, with
the Russian/ESA Venus EXPRESS mission to apply some of the essential
detail trimmings to that cake icing, whereas the radar image that I'm
taking the most observationology interpretation from has 36 looks per
each and every 225 meter pixel, and of 8 bits per each and every one of
those 36 looks is essentially 288:1 worth of sufficient observational
pixel truth to behold about what's natural as well as per hat looks
entirely artificial, yet the mainstream status quo that has far
superior NIMA.MIL PhotoShop capability isn't buying into any of it.
Human life under such pressure isn't exactly a comforting thought;
1.0 bar = 760 torr = 101,325 Pascals = 14.504 psi
68 bar = 51,680 torr = 5.89e6 Pascals = 986.272 psi
We've had a human capable environment/habitat cell of 68+bar, which
isn't quite Venus. However, their "hypo-hyperbaric bio incubator"
offers 140 bar goes a bit over the top.
http://www.comex.fr/suite/ceh/bio/HTP%20140.pdf
"The current tests being carried out on hydrogen as an agent to reduce
oxygen free radicals is opening up pathways for new therapeutic
methods."
Clearly the COMEX group has offered well documented scientific findings
as to what a 68+bar environment has to offer, as applied to everything
from microbes and bugs to us humans.
http://www.comex.fr/suite/pres/accueil%20anglais.html
http://www.comex.fr/suite/ceh/moyens/moyens%20anglais.html
Hyperbaric Experimental Centre
http://www.comex.fr/suite/ceh/bio/bio%20anglais.html
Capable of sustaining a small group of individuals or whatever great
numbers of petri dish samples at better than 68 bar, of which isn't
quite Venus but, is certainly offering a real life experience and
hard-science expertise as to what's doable at 1% O2 and 99% H2.
Basically, myself and/or anyone other shouldn't have been having to
accomplish this degree of secondary fact-finding and/or correlation of
what else has been most easily available to the scientific community as
a whole, as well as on a need-to-know or via exploritory hide-and-seek
basis on behalf of excluding us village idiots that are not nearly as
mindset bigoted, nor as borg like arrogant and thus having been
relatively open minded about our past, present and future, whereas the
required physics and even of what's biologically possible and/or
obtainable within reasonable evolution or via natural or artificial
adaptation per a given environment has been sufficiently established
for many years if not decades. However, the ongoing hype and
dog-wagging forms of mainstream damage-control and of folks otherwise
certified as wizards in their field of expertise having been avoiding
any direct involvements with our moon or Venus, other than using their
cloak and dagger talents and mainstream resources in order to be
excluding upon whatever evidence comes along which they can't otherwise
foil, thus taking whatever unlimited resources as per topic/author
stalking, bashings and/or imposing banishment upon, and by their
otherwise tossing out as much mainstream hype as MOS flak and of
utilizing if not creating as many of those spendy infomercials as
possible, thereby having quite nicely demonstrated their intent upon
taking such actions for causing as much intellectual as well as
scientific book-burning damage as possible, is unfortunately only
further delaying this over-looked discovery of what's most likely ETI
artificial about Venus, which certainly isn't right by any reasonable
much less morally and hopefully still Godly enough high standards and
accountability that I know of.
Obviously my humanly subjective and otherwise deductive reasoning
format of interpretations as to the truth and nothing but the truth
remains as limited to the honest eyes and ears of the few and far
between beholders, and otherwise not exactly in the best interest of
sustaining the brown-nosed status quo that'll obviously go to any
length and as far as need be outside any set of rules as to block or
destroy whatever threatens to rock their precious boats of public
confidence and tax-avoidance endowments, along with nifty job-security
plus retirement benefits to boot.
BTW; the incest cloned spooks and moles worth of MI6/NSA borgs have
been quit busy fornacating like there's no tomorrow, sharing a bit more
of their nifty browser spermware into my PC again. Thus from time to
time I'll have to reboot in order to purge such malware crapolla that's
been clearly focused upon getting into my PC. Therefore, MI6/NSA (aka
NASA) as usual has been sucking and blowing at the same time, while
accommodating all they can muster as to keeping the honest media
focused away from our moon and that of Venus for nearly the past six
years.
What's actually HOT and NASTY about Venus?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/77e25d90e807f3de/f5ded3c87600895a?lnk=st&q=what%27s+actually+hot&rnum=1&hl=en#f5ded3c87600895a
The previous related topic that has been usenet trashed: What's so HOT
and NASTY about Venus?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/7a7cab487beb942d/a7f016c63e03207b?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=12&hl=en#a7f016c63e03207b
~
Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, as in winner takes whatever; "In war there are no rules" -
Brad Guth
Brad Guth
craters. Once the ice is gone is when such impacts get into being less
than 4:1 if not many of nearly equal or a few deeper than the crater
diameter.
Since most anything about our moon and especially if pertaining to
Venus, or for that matter of just about whatever's researched and
authored by little old me has become officially usenet off-limits
(perhaps that's because I tend to return the warm and fuzzy favor of
topic/author stalking and bashing), other than for my being on the
official receiving end of whatever mainstream flak and spermware that
the good MI6/NSA folks of usenet can manage to send my way, as in
otherwise my topics are quite taboo/nondisclosure or bust, in which
case we still have access to these official taboo/nondisclosure Apollo
archives of their grand ruse/sting of the century to admire:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
Whereas you can believe whatever's a Kodak moment as obtained from
orbit but, what the hell happened to the Kodak physics as to the lunar
albedo and natural color while supposedly EVA/moonsuit strolling about
upon the deck of such a nicely clumping and thus great deal of surface
tension worth of cornmeal and portland cement, as an unusually thin
composite that also looked as though everything was having been
entirely xenon lamp illuminated?
I guess that I'm still the absolutely dumbfounded fool on the hill, as
to why these highly official orbit obtained images of our moon haven't
been highly scanned and re-published in every science journal and
textbook, especially the highest resolution of B&W frames and otherwise
sharing those of depicting the perfectly natural color of the moon as
nicely balanced or qualified by whatever other is artificial in frame
or of having included mother Earth, as everything having been viewed
from their nearby orbit which still isn't a technical requirement of
even those being manned. Instead, we're continually shunned way from
these originals and continually offered relatively low resolution
formats of such extremely complex geological and meteor impacted
moonscapes of what's otherwise an extremely dark surface albedo as
having even darker amounts of strewn shards and of what subsequently
looks like extensive areas offering meters deep moon-dirt as having
been collecting into various low elevation pits or geological as well
as large crater formed basins, and there's even the dark golden
brownish/reddish coating of mostly iron, carbon and titanium composite
dust wherever the surface has long been displaced from such a good
number of whatever created those 100+km diameter sized impacts, that
which many seem to be indicating as nearly 20 km deep. That's actually
a relatively shallow impact per diameter that may have been due to
whatever layers of ice taking up the bulk of impact energy, though
still offering one freaking heck of a lot of vaporised and/or
physically displaced basalt.
Megatonnes of moon rock resides upon Earth;
At least it's a whole lot easier to substantiate this statement as
being true than not.
Even if you'd care to insist upon believing that our moon has always
been exactly right here for all but the first billion years worth of
the creation of Earth, then there's a whole lot of trouble in NASA's
River City, and without any doubt their Pope likes boys best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_craters_on_the_Moon
Of course there's been absolute loads of smaller than 100 km craters
and certainly a great many that are much larger, whereas presumably
those larger sorts would logically be somewhat older. However, if we
simply took a highly conservative average of 20% the radius of whatever
a given 100 km diameter sphere represents, whereas lo and behold
there's roughly 1.466e13 m3 of the moon that got pushed/deformed out of
the way, though a good portion of such may have become vaporised and/or
having physical amounts of moon stuff that obviously went somewhere,
and if perhaps originally at 3.35 tonnes/m3 represents 4.9e13 tonnes,
or 49 teratonnes per each and every nasty 100 km crater. Obviously much
of the displaced material that wasn't vaporised into becoming lunar
atmosphere ended right back upon the moon. Although, if even 0.1% had
managed to exit the lunar gravity influence, and that's not even
including the mass of whatever icy or solid meteorite had to
contribute, as such we're talking about nearly 0.5e11t that simply had
to eventually go somewhere other (such as Earth), and what if merely
0.1% of that portion actually arrived upon the surface, as that's still
a whopping though conservative 0.49e8t or 49 megatonnes worth of lunar
remains as having been deposited upon Earth per each of those 100 km
craters upon the moon.
I wonder how many 99~125 km class of craters there actually are?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_craters_on_the_Moon
BTW; according to this calculator
http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/partsphere.html
And just for the sake of using round numbers, whereas I'm clearly
outside the box by way of having to imply a 20% radius depression worth
of a 200 km sphere, that which might help us to simulate the sorts of
volumetric impression that's associated with a typically 5:1 ratio of
diameter to depth of what's considered as a 100+km moon crater, as such
this volume becomes worth 1.173e14 m3
Therefore 1.173e14 x 3.35t = 3.93e14 tonnes worth of the lunar surface
that got reshaped, vaporised and/or entirely displaced away from the
scene of the crime by way of what a meteor that must have been a good
10 km worth of an icy coated diameter, thus added it's volume of
5.236e11 m3 as having impacted the moon as whatever velocity you'd care
to imagine.
Good grief folks; not to even mention the sizable meteor itself, that's
certainly offering a rather serious bunch of moon-rock that has got to
already be situated right here upon Earth, whereas as slight as 0.1%
arriving towards the vicinity of our much thicker atmosphere of the
time and, having obviously surrendered to the gravity grip of mother
Earth is suggesting an influx of 0.173e12t or 173 gigatonnes, and if
only 0.1% of that managed to survive reentry in order to have landed
safely, in which case we're talking about receiving a mostly basalt
deposit of 173 megatonnes of moon rock per 100+km crater. Fortunately
for the moon, a good number of the meteors were of a fairly low
density, as well as for our moon itself may have been quite nicely ice
coated upon it's arrival so as to have kept such impacts somewhat
moderated down to a dull roar, thus relatively shallow bedrock craters
instead of getting seriously hammered.
Even if an icy proto-moon of 4000 km didn't manage to bounce itself off
Earth in the process of arriving to save the otherwise hot and nasty
day, by way of icing down and DNA/RNA seeding the once upon a time
molten Earth that was perhaps at the time a bit Venus like, chances are
the secondary impacts of what could have been a horrific Oort to Oort
cloud exchange plus our relatively nearby Kuiper belt gauntlet worth of
smaller icy orbs as having impacted our moon, is just as likely to have
created those shallow craters and thus indirectly deposited sufficient
amounts of all of that ice along with whatever became available as
volumes of lunar basalt.
As bad as I usually am with math, I came up with better than 84 of
those 99~125 km class of impact craters (excluding a few extremely
shallow craters and of craters within craters, although perhaps of
whatever's situated on the opposite side certainly shouldn't be
discounted), thus of the relatively midlife-crisis of lunar history
having been getting itself pulverised has potentially contributed into
our environment at the very least 84 * 173e6t = 14.5e9 tonnes of mostly
basalt that's somewhere upon and/or having been assimilated into mother
Earth after every 100~110 thousand year reset/cycle of terrestrial ice
having re-excavated and thus reshaped the surface of Earth. Remember
that if it weren't for those nifty ice-age cycles, the ongoing erosion
plus whatever cosmic influx of solids and perhaps a slight global
shrinkage factor would have the livable dry portion of this terraformed
planet down to 10%. As it is, we're surviving on perhaps 15% of what's
sufficiently dry but not too dry, nor too damn cold, too flooded/swamp
like or otherwise too high of altitude to count. So, unless our DNA/RNA
mutates into reverting our physiology into having gills, chances are
that it's going to get real crowded and testy, especially without an
affordable reserve of geological/fossil fuel to spare.
~
Life upon Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
Brad Guth
Most of us accept that the larger the crater generally represents
somewhat older and most often having less depth in proportion to it's
diameter, whereas even the 99~125 km class of craters are still those
of relatively shallow format, of typically 5:1 out to a 10:1 as a ratio
of diameter/depth, even shallower if you'd care to exclude the push-up
of their surrounding crater rim. The more recent craters are generally
those smaller than 99 km, and many of those have been worth 25% if not
deeper than 1:1, indicating as though having little if any involvement
of either surface hosting a low density cushion layer of ice by which
to absorb the impact energy. Raw basalt is roughly 3 times the density
of raw ice, and still twice as dense as solid dry-ice. An incoming
solid basalt to lunar basalt encounter would nearly always involve a
crater diameter per depth ratio that's at least 4:1, and notice how so
few of the craters are oval or otherwise indicating as having an
angular encounter, suggesting that the lunar gravity itself was playing
an important role in their final impact angle that obviously became
nearly vertical prior to contact, thus the 1.623 m/s/s having added an
amount of incoming final velocity, as opposed to limitations imposed by
the orbital escape velocity of whatever having been orbiting the moon
but losing altitude due to the lunar atmospheric drag that's somewhat
greater and further extended than you'd think, at least well past the
100 km mark is the primary reason why SMART-1 can't afford to take a
closer look-see without prematurely losing it's velocity.
Most of the larger than 125 km craters are offering an even shallower
ratio, indicating that at least one of the orbs involved in merging
upon one another was quite nicely ice covered, along with perhaps the
option of the other orb having a sufficient layer of ice and/or that of
an atmospheric buffer zone that would have somewhat moderated their
encounter to a point where a partial deflection rather than a total
joining of orbs would have been possible. Whereas, the largest of the
craters being entirely suggestive of a Earth/moon like encounter.
Therefore, if the icy proto-moon hosted such a layer of ice (say 262 km
worth), that original volume of such ice obviously didn't entirely if
at all survive the primary orb to orb encounter, whereas even secondary
impacts as having created other massive craters should have entitled a
few large portions of their surface ice as becoming icy spacebergs upon
their having been impact deflected into the general orbital path of the
moon and, obviously as otherwise those icy spacebergs and sequestered
rock having been most likely attracted by the gravity of Earth simply
because we're sufficiently nearby, so much larger than and certainly
more massive than the moon would pretty much conclude that the majority
of whatever proto-moon ice and sequestered rock within would have
eventually become united within the environment of Earth rather than
not.
Of course, any such deductive reasoning based speculation as to
whatever icy proto-moon has to remain nondisclosure, that is since we
still have absolutely nothing as to the hard-science of any such nearby
raw ice surviving in space, nor as to any other such nearby space
traveling ice expertise and, much less is known for certain of low
albedo ice (hosting a layer of carbon soot, iron and other cosmic and
solar wind deposits) of essentially a dirty composite of ice and solids
having to survive the raw solar influx or even as to the reentry phase
as affecting such remainders of ice arriving into the lower atmosphere
without previously sublimitation/vaporising into less than thin air
before getting itself through the upper most atmosphere remains as
another taboo/nondisclosure hold-card of the mainstream status quo,
with no apparent intentions of that sort of basic/fundamental knowledge
ever being appreciated because, honestly understanding the holy grail
of raw ice in space remains as top-secret, especially since it'll only
apply more nails into the coffins of our NASA/Apollo ruse of the
century.
You'd think that before we'd set a moonsuit-boot worth of such a nicely
clumping footprint upon the moon, that we'd have established a basic
understanding about raw ice in space, thus better able to extrapolate
all sorts of viable notions related to energy transfers and of mere
humans having to survive via applied physics and therefore artificial
means while situated within such a near vacuum, not to mention while
situated upon the sunny/reactive hostile side of an extremely dark and
nasty moon that's roasting and otherwise TBI to death upon whatever's
biologically upon the deck, plus otherwise further attracting as well
as just running itself butt-naked into the sorts of space/solar dust
and micro-meteorites at a bare minimum of 30 km/s, although bucking
through a solar wind that's absolutely loaded with such nano/pico flak
that's passing by at 300+km/s isn't exactly insignificant, even if
there's but one arriving solar nano-speck of whatever per m3 is still
worth 300e3 of those specks/m2/second. With that sort of potential
velocity, some of those micro-meteorites or even solar nano-specks are
not going to be so easily fended off by any synthetic moonsuit.
What's blowing in the solar wind can kick serious moonsuit butt,
whereas at 300 km/s a nanogram/m3 or even a picogram/m3 can
collectively represent a real sucker-punch.
Whatever's drifting along with the moon and even of somewhat highly
electrostatic moon-dust in of itself isn't worth all that much of a
threat unless the surface tension of such having been lightly compiled
as lunar quicksand drops anywhere below 50 g/cm2, a wee bit of a
problem since I can't discover why such bone-dry quicksand of
accumulated moon-dust should be offering a surface tension that's any
greater than 10 g/cm2. However, if and whenever each spec of whatever's
incoming or passing by becomes worth 1e-9 gram is where KE=.5MV2 gets
seriously interesting, as that's one nanogram/m3 of which a solar wind
that's contributing 300e3/s of those m3 translates into a nasty
population of such nano-specs that'll be impacting upon each m2 with a
total mass that's worth 0.3e-6 kg/sec.
Obviously individually them nano-specs represent nothing much to worry
about, except for their having made those clean-through submicron holes
in your moonsuit. However, as a collective cloud it could hurt a little
as based upon 300 km/s (V2 = 300e3^2 = 90e9) for the attending
velocity, and I believe that's being conservative since 950+km/s worth
of solar winds have been recorded. Otherwise the more typical solar
wind is perhaps offering a picogram/m3 worth of carbon, iron and
titanium specs, which should only become challenging if that's getting
delivered via 950 km/s instead of the more typical 300 km/s.
picogram/m3 @300 km/s KE = 0.15e-9 * 90e9 = 13.5 joules/m2
picogram/m3 @950 km/s KE = 0.475e-9 * 90.25e10 = 428.7 joules/m2
Fortunately, the extremely low density of the Van Allen zone of death,
being the vast magnetosphere expanse that it is, is enough to deflect
and/or absorb a great amount of solar flak KE, which should also be
said of whatever thin atmosphere is associated with our moon. Although,
without all that much of an atmospheric buffer as according to those
spendy NASA/Apollo infomercials, and I'll have to suppose that a well
proportioned moonsuit might represent a square meter of windward
surface area, of which a well braced individual, and otherwise grasping
onto something for dear life wouldn't be capable of holding their own
against any nanogram/m3 = 13.5 kj, as that's only a little over 18 hp.
Of course, having dropped that solar flak influx density down to a
picogram/m3 gets the resulting KE down to dull roar of 13.5 joules/m2.
Of course we now realize there is an amount of lunar atmosphere that's
a bit sparse but otherwise made up of heavier elements, and most
certainly any moon having such as a fairly extended atmosphere that's
comprised of a few heavy elements such as Argon, Xenon, CO2 and quite
possibly a near-surface layer of Radon would greatly moderate the
near-surface situation on behalf of future moonsuit EVAs, especially on
behalf of those deployed upon the nighttime/earthshine lunar surface.
However, this is where our moon-science sucks, since we still have
absolutely nothing that's scientifically interactive as deployed upon
our moon, in which case all that we have are reasonable science
speculations and viable conjectures as based upon the regular laws of
physics and of nearby orbital moon-science to work from.
Over the years I know that others and I've suggested our science could
have utilized any number of relatively small and energy efficient
robotic deployed instruments upon the surface, as well as per JAVELIN
impact or LUNAR-A implanted forms of instrument packages. However, all
that I'd obtained as feedback was purely MOS mainstream damage control
on behalf of their status quo that has to adhere to worshiping their
pagan NASA/Apollo bible, or else.
No wonder our moon remains as off-limits, as well as for taking another
look-see at Venus has also become such nondisclosure/taboo.
I'm not some village idiot fool insisting that our sunny side of the
moon is always beyond moonsuit EVA capability, as obviously our sun
from time to time has a few hours of off-duty moments when there's
little flak or much of any other nasties to deal with, though I'd be
surprised if those situations last for more than a few hours at a time.
I am however very much that same old village idiot messenger from hell
that's still insisting Venus is where all the ET/ETI action is.
Brad Guth
another damage control Lord/wizard "Bookman" thinks, thus MI6/NSA~NASA
doesn't even require any nondisclosure policy that sucks, at least not
when they've got such nicely incest cloned borgs that'll double-suck
just fine an dandy on their own;
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro.seti/browse_frm/thread/177c9b03ce228299/71ac5de219860726?hl=en#71ac5de219860726
>Gotten some virus protection yet? Learning anything about computer
>hygine? Or will you continue blaming the problems you cause by your
>own incompetence on "others"[tano]?
>All the facts are in, Guthball. Men walked on the moon. Thousands of
>pictures, film, samples of lunar rock, ham radio operators, Russian
>radio operators (who would have loved to "debunk" the Apollo missions,
>but couldn't, because they happened>, versus a few LLPOF kooks
>like you, trying desperately to misinterpret the facts in order to
>"disprove" reality.
Bookman,
Side by side computers connected via the same browser and internet
server, at the same time and essentially running the same OS as not
associated with my name nor of whatever I'm into and, that of my PC
that's getting summarily MI6/NSA spermed to death.
You tell me what's wrong with this picture?
BTW; I'm not "pissed off" as much as I'm amazed that we haven't been
nuked for our perpetrated cold-wars and of being such LLPOF absolute
arrogant, greedy and as anti-God as well as bigoted as humanity gets.
>It must drive you straight up the wall that your LLPOF story is so
>obviously false in the face of the the facts ot the real, historical
>event of men landing on the moon.
And you're independently supporting that absolute proof-positive notion
with what?
You've actually got those fly-by-rocket R&D prototype landers on film?
You've got better than Kodak photochemical physics and hard-science?
Unlike fools as yourself, I'm actually thinking that reasonably soon
the likes of Russia should could be into mining the moon, or at least
establishing their LSE-CM/ISS, even though accomplishing Venus would be
technically a whole lot easier. However, basically I've had to agree
with the notions that the previous "Apollo Moon Landings Are Pure
Fantasy" and, I do believe that a good number of individuals along with
the likes of Kodak's physics as well as I can add further support as to
a good many of the related arguments, whereas many of these other folks
as having been stipulating we haven't walked upon the moon have
certainly been better off at their communicating skills than myself.
However, this seemingly never-ending argument is somewhat the same as
yet another topic "of what's become nondisclosure/taboo" because, it's
clear that our perpetrated cold-wars are far from anything but over.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.scientists/browse_frm/thread/5d5dd4ec128536f3/cf651fa51f479dce?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=5&hl=en#cf651fa51f479dce
BTW; you're still avoiding the topics at hand by way of avoiding my
specific questions. Why is that?
Is being dumb and dumber as well as entirely dumbfounded the borg
mindset of your status quo?
Once a snookered borg always a snookered borg?
I'd forgotten to mention that my PC has the latest MS updates plus two
levels of running firewalls, whereas I've also utilized one or the
other at a time, as opposed to the other PC running nearly wide-open
that's not even the most updated and without firewall yet lo and
behold, oddly the other PC doesn't seem to get nearly as nailed, at
least never to the same extent. Thus you're quite correct in that since
MI6/NSA has all of the back and side door keys to the Microsoft info
steeling crapolla OS of the century, obviously the likes of myself can
be remotely invaded/spermed and if need be shut-down, and/or at least
having packets shared and/or diverted as going anywhere other than I'd
thought possible.
I'd also forgotten to ask if your wisdom and supposed all-knowing
expertise can best explain as to how the natural color and thereby
deeply affected albedo of the moon as having been so nicely imaged from
100+km was so entirely different from their being situated upon the
deck?
Since there's so freaking much raw UV energy/m2 in space, especially
external to the expansive Van Allen zone of death and, since there's
supposedly such a slight amount of lunar atmosphere as having been
reported by your pagan Gods that couldn't possibly filter or otherwise
shun such raw solar photons, whereas perhaps you'll deliver the much
needed Kodak photo chemical physics as to why there was absolutely no
sign whatsoever of any secondary/recoil worth of near-blue or near-UV
spectrum of photons to being had (you already know damn good an well
I'm not talking about any stinking sky-blue worth of illumination)?
Same goes for the secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays that were
nowhere to be found and, thus unrecorded upon film that was
sufficiently sensitive to such hard-X-rays, not upon on any of their
supposed EVA moonsuit walkabouts that were quite extensive by any Kodak
film exposure standards.
Also, why the heck did their highest of quality polarised filters make
the apparently highly reflective lunar surface into nearly white-out
zones?
The spot-illuminated zones should certainly represent another prime
level of whatever your all-knowing photo expertise must have the proper
and thus verifiable answers to. Please do demonstrate as to how wizards
as yourself have even this minor Apollo fart nailed down, whereas
wizard Bob of the Apollohoax crapolla infomercial forum that sucks
insisted that for such a thin layer of such nicely clumping moon-dirt
was somehow selectively retroreflective, yet otherwise entirely
nonreactive thus unable to contribute secondary/recoil photons of any
sort.
Why are you excluding whatever these official photo archives have to
offer?
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
Brad Guth
flaming stick at.
Apparently the truth and nothing but the truth is now having been
reclasified as a "Usenet gang"
>Warning about Usenet gangs!
I always wanted to be a "gang" and, as such other folks would lick my
boots and brown-nose themselves off of my butt.
Speaking about "crimes against science. creationism, feminism, cultural
relativism, political correctness, etc"
The ET UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac of Venus (this topic isn't one of them)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro.seti/browse_frm/thread/177c9b03ce228299/38e746eab0a157da?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=4&hl=en#38e746eab0a157da
>Bookman; I very much doubt it, Guthball, since you cannot accept the
>overwhelming evidence of the historic Apollo landings now.
What independent hard-scientific evidence? It seems as though I've
asked and you haven't delivered squat.
I've been asking those same basic questions for nearly six years and,
besides your continually avoiding such specifics, it seems as though
you're the fool on the hill that's not appreciating the matter of fact
that you've been summarily snookered.
>There it is. If you were dropped on the landing site, you'd still be
>screaming "NASA hoax". Q.E.D.
Is being an incest cloned LLPOF brown-nosed bastard of such a profound
bigot all that you've got to work with?
Is that why you're avoiding the truth and nothing but the truth? Is
that why you're anti-ET and thus anti-God?
If I had so much as a few of those Kodak orginal moments worth of those
original transperianceis/negatives as having been obtained from the
100+km orbit, I'd be a happy camper. Dropping an extremely small CCD
camera via an extremely large/inflated parachute as getting that kg
worth of a micro-probe package safely deplowed onto the dark and dusty
surface would be more than worth it's weight in gold, that is before it
sank out of sight, although the extremely large and mylar reflective
parachute should remain as visible since it could be a full km in
diameter.
Not that you'd be one to give an honest tinkers damn but, our moon air
remains as rather humanly slight, even on behalf of robotic deployments
is supposedly too damn thin to be of any aerobreaking good but,
otherwise extends a few of the heavier elements outward to quite a
distance (100+km).
This certainly doesn't represent that our moon will remain as forever
impossible, at least for getting a reasonable degree of robotics
deployed, such as those LUNAR-A impact probes should do the trick and,
eventually actual robotic fly-by-rocket soft landings should some day
become obtainable. Without ever setting a hot and TBI moonboot foot
upon the dark and extremely dusty surface, the LSE-CM/ISS has been
entirely doable as is. Although, the motives and actions and thus
perverted mindsets of such heathen incest cloned borgs such as
rusemaster "Fred Garvin" are here to stay, just like the devil himself
has been reincarnated as GW Bush is here to stay.
>Warhol; In my Religion we have the sum of all knowledge and go wherever we want in
>space and in time or dimension.... My God has made all what you see and
>know, he controls the universes with many many Galaxy's full of civilized
>life.... anyway the Moonprogram was a smokescreen.... Nasa is a
>simpleBallistic program to stop a incoming Meteor that shall hit Earth...
>and even for that they are not good... because they dont have the knowledge
>needed... and THEY Never had PI... so Forget all what Nasa claims... they
>are Known LIARS....
I'd asked of Warhol if there were any chance his God could swing by for
dispensing some serious butt kickings (starting from the top down)?
This next part merely offers us free and thus open minded souls some
further notions as to how gosh darn testy our moon is for even having
to orbit that nasty sucker because, apparently there's a wee bit more
substance to the lunar atmosphere than we've been told.
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/technovel_smart-1_041119.html
"SMART-1 has a stationary plasma thruster using xenon gas with 1190
watts of power available, giving a nominal thrust of 68 mN. The
spacecraft contains 48 liters of xenon gas at 150 bar. The lifetime of
the thruster is 7,000 hours at maximum power. The thrust is equivalent
to two pennies resting in the palm of your hand."
Obviously at half thrust it's Xenon fuel becomes worthy of sustaining
583 days as Smart-1 gets itself ever closer and closer to the moon,
thus taking the 34 mN (3.467 grams) force of just one penny resting in
the palm of your hand represents why such a little item as SMART-1 at
one cubic meter plus PV cell panels has to remain so far away from the
moon and thereby free of it's relatively thin but otherwise fairly
expansive atmosphere. Cruising to within 50 km would be nearly an
instant death sentence, with only 2 km/s representing far too much
aerobreaking drag, whereas even a 200 x 50 km orbit would have cut
their mission down to a few days at best before becoming another part
of the moon in the same manner as did the mostly robotic portions of
those Apollo missions.
Thus the NASA/Apollo ruse of evidence exclusions and even involving
avoidance of their own NASA/Apollo archives of what's supposedly the
actual images as having been obtained from such a nearby orbit, whereas
at least Apollo-8 proved that such images could have been 100%
robotically obtained, even somewhat reasonably directed and thus
accomplished via ground-control since it's just 2.5 seconds per
instruction packet delivery and reply.
Also, the natural color and obviously quite dark composite albedo of
the moon as having been obtained from orbit still matches up with what
other satellites since Apollo have been delivering, especially those
which offer something of mother Earth in view and/or that of including
Venus, many of those having included a portion of the earthshine
illuminated moon are quite interesting as long as you're not expecting
to see any of those retroreflectance aspects of such near white-out
scenes as most often the case with those supposed EVA/moonsuit strolls
upon what apparently was a uniformly thin layer of cornmeal and
portland cement, in that even though it was absolutely bone dry and of
hardly any gravity influence as for compacting is another one of these
moon dry-quicksand conditional laws of physics as to why it was to
nicely clumping at a surface tension of supporting better than 100
g/cm2, yet not having been the least bit electrostatic, dark and nasty
nor otherwise reactive, just highly retroreflective so as per creating
all of those unusually selective and quite xenon lamp spectrum like
illumination hot-spots.
The likes of this rather unfortunate Apollo-14 page includes one of
their 'BLUE SCREEN' star-removal oops frames, yet never once an
inclusion of mother Earth.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?73
Taking a closer review and as best possible objective look-see at what
the natural color and especially of those frames from orbit as having
something of the Apollo equipment within view so as to thus quantify as
to comparing the true colors and, then obviously of those frames
including those extremely white moonsuits and/or of mother Earth are
those which are going to best represent the true color and as to what
should have been the extremely dark albedo of the moon (same color as
from orbit except darker), of which if anything should only have gotten
photographically darker as our crack teams of moonsuit rusemasters
stepped onto the actual lunar deck, along with their polarised filter
outfitted camera lens that should have been making whatever lunar
surface reflected illumination of the raw solar influx record as nearly
50% darker yet.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
On at least two of their missions is where Venus had to have been
downright pesky about having such a damn bright point-source of
illumination (reflecting 75+% of the 2650 w/m2), although a full amount
of earthshine was also worth 50:1 as compared to moonshine delivered
upon the surface of Earth, which should have been taken into account as
for creating a few soft secondary shadows as could easily have been
depicted within the primary harshness of such raw shadows that were
supposedly recorded as per having been standing upon the lunar surface,
yet none of the Apollo surface photos having significant frames of
shadowed terrain offered any notions of earthshine shadows whatsoever.
Even upon Earth there a moonshine shadows that have been photo
recordable, and to a good human eye that's situated within a moonless
terrestrial night can even realize the extremely point-source cast of a
Venus derived shadow. Of course upon the moon is where the Venus
illumination is twice as much to the human eye and at least 8 fold
brighter to the unfiltered Kodak eye.
BTW; lunar daytime shadows were actually capable of achieving a darker
(less illuminated) environment zone than a moonless night upon Earth,
not to mention the nearly coal like surrounding terrain of 11~12%
albedo that's not even half of what the average surface albedo of Earth
has to offer. Go figure.
>Warhol; they will get destroyed long before they get mature... they are destroying
>their own.... by not Believing in the Allmighty... and they Think, they killed the Lord...
>where they are wrong. He was Always alive and is here, and he even helped them to
>commit their theft... The Lord always works in mysteriouse way's they say, and it's true.
This works for me. Although, does it represent that at times our
planetary terraforming lord and master of the universe has been playing
favorites by way of being pro LLPOF GW Bush?
Brad Guth
Dear brown-nosed rusemaster(s) *The Commentator*, DrPostman, Art Deco
and mutually snookered religious bigot Bookman,
Obviously you folks still can't appreciate the hard-science matter of
fact that we've extensively orbited the moon (at least robotically) and
thus having obtained a great amount of moon-science, skewed only enough
so as to be inclusive of those supposed manned landings and safe
returns that for some unexplainable reasons were 100% fly-by-rocket
bullet proof yet can't be in any way demonstrated or otherwise utilized
on behalf of such supposed technology accomplishing any other past
robotic or future robotic/manned missions to come. In other words, of
whatever's in need of fly-by-rocket capability has to start entirely
from scratch because???????
When I say "GOT CROSS", I'm intentionally pointing out that certain
religious freaks, and of their being way too incest cloned, are still
without a viable stitch of remorse, in that such born-again liars have
only but one option to beget MOS lies until them Apollo cows come home.
As having been suggested by many that I'm some kind of a certified loon
and otherwise beyond any hope of recovery and/or assimilation into
their mainstream status quo, at least my supposed "fantasy world"
hasn't artificially spiked the cost of energy, hasn't taken out the USN
LIBERTY or even the wrong TWA Flight-800, hasn't LLPOF invented WMD nor
having subsequently caused such horrific collateral damage and the
carnage of having exterminated tens of thousands of innocent folks that
were each individually far more worthy of life than the likes of those
protecting their own and certainly many other brown=nosed butts. I also
can't seem to identify as to my causing any negative albedo shift
that's responsible for global warming, at least not that's in any way
associated with my research or even of what I've since proposed. How
about yourself?
Perhaps Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" column in the Guardian can take
yet another step further in order to appreciate how a few usenet gangs
of honest souls are better off than humanity being continually
snookered.
Science Journalism
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/e4d2fe6a2f379eb6/8375f4bfa4479b50?hl=en#8375f4bfa4479b50
Since I've rediscovered of what I'd thought was reality somewhat sucks,
thus speaking as a certified pro at myself having been detached from
mainstream reality, especially from the part of reality that so badly
sucks and blows at the same time:
>Geoffrey A. Landis; they do work that is either wacky, or dangerous, but either way, everything
>in science is tenuous, contradictory and, most ridiculously, "hard to understand".
This statement makes perfect sense if you're one of those into knowing
thy enemy and thus intent upon snookering thy humanity. In orther
words, if you're only out and about as looking for taking whatever out
of context in order to sustain your mindset, then the shoe fits. At
least that's what I do all the rime, extracting whatever I think is
most important, whereas I'm the sort of village idiot that's
continually looking on the positive side of achieving the most bang for
the buck, while otherwise affordably improving the quality of life for
the greater portion of humanity, however realizing my limitations due
to the well established borg collective army of opposition that's
continually sitting if not super-glued upon those spendy intellectual
space toilets, trying their intellectual flatulence best at keeping
their mainstream status quo as is.
Apparently the reality of folks honestly sharing of truth and nothing
but the truth is now having been reclasified as a "Usenet gang" via the
following topic;
>Warning about Usenet gangs!
This is actually good news because, I've always wanted to be a "gang"
and, as such other folks would lick my boots and brown-nose themselves
off of my butt, thus putting an end to my minion gap.
Having been nominated as one of the usenet gang leaders that's breaking
all their precious rules by insisting there has been other life upon
Venus, in part because of viable observationology as having been
further supported by the regular laws of physics that are offering a
rather major contributing factor and, if these Venus establishments
were of merely visiting ETs as having been responsible for what I've
interpreted, as being a community of large structures and of having a
perfectly rational association with having a perfectly desirable form
of infrastructure, then obviously with such capable ETI smarts and some
basic applied technology is where Venus has been doable.
As opposed to getting robotics and humanity onto the moon, at least the
thick atmospheric ocean environment of Venus is actually obtainable
with the applied technology at hand. Our moon having insufficient
atmosphere for aerobreaking on behalf of deploying any significant
amount of payload and, since we still haven't a viable fly-by-rocket
craft, nor have we the necessary science of any human expedition as to
even safely deal with the harsh heat, nasty dust and otherwise highly
reactive/TBI conditions of the raw solar illuminated moon, whereas
getting a craft below them relatively cool nighttime seasonal clouds of
Venus has been entirely doable as of decades ago. As for actually
safely deploying robotics onto the surface is entirely doable of even
extremely large scale and massive deployments. Eventually our walking
upon the surface of Venus that may seem a wee bit humanly testy but,
that too has become technically surmountable with the sorts of products
and applied technology that's been available within the most recent
decade.
However, hard-science obtained by way of robotic missions isn't going
to take a tenth the time nor 0.1% the cost (especially since robotics
do not have to come back home), as such I see no good reason for
humanity to be walking upon Venus or even that of our moon, much less
Mars. The 0.1% of the trillion+ dollars for supposedly walking upon
Mars becomes worth a billion+ dollars on behalf of robotics capable of
accomplishing another 100 if not a thousand fold more hard science
because, robots will not have to be continually fed O2, food and drink
nor subsequently piss and poop upon another planet or moon, nor much
less returned to Mother Earth as still alive and kicking. Whereas a
billion dollars (especially if extensively spent in Russia, China or
India) should get the likes of TRACE-VL2 deployed and of a few surface
kiosks of interactive instruments established.
Any notion of manned missions to/from another planet or moon needs to
have a great deal of good reason(s), thus justifiable logic, that which
other than extracting He3 from our moon in of itself would have to
remain primarily a robotic task, whereas it seems that even I can't
find such valid reasons nor even an once/gram of remorse as for such
investments into manned expeditions that could possibly benefit
humanity, especially on behalf of the sorts of humanity as having been
focused upon perpetrating cold-wars and as of lately into global energy
domination shouldn't even be entitled to the worth of He3/fusion
because, they'd only utilize it to improve their lives at the continued
expense and/or demise of others because, Earth isn't just running
itself out of geological/fossil fuel reserves.
Even as of today, the lower 99.9% portion of humanity hasn't benefitted
from all of astronomy to date, yet trillions upon trillions have been
invested, as well as having diverted countless tens of thousands of
supposedly talented souls, of their past and ongoing research and
exploits as having further diverted vast amounts of human and energy
resources and, as far as I can tell we (the lower 99.9% of humanity)
certainly haven't specifically benefitted from even the total sum of
robotic missions to other worlds or moons (not even that of our own
moon since there's still nothing interactively as having been
deployed).
Thus we're left with spendy sorts of NOVA and so many other classy
infomercials of having to accept their incessant hype and promises that
have never materialized an actual gram worth of food upon the table,
nor even contributed that of a more affordable or cleaner form of
energy from such bogus ET related science, whereas Earth-science and
thereby of purely terrestrial satellites focused upon the needs of
Earth have contributed, as otherwise having been focused upon our sun
and even on behalf of tracking potentially lethal NEOs should
eventually become a win-win for at least the upper 10% of humanity,
whereas the lower 90% can just go to hell, and apparently by way of our
"high standards and accountability" of our "so what's the difference"
policy as having been employed by our resident warlord(GW Bush), the
sooner the better. Those that say otherwise are liars of the worse
possible kind by insisting their spendy and resource consuming
astronomy and of whatever ET exploits are justifiable (I guess that's
true as long as it's not their money or other resources getting
depleted, and some one else is having to paying extra as a direct
result of their matrix of tax avoidance).
>Geoffrey A. Landis; Science stories usually fall into three families: wacky stories,
>scare stories and "breakthrough" stories.."
I think the discovery of other life/ETs as having been situated upon
Venus fits all of the above.
>Geoffrey A. Landis; It is my hypothesis that in their choice of stories, and the way they
>cover them, the media create a parody of science, for their own means.
I'll have to totally concur. The media (as having been MI6/NSA~NASA
influenced if not assimilated into being entirely at their disposal)
has been leading us astray while milking us honest minions dry, and
then some.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
Brad Guth
Since so many folks are seemingly so gosh darn all-knowing and a bit
brown-nosed to boot, perhaps yourself and any other incest cloned
wizard/borg friend can explain as to why any of this following context
is the least bit news worthy.
NASA News Release "Radioactive Moon"
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/08sep_radioactivemoon.htm
http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/nasa_sci_radioactive_moon.html
"Summary - (Sep 9, 2005) When humans return to the Moon in the next
decade, they'll be facing a dangerous combination of cosmic rays and
solar flares. Astronauts will need to avoid getting too much radiation,
so NASA is working to better understand risks. The upcoming Lunar
Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) will carefully measure and map the Moon's
radiation environment. It will also have a special instrument designed
to simulate how this radiation will affect the human body."
"The surface of the Moon is baldly exposed to cosmic rays and solar
flares, and some of that radiation is very hard to stop with shielding.
Furthermore, when cosmic rays hit the ground, they produce a dangerous
spray of secondary particles right at your feet. All this radiation
penetrating human flesh can damage DNA, boosting the risk of cancer and
other maladies."
Says Harlan Spence, a professor of astronomy at Boston University;
"We really need to know more about the radiation environment on the
Moon, especially if people will be staying there for more than just a
few days,"
"When galactic cosmic rays collide with particles in the lunar surface,
they trigger little nuclear reactions that release yet more radiation
in the form of neutrons. The lunar surface itself is radioactive!"
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_dangers_040120.html
"The Moon, with no atmosphere, is more dangerous than the surface of
Mars. Lunar forays will have to be brief unless expensive shielded
habitats are built."
Double dose or perhaps Double duh
"Particle radiation in space goes right through the human body and can
tear apart strands of DNA, the software of life that resides inside a
cell nucleus. Damaged cells can lose the ability perform normally and
to repair themselves."
"There are two primary forms of hazardous space radiation particles.
(These particles are different from electromagnetic radiation, such as
X-rays, visible light or the ultraviolet (UV) rays that cause skin
cancer.)"
"High-energy particles emitted by the Sun during intense flares are one
type. They move outward at millions of miles an hour and can strike the
Earth-Moon system in a day or two. Earth's magnetic field shields the
planet from most of these. Some get through, though, especially in
intense streams lasting several hours when a storm's magnetic field is
aligned in a certain way with that of the planet's."
"Warning times for Sun storms can be as little as 18 hours."
That's roughly 2400 km/s of whatever's extremely TBI hot and nasty and,
I believe such solar wind has to include quite a bit of picogram
flak/m3 that's traveling at lest half as fast, perhaps delivering as
great as 10 picogram/m3 at 1200 km/s by which the KE of that fast
arriving substance can essentially knock yourself onto your moonsuit
butt, if not turn you moonsuit into a nicely nano perforated moonsuit
that could actually leak O2 and the likes of human sweat and blood from
within which might actually act as a necessary byproduct that'll keep
your moonsuit air tight. However, in addition to the solar primary
radiation dosage that should have terminated a good portion of your
DNA, there's also the secondary/recoil aspects as contributed by the
surrounding local dosage that's just as bad off if not worse. Without a
significant atmosphere is what gives such a berth of hard-X-rays a free
ride as to going in all directions and about as far as the eye can see,
such as all the way to Earth where such has been well documented via
terrestrial satellites that are situated well below the Van Allen
expanse as for shielding such satellites and us from much of the lunar
radiation, although our relatively thick atmosphere is what's primarily
saving our DNA/RNA from becoming exterminated via moon, solar and
cosmic radiation.
http://lunar.arc.nasa.gov/results/neures.htm
>From this old data It looks as though the largest of craters situated
about the lunar South Pole offers a somewhat less reactive zone,
perhaps it's less because of the direct solar influx least impacts that
central low terrain and, there is certainly a bit of an atmosphere
that's otherwise responsible for a measured degree of radiation
shielding. A bit larger safety zone though not quite as deep of a
pocket resides about the lunar North Pole.
BTW; when certain solar rays hit the moon that's nearly naked to such
trauma, I believe this is the primary reason as to why there's always a
much greater amount of secondary/recoil dosage of hard-X-rays to being
had. Lunar nighttime or via earthshine is obviously getting back to the
dull roar of cosmic and local radioactive dosages that are still
downright nasty and as such would require a great deal of shielding as
to moderate those TBI dosages down to perhaps something less than a rad
per day, thus giving 50~60 days worth of a working timeline before
receiving their short term career dosage limit. Avoiding the solar
impacted lunar surface goes without saying, that is unless you have a
rather nasty death wish to fulfill, as otherwise an EVA/moonsuit hour
or so might become your career red-line limit, although encountering a
bad solar influx and you could be down to a few minutes.
Actually, as of the late 1960s, there was no shortage of radiation
knowledge as to the likes of our moon, it was just being continually
sequestered so that certain folks could continually snooker thy
humanity for all it's worth. The laws of physics haven't change or even
been modified since way back in them good old perpetrated Apollo and
cold-war days of our supposedly accomplishing the task of walking upon
our moon. In fact, the dosage recording methods back then are nearly
one and same as of today, and certainly of science instruments for
recording such primary and secondary radiation were also of way more
than sufficient methods as for covering their surrounding spacecraft
and moonsuit applications and, of before and long after those Apollo
missions had obtained loads of sufficient moon radiation information
that has merely been sequestered out of sight and thus out of mind for
decades. Thus other than greatly improved resolution which is nearly
always a good thing, why otherwise waste time and by way of our
spending hundreds of millions if not actually getting into billions
with deploying yet another radiation look-see upon what our nasty moon
has to offer?
More than a decade ago the LUNAR-A mission should have nailed the moon,
yet it's still sequestered as we speak.
According to many that certainly know far more than myself, there's
been damn little argument that the substance of the moon itself is far
more radioactive than the common soil and rock of mother Earth. Because
the moon has but a slight atmosphere of mostly argon along with CO2 and
perhaps a xenon and even a radon layer near the surface is why it's
well accepted that the likes of sequestered He3 is also there to
behold. Yet we have no viable robotic nor manned fly-by-rocket lander
that'll accomplish the to/from task. Meanwhile Russia and China are in
a race to establishing the first one and only LSE-CM/ISS which doesn't
even require any stinking fly-by-rocket landers.
~
Life upon Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
Brad Guth
a bit more truth worthy substance than you can imagine. Even the notion
of our planet receiving the benefits of an icy proto-moon is topic
taboo/nondisclosure because ????????
Even the likes of Mark Wade can't possibly support the NASA/Apollo
bible as carved in stone, or even for that matter those USSR AI/robotic
fly-by-rocket landers.
Others individuals like Jack White have certainly made a perfectly
nifty publishing career out of those NASA/Apollo missions without ever
taking into account the natural color and relatively dark albedo of the
moon as officially recorded from orbit, as opposed to those phony
baloney near white-outs of those EVA/moonsuit obtained Kodak moments
that otherwise look entirely xenon lamp spectrum illuminated which
quite frankly sucks big time, or has Jack offered anything as to the
unfiltered Kodak eye not having recorded any sort of near-blue, near-UV
or of any other secondary/recoil photons. Of course, at any time NASA
could have 100+% nailed their own coffins tight by way of forking over
some of the original film transparencies, meaning allowing a totally
nondestructive scan of such frames under whatever safety precautions
NASA deemed fit to impose.
http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html
The extremely slight surface-tension of lunar dry-quicksand as an
uncompacted moon-dust composite of iron, titanium and carbon/soot mixed
in with meteor and local basalt shards strewn essentially everywhere
you can imagine is yet another basic topic that Jack White missed
almost entirely, just like having missed the raw particle influx of
whatever's passing by at 30+km/s plus otherwise 1.623 m/s/s gravity
attracted and certainly loads of raw solar flak arriving full speed at
300+km/s, or even of the harsh reactive nature of what such an exposed
lunar surface has to offer. There's also no mention of those little and
quite energy efficient Chapel-Bell S-band to microwave transponders
that were EM-L2/ME-L1 situated for the specific task of those items
essentially snookering the very best of scientist. Hells bells, they
even fooled myself and Walter Cronkite.
This site (though I've seen better) simply adds a little further insult
to injury.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
Of course, our JPL spooks and of most anyone the least bit government
funded or even remotely related to someone that is, it seems they have
to say otherwise, or else.
http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/
Thus the mainstream media and especially textbook and science journal
publishers are seriously up against a firery wall of
nondisclosure/taboo spookology that's clearly about their having to
support and sustain a perpetrated cold-war that obviously sucks and
blows something horrific at the same time, or else.
Of course JayUtah's "apollohoax" forum sucks and blows mainstream
status quo disinformation and/or of employing evidence exclusions
without ever a stitch of remorse. His nose isn't even brown anymore,
it's absolutely pitch black and still in the process of rotting off at
the root.
BTW; his site runs a bit poorly at times because it's continually
steeling info from your computer, and if need be capable of sharing
spermware/malware to boot via his MI6/NSA spooks. Thus there's no real
point in much of anything associated with the likes of an incest cloned
borg like JayUtah that's 100+% pro-Bush, anti-ET and thus as anti-God
as you'll find.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi
Even though this next link shares a somewhat greater balance on behalf
of the hoax aspects than most, without question this snookered or
perhaps rusemaster publishing of sutile infomercials by way of
Wikipedia is simply allowing and thus promoting more than their fair
share of what's absolutely full of disinformation-R-us infomercials
and, otherwise being a more than willing participant in evidence
exclusions upon what really matters, thus Wikipedia is a in fact a
willing partner in crimes against humanity. It's that simple because,
there's noting about the Apollo pprogram that's independently
researched nor otherwise verified, yet Wikipedia published every word
of the NASA/Apollo related informercials as though all is well and good
with the almighty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations
Talk:Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
Brad Guth
need-to-know is anything having to do with the topic of "Russia to mine
the Moon?"
Whereas Russia may have rediscovered that they have a few slight if not
nearly insurmountable glitches to deal with.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/608f283f468439de/3e63740c002a9729?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=1#3e63740c002a9729
Can you moon-walk upon a surface-tension of 5 g/cm2 without sinking out
of sight?
Is such moon-dust actually clumping all that good, or what?
At 1/6th G (1.623 m/s/s); what's compacting said moon-dust?
I believe that mining our moon is going to suck even for a good Russian
robot, that is unless you've got traction. As little as 5 g/cm2 worth
of a bone-dry quicksand surface-tension isn't exactly promising.
As for them Russians mining the moon isn't something that's going to
transpire any time soon without their first getting a good number of
their moonsuit butts safely onto the earthshine illuminated lunar deck
and, that's going to become just a wee bit ticky by way of utilizing
those yet unproven fly-by-rocket landers which don't seem to actually
exist, not even for the likes of any of those Russian AI/robotic
landers having since provided us with little more than pop-up books of
depicting what supposedly transpired, that is since apparently their
local R&D as recorded upon movie film which hadn't been invented yet.
Even if such fly-by-rocket landers of any reasonable payload capacity
existed, or if having to R&D create such from scratch as for
accommodating the task at hand, whereas per tonnage of getting whatever
robotics and certainly of those moonsuit butts safely deployed upon the
moon, of then having to operate such mining technology machines,
processing and thus extracting upon whatever and of getting the end
product packaged and shipped back towards mother Earth is per tonne
going to involve at least a good 1000+ tonnes worth of nasty pollution
for mother Earth, and of that 1000:1 ratio of pollution contributing
factor is not to mention the horrific amounts of raw energy that such
efforts will have taken in the first place, thus having far
out-stripped any recovery potential of He3. Without their first
establishing a good lunar space elevator(LSE), the lunar surface is
technically going to continually suck so much worse off than we've been
informed. Of physics and science as having been based upon LLPOF worth
of smoke and mirrors simply isn't going to make it happen, at least not
any time soon.
Mining and thereby extracting whatever away from our moon sucks big
time even for a good robotic solution unless you've got traction, and
perhaps one hell of a nifty periscope to boot. Operating within the
sub-frozen nighttime environment of our moon, even with somewhat
considerable earthshine and thereby some indirect benefit of secondary
thermal influx might become just be the only CO2-->dry-ice method of
the lunar environment that'll achieve any measurable degree of
moon-dirt binding or clumping. As otherwise there's none other drier
quicksand to be found unless you're situated upon Mercury, as even a
Venus class of hot and obviously bone dry quicksand isn't going to be
without benefit of local elements as affording viable binders for
sticking such hot and nasty sand together and, much unlike our
electrostatic powder puff of a moon, as upon Venus there's certainly
not any significant other forms of cosmic influx of sand or meteorites
that could have significantly contributed to such terrestrial depth(s)
becoming whatever's Venus sand, soil or dust. Perhaps the mostly
Russian Venus Express mission will further define as to whatever's what
with regard to the various depths and composition of the otherwise
geologically hot and nasty Venus soils, plus identifying a few of those
likely active mud flows and S8 sulphur vents.
The Next Lunar Rover; may still manage to sink itself out of sight
http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/BeyondLEO/leo194/rover.htm
Having a dry mass of under 1000 kg and having six extremely large
traction wheels seems a whole lot more doable, that is as long as their
conditional laws of moon-physics of such nasty dust/soil remains as a
relatively thin coating that's somehow magically clumping within the
first 12.5 mm and apparently comprised of entirely nonreactive
substance like nowhere other.
However, along with another 1000 kg of payload brings the tally to
nearly 2000 kg, thus 333 kg divided upon 6 wheels offering 56 kg/wheel
is at least getting somewhat suggestive of what darn little mass that
supposedly thin layer of such nicely auto-clumping moon-dirt of lunar
cornmeal and portland cement can manage to support, and that's for
using wheels offering better than 6 fold the surface contact area, thus
in total accomplishing 10 times the traction of what those original
Apollo rovers had to work with.
Terrestrial ROLLING RESISTANCE isn't quite the same thing as for the
moon.
http://www.perfnet.com/haul_truck_830e_demo_web/performance_optimization/introduction_and_definitions.htm
The following link provides us with a nifty traction and required
energy calculator, although terrestrial based but otherwise especially
interesting if using their "Sand Dune(.16)" consideration as to what a
150 kg tractor + 150 kg trailer for a combined mass of 300 kg
represents at various grades. I also used 10 mph and 100 seconds as for
the acceleration factor, zero ballast and a grade of 10%. You may want
to utilize an overall efficiency of 0.25 instead of 0.85 just for good
measure.
http://www.talbertmfg.com/index2.html
This is assuming and thus based upon a reasonable set of two
extra/double-wide or that of the usual four large diameter and wide
enough driving tires/axle of good tread design that are not sinking
into whatever substance as being driven upon. It's obviously not
considering the much lighter fluff or far less clumping nature of
whatever actual moon-dust is all about, which may actually represent
another factor of extremely slight moon-dust buoyancy issues as much as
less surface-tension since their no good reason for such dust to have
compacted, nor at least in any known manner of physics as for clumping
that substance under the absolute best of situations wouldn't sustain
more than 50 g/cm2 unless there's only a relatively thin layer of such
moon-dust and/or sufficiently nearby bedrock upon which to drive.
Whereas a wise assumption of unsupported and thus unclumping
surface-tension might be a bit closer to 5 g/cm2.
BTW; the absolute driest of terrestrial sand dunes would still have a
million fold more moisture content as for accommodating whatever
binding degree of clumping, thus walking and/or having to drive upon
such a terrestrial substance that leaves no footprints nor of even
sustaining any trace of tire tracks for long is still considerably
better off than what even a 1/6th gravity and certainly more than bone
dry situation upon what our scorching and otherwise terribly reactive
moon has to offer.
Lose sand upon Earth that's bone dry (least clumping) offers a flat
surface rolling resistance of 15%, whereas going the least bit vertical
adds considerable insult to injury, meaning that the rolling resistance
can easily double due to a loss of traction and thus wheel spinning. A
10% grade upon a hard and smooth surface represents another 10% worth
of base energy required for the same task of moving a given tire upon
whatever asphalt/concrete substance, whereas on a truly lose sand or
lunar composite dust that your tires have been sinking into may more
than double if not four times that ratio.
"The degree of traction between the tire and the ground is called the
coefficient of traction."
"Since there is never 100 percent adhesion, the coefficient is always
less than 1.0. The result of multiplying the weight on the drive axle
times the coefficient of traction represents the maximum force which
can be transmitted before the tire spins out."
"For example, a vehicle with 200,000 kg of weight on the drive axle and
working on ground conditions having a coefficient of traction of 0.6
can deliver up to 120,000 kg (200,000 kg × 0.6) of force before the
tires will spin out."
Given roughly 1000 cm2 per set or pair of over-enlarged moonboots as
having to walk upon such dusty locations offering a surface tension
worth 50 g/cm2 represents that a given moonsuit EVA that's worth 25 kg
should be doable at representing 25 g/cm2, although upon one moonboot
foot at a time or 500 cm2 per step having to support the entire 25 kg
is going to become nearly equal to whatever surface-tension that's
supposedly capable of eventually supporting at 50 g/cm2, which
represents that whatever moon-walking may require somewhat enlarged
footprints that might otherwise represent a pair of clown shoes or
those of compact snowshoes.
Even though the surface tension is perhaps worthy of 0.05 kg/cm2, in
places this may be somewhat like having to walk through certain density
of powder snow, in that each step will have to sink into the more
likely 5 g/cm2 composite of moon-dust before that surface tension
becomes all that usable, thereby any rolling tire or other flat tread
like tire is going to be transferring a great deal of material up and
around that form of traction, whereas a camel like traveling machine
might prove more acceptable, especially if it had six legs that were
long enough so as to keeping it's payload and passengers above the
thick dust.
Traveling via robotic moon-camel isn't all that far fetched. Say if
each of the six legged machines offered a m2 cupped foot per leg,
that's potentially 6 m2 or 60,000 cm2 to work with. At half-loading is
where that amount of area becomes worth 30,000 cm2, upon which 0.05
kg/cm2 = 1500 kg of moon mass or 9t Earth mass, although I have my
doubts we'll actually have 50 g/cm2 to work with.
A traction tread/belt as having perhaps 10 m2 of a working amount of
surface contact should do as well if not a bit better as long as it's
operating depth capacity isn't limited. Thus 100,000 cm2 X 0.05 kg/cm2
= 5,000 kg or at the same half-load capacity of 15t Earth mass.
Excluding factors of buoyancy, at 1G the surface-tension of warm water
is 72 dynes/cm; that's just 7.34e-2 g/cm2. Obviously terrestrial
dry-quicksand is offering a great deal more surface-tension plus a
better displacement degree of buoyancy, although uncompacted moon-dust
may not support a surface-tension much better than 5 g/cm2.
Dry Quicksand
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/d/dr/dry_quicksand.htm
"Lohse found that a weighted ping pong ball (radius 2cm, mass 133g),
when released from just above the surface of the sand, would sink to
about five diameters. Lohse also observed a "straight jet of sand
[shooting] violently into the air after about 100 ms". Objects are
known to make a splash when they hit sand, but this type of jet has
never been described before."
That's roughly a total ball surface area of 50 cm2. Dividing that by 3
offers at most 17 cm2 worth of a supportive surface area that's having
been somewhat offset by a slight buoyancy factor since the above
weighted ball submerged itself to roughly a depth of 20 cm. As then we
can deduce the notion that a 133 g mass had eventually obtained a
dry-quicksand surface tension worthy of not more than 7.8 g/cm2, or
46.8 g/cm2 worth of terrestrial mass as having been situated upon the
moon could become the case. However, being that the same dry-quicksand
as otherwise situated within the same 1/6th G environment should also
be taken into account, thus perhaps at the very optimum best 10 g/cm2
is about all we're ever going to obtain. Thereby not going by my
previous 50 g/cm2 but having to use 10 g/cm2 if not 5 g/cm2 to safe
should become the wise alternative as for keeping your moonsuit butt
and head above such obviously extremely dry-quicksand of the moon,
especially wise if that's having to involve the compression ratio of
5:1 as being worth taking note of.
As for getting those two reasonably hefty moonsuits and especially of
their lander at something that amounted to nearly 16 tonnes resting
nicely upon 3 pads that looked as though each offered somewhat less
than a square meter, thereby affording 0.9 m2 as having accommodated
900 kg/pad that barely managed to compress into the first couple of
inches is suggestive of their having 6 out of six times set their
fly-by-rocket craft down upon a relatively firm surface-tension of
something that's certainly better than 100 g/cm2. This is either quite
unexpected or damn lucky since in places the surface tension could have
been less than 5 g/cm2 and otherwise at most 10 g/cm2, and of course
their next generation lander that's getting proposed is going to have
to become extremely robust for taking a payload of perhaps 3 astronauts
plus a rather substantially larger and thus more of everything rover
that's at least twice the capacity of what our Apollo teams had to work
with, thus a combined terrestrial mass of certainly not less than 24
tonnes and most likely with the necessary de-orbit and down-range plus
sufficient (what-if) spare fuel and the third person accommodation
making it 27 tonnes, which computes out to 1500 kg/pad. Thus even with
a 4 m2 landing pad is still having to bet the farm upon setting down
upon a dry quicksand surface-tension of 37.5 g/cm2, which by all logic
and certainly of the known laws of physics simply may not exist unless
we're talking about mostly bedrock or at least significant piles of
impact related shards that are sufficiently vertical in slope so as to
have since been blown nearly clean by some 1200+km/s solar winds, that
which should have easily reached the surface if there's actually as
slight of atmosphere as having been reported.
Getting this task of whatever safely to/from the moon down to a bit
more realistic measure requires a lunar space elevator:
Of any such new and "improved lunar landing architecture" needs exactly
what the LSE-CM/ISS infrastructure has to offer, that is unless we're
talking about one-way tickets to ride. As per the task of terraforming
our moon into becoming a bit more robotically obtainable is certainly a
doable task without ever risking a single astronaut.
Over the past 6 years it has certainly become most interesting in that
whenever individuals like myself have drawn upon the wisdom and
hard-science of others for perfectly honest actions, as for our
utilizing the best available hard-science and so much other expertise
accomplished by so many as having been previously mainstream worshiped,
in that if such science knowledge in any way provides rational though
alternative interpretations that are the least outside their
MI6/NSA~NASA box, whereas then all of the sudden the evidence
exclusions and of those brown-nosed conditional laws of physics come
into play. Why is that?
Why are these mainstream wizards and of their mainstream God(s) (pagan
or otherwise) so freaking terrestrial limited?
Of what's become nondisclosure/taboo
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.scientists/browse_frm/thread/5d5dd4ec128536f3/af7489fc47bbcc24?hl=en#af7489fc47bbcc24
Perhaps it's all another part of God's master plan, as to keeping us as
Earthly ET minions as thoroughly sequestered and snookered as possible,
thus every bit as terrestrial dumb and dumber to the dumbfounded point
of no return. God's ideal formula of artificial population control via
LLPOF collateral damage and the horrific carnage of the innocent, not
to even mention upon artificially global-warming our sorry butts to our
own demise. Sounds like quite a Godly sort of plan of action to me.
It's almost as though the topic/author banishment is yet another part
of God's LLPOF plan of action, or perhaps that of an orchestrated level
of inaction that sucks and blows at the same time. Apparently, I'm
getting myself closer to being God's equal, especially if banishment is
all that remains for the mainstream status quo to use against my good
intentions of sharing the truth and nothing but the truth.
That's really too bad in more ways than you'd think, in that as of more
than 5 years ago, at least I would have been matching the funding of
dozens of such good intentioned efforts with nearly unlimited capacity,
as towards making a difference that would have directly benefitted the
greater good for the lower 99.9% humanity of this Earth (the upper most
0.1% simply don't need any benefits). But then what's another half
decade or even several decades and of the trillions upon trillions of
hard earned dollars down the proverbial drain worth these days?
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
"In war there are no rules" - Brad Guth
Brad Guth
sirius moon venus
lunar space elevator
raw ice in space
or of anything related to space ice
fly by rocket landers
Kodak photon physics
space radiation
secondary/recoil photons
moon radiation
ETs surviving on Venus
All of the above and so much other gets you next to nothing that's in
any way specific via hard-science or otherwise verifiable up against
whatever has been NASA moderated to death and thereby subsequently
infomercial published within PBS/NOVA, textbooks and science journals,
that is unless it 100+% supports their perpetrated cold-war and of the
NASA/Apollo ruse. Why is that?
Apparently of anything that's the least bit capable of skewing their
pagan story as to whatever their pagan God(NASA) accomplished is
taboo/nondisclosure or at best need-to-know, worthy of getting stalked
and summarily bashed to death, much like how our LLPOF resident
warlord(GW Bush) stalked and bashed Saddam as well as taking out a few
too many tens of thousands of Muslims that simply got in his way,
whereas that sort of multi-trillion costing collateral worth damage and
carnage of the innocent is just perfectly fine and dandy, much like
taking out TWA flight-800 was another one of those acceptable "so
what's the difference" formula of "high standards and accountability
that seriously sucks and blows.
The mainstream status quo has continually been all along excluding
and/or avoiding the hard-science matter of their own proof-positive
facts as having been provided by their very own pagan NASA/God that
sucks and blows at the same time.
How the hell can even a certified bigot exclude the true natural color
and dark albedo of the moon?
There's certainly other non-Apollo related color images of our moon to
further support this argument.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/
No Venus, No Sirius = No Apollo is perhaps another topic that's sharing
a bit more truth worthy substance than you can imagine. Even the notion
of our planet receiving the benefits of an icy proto-moon is topic
taboo/nondisclosure because ????????
Even the likes of Mark Wade can't possibly support the NASA/Apollo
bible as having been carved in stone, or even for that matter those
USSR AI/robotic fly-by-rocket landers.
Other individuals like Jack White have certainly made a perfectly nifty
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Brad Guth
moon is highly topic/author taboo/nondisclosure or bust. This isn't
even on a need-to-know basis because, all related information is either
nonspecific or encrypted so as to be interpreted in order to suit
whatever argument.
If our NASA or perhaps more likely that of Russia, China or whomever is
ever going to mine the Moon;
Here's another nagging tidbit of what's so gosh darn interesting, as
well as remaining pesky about such fully exposed space travel.
The same old to/from testy matter of folks having to deal with the hot
and nasty portions of the Van Allan expanse is still giving such future
space travel a royal DNA chopping pain in the butt, and even that's
based upon not ever getting caught with your pants down shortly after
another large solar zit lets go.
The Van Allen Belts (MOS disinformation-R-us and just enough evidence
exclusion)
http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/tour/AAvan.html
Outer Belt carry between 10 to 100 million volts of energy, on average.
"Typical 'Belt' particles carry energies between 1 and 100 million
volts. The rest of the particles that we can encounter near the earth
barely have energies higher than 200,000 volts."
"Space Shuttle and Space Station astronauts inside their crafts receive
about 2 mRems of additional dosage each time they pass through the SAA.
In one day they can accumulate 30 mRem of dosage. Over the course of a
week, this adds up to 7 x 30 = 210 mRems which is just below the dosage
you get at ground-level in a single year (about 350mRem)."
"Apollo astronauts, however, were forced to traverse the most intense
regions of the Belts in their journey to the Moon. Fortunately, the
travel time was only about 30 minutes so their actual radiation
exposures inside the Apollo space capsule were not much more than the
total dose received by Space Shuttle astronauts."
Unfortunately, "the most insense regions" for 30 minutes each way
wasn't by any means their only significant portion of that Van Allen
zone of death trek. It took nearly a good 10,000 seconds or at the very
least 2.5 hours each way to get entirely through the Van Allen
badlands, and that's 5 hours stacked on top of their getting
secondary/recoil radiated by all of the hard-X-ray energy coming off
the solar illuminated moon, that which even from orbiting at 100+km
couldn't have been a good thing, much less having those EVA/moonsuit
walks directly upon what by all methods of known radiation physics and
of more recent terrestrial satellite measurements of the solar
illuminated moon was in fact a highly reactive and otherwise an
extremely dark (nearly coal like darkness) and nasty albedo
environment, not to mention hotter than hell.
The worst portion of the Van Allen zone that they claim as having spent
their 30 minute within each way was perfectly capable of being worth
200e3 rads/year, which boils down to a perfectly survivable worth of 23
rads/hr as situated behind 2 g/cm2 worth of aluminum shielding, and it
certainly takes a great deal of extra shielding as to cut that dosage
in half, such as having a 0.7" layer of lead in all directions. Thus
even via extremely mild solar hours within the entire trek of their
getting to/from the moon is going to be worth a whole lot more than the
mere 30 minutes each way as having been touted as to why they'd
received such slight amounts of a TBI dosage.
Of course, since we still have no instruments that are openly reporting
the honest hard-science dosage levels of such space travel zones, much
less from the lunar surface, as such there's no viable way that others
can prove me wrong without their spilling a few more of their
brown-nosed perpetrated cold-war beans.
Brad Guth
official freelance rusemasters like so many of the usenet gangs that
suck and blow at the same time. As such, and in spite of their
inability as to contribute so much as an honest pile of squat on behalf
of the original topic or of any viable sub-topic, as such here's yet
another one of their ongoing crapolla butt loads of MOS
taboo/nondisclosure and of employing as much evidence exclusion as need
be in order to fool the easily dumbfounded souls as to "Spacecraft
Sound Levels: Engine Noise"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/1a0bacb9e674adc4/86af691d838022fe?lnk=st&q=Spacecraft+Sound+Levels&rnum=5&hl=en#86af691d838022fe
Because "sci.space.tech" is strictly another officially moderated (NASA
damage control) group or gang, thus the truth obviously can't be
contributed, much less expected, whereas in which case I've had to
repost this contribution into their "sci.space.history" portion of what
the original topic/author (Ken Webster) had in mind. I've actually
added in a wee bit of further info upon the 0.0003 lux cameras and UV
capable lens info for good measure.
Ken Webster and otherwise on behalf of Bob Martin (Spacecraft Sound
Levels: Engine Noise),
According to these not always so nice NASA/usenet rusemasters that are
encharge of keeping various lids on tight, there never is a sound of
thrusters from within any of their craft. That's actually always been a
wee bit hard to believe, especially since we're talking about at least
5 psi (better than 0.3 bar) of ambient cabin atmosphere and of various
rocket engines plus internal auxiliary components having to be attached
to that craft, in that you'd have to think such items might have to be
rather noisy, that is unless your ears are situated within a vacuum and
thus you're quite dead.
Decades long after the fact, it remains perfectly clear that we're
never going to hear for ourselves as to what the truth really is about
spacecraft cabin sounds and noise levels.
However, we're being told to believe that such lack of any engine noise
must be the reason as to why there's no live sound tracks obtained from
anything associated within ISS, shuttle or of those spendy Apollo
missions. Simply a waste of time and technology, or perhaps too gosh
darn spendy and apparently way to much extra weight and energy
consumption as to include any sort of cabin audio recording technology
that might have at the time consumed 10 whole watts of energy if doing
such things in the old magnetic tape way, as otherwise only a fraction
of a watt as of the last decade.
This must also be why for all these decades there has been no camera,
as of the last decade 0.0003 lux B&W w/auto-iris as an external camera
(now there's even a color 0.0003 lux version Model KPC-650 of 1.2 watt)
that are never sharing publicly accessible images from space, not even
at one frame per second. Apparently we wouldn't want to be consuming
all of perhaps 5 watts (including the video frame storage) of energy on
behalf of confusing folks with those pesky stars and nearby moving
items that might have any of those pesky UV energy signatures as having
been indirectly obtained by David Sereda, plus his offering us new
ideas and notions of UV energy, of video images that had to be
forcefully extracted away from NASA. For best impact on this one,
you'll really need to obtain a copy of his video tapes:
http://www.ufonasa.com
Even a terrestrial application via telescope is certainly worth of
knocking your socks off, however most of the UV spectrum has been
moderated or entirely eliminated by the atmosphere of Earth. This
example is of what an amateur Ultima 11 SCT telescope captured.
http://www.aaobc.com/pc164.html
This 0.0003 lux camera obtained photo (4-23--LUNAR0023) is interesting
in that it's given us another typical look-see at the larger as clearly
suggesting an icy proto-moon as having been impacted by perhaps another
large icy orb, then of somewhat newer and much smaller skip impacts of
two or more bounces which clearly indicates something quite interesting
as to the relatively soft surface composition of the moon.
http://www.aaobc.com/pc164/4-23--LUNAR0023.jpg
Image 4-23--LUNAR0018 is that of an even much larger ice impact zone
upon an icy proto-moon, with loads of other icy secondary impacts, plus
having the usual numbers of the much newer and most likely those of a
non icy format, whereas these smaller craters having a diameter/depth
ratio suggesting that perhaps neither surface had any initial ice
involvement.
http://www.aaobc.com/pc164/4-23--LUNAR0018.jpg
Their club (Amateur Astronomers Of Beaver County) even has one of those
nifty entro score, so that means they know exactly what they're doing:
http://www.aaobc.com/
Of course, as of not so recently even, there's been high resolution
2/3" CCD 0.0001 lux cameras that have been off the shelf, and certanly
always along with a UV spectrum capable lens to boot, that is unless
you intentionally wanted to exclude such UV spectrum photons with an
approprate optical filter. There's actually plenty of fairly common
optics that are notorious for their high UV transmission, although
specialized glass that's obviously quite pure can manage to efficiently
pass 250 nm, the Cerco UV lens
(http://www.sodern.com/pdf/leaflet%20F28%20june%2004.pdf) offers an
example of one that's suitable from 220 nm to 620 nm
Here's another optical research provider as having a C-mount lens
that's good for less than 200 nm.
http://www.photonics.com/spectra/newprods/XQ/ASP/newprodido.1793/QX/read.htm
UV-Nikkor 105mm f/4.5s lense claims being good for 190 nm.
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/special/105UVmm.htm
There's actually several UV spectrums to contend with; Long wave UV
that extends from 320 to 400 nanometers. Medium wave UV that extends
from 280 to 320 nm. Short wave UV that extends from 200 to 280 nm.
There are even some special and thus spendy quartz crystal lenses made
by Zeiss for Hasselblad and other companies, which allow wavelengths of
200 to 280 nm to pass.
The purest of quartz crystal lenses have frequently been produced by
the likes Zeiss for Hasselblad, where as passing the majority of the UV
spectrum hasn't been all that difficult, just spendy. Especially
effective upon regular Kodak films that have a well documented
proficiency of easily resording UV energy, although as for terrestrial
and/or xenon lamp illuminated scenes are not such a problem since
typically by daylight or by xenon lamp there's only 250~500 mw/m2 out
of 750 w/m2 to deal with, as opposed to 32~64 w/m2 out of 1.4 kw/m2
that's available in space or upon the surface of the moon. Even a
regular quality lens along with a polorised filter passes such photons
quite effectively down to 350 nm, which is more than adequate as per
recording well enough into the long-wave UV spectrum and it's certainly
more than 100% capable of having recorded the secondary/recoil worth of
the ultraviolet fluorescence photography that's commonly producing the
sorts of near-blue photons as having been generated by such a great
amount of what the raw solar influx obviously contains.
All B&W Panchromatic films are sensitive to ultraviolet radiation and
are suitable for ultraviolet photography, as with most color films,
whereas daylight type color film is all that's preferable.
There's even extreme UV lithography optics of less than 200 nm, and of
the next generations of aluminum coated mirror optics that'll go just
about as far down the spectrum as you'd care to imagine. So, there's no
shortage of suitable UV-pass optics and, the latest of CCDs can be
extremely sensitive to the UV spectrum unless having been appropriately
coated as would most consumer CCD cameras because, otherwise that
photograph would reveal an entirely new spectrum of what's there to
being seen if only the naked human eye was that good, such as what most
nocturnals have to work with is entirely capable of their seeing down
to far less than 300 nm, whereas most human eyes bottom out at 400 nm.
Of course, within space and certainly from the moonsuit perspective of
the moon is where there was simply way too much unfiltered UV energy
from our sun, as well as arriving from many other stars, especially the
nearby likes of the already near-blue Sirius star system. Even the 75+%
reflected photons coming off Venus should have been rather easily Kodak
moment recorded as being truly impressive since there's 2650 initial
watts/m2 to work with and upon at least two of the Apollo missions
Venus wasn't all that far away.
Brad Guth
truth is quite taboo/nondisclosure.
Apparently notions of the few and far between honest usenet folks
trusting anyone with more than a gram of respect for what's God and of
thereby having morals and remorse to boot is Bookman/Deco worthy of
being KKK and/or their usual Third Reich taboo/nondisclosure or bust to
the likes of pleasing such incest brown-nosed cloned borg mainstream
wizards as Bookman and Art Deco, that have been the Skull and Bones
part of the GOOGLE/usenet as officially encharge of topic/author
stalking and bashing.
Of honest folks using the best available hard-science and thereby
deductive reasoning as based upon their relying upon the best of such
talents and expertise of others (obviously that alone has to exclude
the likes of GW Bush) simply isn't permitted if there's so much as a
gram of the regular laws of physics involved with the likes of applied
technology, evolution and most certainly that of involving our moon,
Venus, the Sirius star system, or God forbid of any notions upon icy
proto-moons are strictly taboo/nondisclosure, and obviously worth every
topic/author stalking and bashing effort they and of their borg
collective can muster.
Geoffrey A. Landis "Science Journalism" downright sucks and blows via a
few too many usenet folks (roughly 99.9%) that are only here to take
advantage of others by extracting and/or exploitinmg such talents,
expertise and the resources of whomever while otherwise intent upon
causing as much grief and discontent as their good MI6/NSA lords and
masters will permit. Thus has been the focus and actions of Bookmans's
and Deco's worth of their incest spermware/malware that flowith freely
and with as much wrath and vengeance as their remorseless pagan
brown-nosed Gods can muster. Usenet spooks like Art Deco and Lord
Bookman that clearly are the very best of GW Bush brown-nosed minions,
as such they do NOT believe in ETs nor thereby UFOs and you name it, if
it isn't 100% terrestrial and thus sequestered forever upon their
intellectual cesspool of an extremely white and flat Earth, it doesn't
seem to exist nor coexist, nor can it ever have existed. Imagine that,
we have their formal usenet bigotry along with a pagan brown-nosed God
that has an attitude and mindset for going postal upon humanity to
boot.
It seems these usenet spooks and moles of intellectual incest and as
clearly having been offering their biological bigotry as though on
steroids still can't manage to bring anything of independent
hard-science or even viably subjective notions of any worthy substance
to the table, and why is that?
It seems their notions of whatever's suitable to their "high standards
and accountability" of hard-science is based entirely upon whatever
sufficiently brown-nose worthy of hocus-pocus, as to their "so what's
the difference" perpetrated cold-war(s) and ruse/sting of the century
via MI6/NSA~NASA/Apollo scriptures have delivered, such as via all of
those nifty and rather spendy 3D animated and custom surround-sound
orchestrated publications, plus a few of those NPR, PBS and NOVA
productions worth of extreme dog-wagging infomercials that seem to have
lost all of their background R&D documentation, as well as their having
been continually excluding evidence while having to skew the likes of
Kodak physics into the nearest space-toilet of their social/political
and religious conditional laws of physics.
Thus continually posting their incest of intellectual flatulence of
mainstream crapolla that's having been applied entirely out of context
and otherwise continually off-topic is their one and only prime
directive.
So, whatever's the truth and nothing but the truth as taken from honest
"Science Journalism" has to take an extreme back seat to their ulterior
motives and hidden agendas of whatever their mainstream status quo
(that's primarily quite Jewish and thus anti-other humanity mindset)
has in mind.
Brad Guth
radiation (TBI dosage) is still very much taboo/nondisclosure worthy.
Obviously the further you manage to get yourself away from the sun
(such as going for Mars and beyond) the better off you'll be, however
then the cosmic influx becomes a greater TBI dosage that'll more easily
nail your sorry butt and the DNA/RNA within.
The moon's surface is short-term survivable if you've got sufficient
shielding and obviously the fly-by-rocket technology nailed down,
although by way of nighttime/earthshine is obviously best to humanly
short-term survive within, and it's certainly quit nicely illuminated
via earthshine. However, even the task of nearby orbiting sucks a wee
bit more life than most of the brown-nosed pagan establishment are
willing to accept.
According to the well established laws of physics, cutting the distance
in half between us and the moon should increase the component of
radiation by the square. In other words, going half the distance should
provide 4 times the TBI dosage from whatever's available as a whole
(the whole being the half sphere of the moon as fully solar
illuminated).
However, if you'd also care to being extremely conservative, such as
from a terrestrial orbit of 400 km as representing just a microrem/day
as being contributed from such a fully solar illuminated moon, and if
you'd further care to imply a mere 100:1 factor of shield throughput
moderation as afforded by the entire Van Allen expanse as also being
hard-X-ray conservative for what that expanse attenuation is good for
blocking. Now do the math for yourself.
Starting with a separation of 384,000 km, I came up with 1678 rems or
rads (16.8 Sv) per day once we're situated at 93.75 km off the solar
illuminated lunar deck. Of course if you're into orbiting the moon
should represent that half the time you're not getting the
secondary/recoil worth of the raw solar influx, just the natural soil
and rock radiation plus cosmic background that has to be dealt with no
matters what and, that's why the average orbiting dosage should become
never greater than 850 rads/day. Although, since we're being so close
is why you're no longer exposed to the entire half lunar surface at any
one time, just 4.15% of the half-sphere total is perhaps offering a
good enough estimate, which cuts the available dosage down to 35
rads/day.
The math: as from the orbiting perspective of 93.75 km is where a 1000
km diameter circle represents what your craft is given a look-see at,
and vise versa, thus a limited exposure to 785,398 km2 worth of the
lunar surface at any one time that's capable of radiating those
secondary/recoil photons of hard-X-rays. That being roughly 4.15% worth
of the entire half sphere, thus upon average 4.15% of the 850 rads =
35.275 rads/day as based upon orbiting the moon at the distance of
93.75 km. Of course that's still as having been based upon the initial
assumption of what the terrestrial satellite instrument was getting as
just 1 microrem/day as contributed from the solar illuminated portion
of the moon (I think it's a bit closer to a millirem/day, but I
certainly could be wrong because that's imposing a rather nasty
thousand fold more dosage to deal with).
So, if you don't like my numbers is simple, you should accomplish your
own and then tell me what's what. Obviously it's the secondary/recoil
radiation that's worse off than what's typically passing through as
contributed by the sun. However, for the very same reason the moon is
reactive is why the aluminum that's surrounding your butt is also
reactive, thus in addition the lunar contributed dosage is why you've
got to deal with whatever your own spacecraft is creating in the way of
those nasty secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays.
This next hot-link gets a bit confusing as to whatever your aluminum
craft shielding aspects of secondary TBI amounts to. However, with some
effort you can safely extrapolate as to what's necessary out of this
NASA official set of charts, though due to the usual hocus-pocus
scientific encryptions, I'd advise that you carefully read through the
fine print several times before coming to any conclusions:
http://conxproject.gsfc.nasa.gov/radiation/docs/con_x_dose1.pdf
Other than certain circuitry degrades due to such prolonged radiation
exposures, most items of robotics are not going to be impacted in the
lethal way human DNA/RNA gets chopped into bits and then having to be
rejected from your body, which I believe we've all been informed that
outcome isn't such a good thing. An extremely well shielded camera of
utilizing Kodak film has obviously survived a few days in orbit.
However, upon the surface hasn't been accomplished unless the
hard-science and of all the laws of physics are skewed as somehow based
upon whatever's conditional about your "high standards and
accountability" that are not otherwise well known.
This doesn't represent that our moon is humanly insurmountable, it just
confirms that by day there's going to be a good amount of
secondary/recoil photons that'll include those of hard-X-rays and, that
the surface of the moon should also have provided a layer of radon gas
as a direct result of all that ambient radiation and, that keeping
yourself as much as possible out of the solar illuminated zone is
certainly a darn good idea along with of having as much shielding as
can be accommodated goes without saying, that plus keeping even your
nighttime/earthshine illuminated exposure down to a few days at best is
what's humanly doable. Thus mostly of robotics functioning as
whatever's mining, processing and exporting lunar substances such as
He3 is what should transpire with as little human involvement as
possible. Of course no matters what, such solar/cosmic energy arrives
within the speed of light, plus whenever a solar wind of 2400 km/s
contributes is why such solar storms are going to become DNA/RNA lethal
within minutes of their arrival unless you've got the likes of 50t/m2
as situated between yourself and of that nasty sorts of such nasty
influx that may arrive within 18 hours of those events having been
spotted via instruments looking at the sun. At a 3.35t/m3 density is
simply a requirement of having 15 meters of moon substance between
yourself and of what's incoming, and that's certainly entirely doable,
especially doable if there are hollow rilles and/or hollow geode
pockets that already exist, of which they should.
Brad Guth
GOOGLE/usenet, in that I've noticed that all sorts of topics (the good
the bad and the ugly) up until roughly 18 Sept. 2005 12:00 pm were
being applied into the usenet stack as fairly timely for public
viewing, whereas others and those of mine are now being summarily
sequestered. Perhaps I've broken their mainframe like I'd inadvertently
managed to accomplish upon taking down the Irish (IAA) astronomy club
and of their FAS servers for managing their public .org .net and .com
forum sites. Now the usenet is sucking up whatever's contributed but
keeping it out of sight and thus out of mind as far as the public is
concerned. Sorry about that.
Brad Guth
century continues until them Apollo cows come home. Thus all other
related and/or of independent research and of whatever's derived as
objectively hard-science or even of sufficiently subjective notions as
having been honestly interpreted is sequestered indefinitely regardless
of the consequences. Mention God, morals, remorse or anything that's
the least bit anti-mainstream (such as the perpetrated cold-war) and
you're worse off than DOA, and that's even if you've located the holy
grail. Dare to question authority or religion and it open season of
your getting summarily pulverised by as much topic/author stalking,
bashing and/or banishment as they (the mainstream status quo bad guys)
can muster.
Radiation physics as based upon the square of the distance being
representative of what being sufficiently near to the moon has to offer
is certainly bad enough if the terrestrial satellite that's roughly 400
km above Earth takes in sample readings that are worthy of one microrem
per day because, that'll get you into an environment of an average 35
rem/day while cruising at 94 km above the moon. However, make that a
terrestrial millirem/day and you've got 35,000 rem/day or 1458 rem/hr
to deal with.
Of course, if the sun wasn't providing any nasty amount of influx to
start off with, as must have been the case with those supposedly manned
Apollo missions, as then you've got next to nothing to defend your self
from (especially if you don't bother with going down onto the otherwise
sufficiently radioactive as well as reactive surface that has
insufficient atmosphere as to moderated not only the incoming flux of
whatever has reacted itself into being hard-X-rays as well as per
secondary/recoil rays coming from all the surrounding lunar terrain
that you can see, from such having easily nailed your naked moonsuit
butt, which also would have to somehow coincide with the extremely
slight (inconceivably scant) amount of TBI dosage as having been
officially recorded and published as being the case.
The reported 12~76 mr/day while having a shield density of not much
better off than 5 g/cm2 within their Apollo CM (roughly twice that much
density available in the direction of their forward and aft ends) and
otherwise next to nothing while situated upon the surface is absurdly
physics-101 impossible for even an earthshine/nighttime lunar
environment.
I believe that the Apollo record of 12~76 mr/day is only off by a good
factor of 100:1 for that their surviving an extremely mild solar day
while cruising external to the Van Allen expanse and so close to such a
nicely reactive moon, and perhaps a thousand fold under the mark of
what a somewhat nasty solar day has to provide. However, a truly bad
solar event day would have been a matter of terminating all crew
regardless of their 5~10 g/cm2 worth of shielding, and certainly
getting nearly 100% through the aluminum foil utilized while upon the
lunar surface that should have been perfectly good for defending from
the sorts of deep-UV (down to 10 nm) but otherwise invisible to the
likes of the available hard-X-rays plus the unfiltered naked incomings
of solar and cosmic whatever, not to mention of whatever's of micro
meteorites or just incoming dust at 30+km/s and/or of the solar
submicron flak arriving at 300+km/s. A truly bad solar day upon the
moon might incorporate a solar wind that packing 10 picogram/m3 as
arriving at 2400 km/s and of a TBI dosage factor that's so far off the
charts that we haven't even developed the sorts of instruments capable
of going that high.
Realistically, 100 fold greater than the NASA/Apollo reported TBI
dosage would have been survivable without involving banked bone marrow,
although obviously their Kodak moment's wouldn't have gone unscaved and
there should have been more than a few white hairs to boot, however
1000 fold would have required the usage of banked bone marrow being
that so much short-term TBI dosage would have far exceeded our
biological ability of surviving so much DNA/RNA damage. The amounts of
radiation dosage as having been managed on our side of the Van Allen
expanse is at least 100 fold lesser than being external, with many
having suggested as great as a 1000 fold lesser dosage depending upon a
given spectrum of the sorts of TBI dosage made available, however the
aspects getting yourself closer to the reactive moon is exactly like
getting yourself closer to a pile of radioactive substances, whereas
the closer you manage to get by the square of the distance is where
things sort of go to hell very quickly. It's also well established that
in order to diminish one's own TBI dosage by a factor of 50% or 2:1
requires a density that's worth .7" of lead. Thereby it'll require
roughly 0.7" of lead or of whatever greater thickness of other
substance as situated between yourself and the source(s) of those
hard-X-rays in order to cut whatever raw dosage in half. Thus 2.8" or
71 mm of solid lead (80+g/cm2) will get you a 16:1 reduction, or 4.9"
(124.5 mm) that'll amount to 141 g/cm2 will get you a fairly
respectable 128:1 shield (somewhat equal to what the Van Allen expanse
provides) from the vast bulk of what's otherwise DNA/RNA nasty.
Unfortunately, there's still no viable way of launching a habitat of 80
g/cm2, much less of 141 g/cm2, thus cutting your time of exposure is
about all that's humanly doable and, even then having that cryogenic
cash of your banked bone marrow just in case would be the sort of
insurance/plan-B that you'd want at your disposal.
Actually lead is not as good as UHMW or water, since the atomic number
of lead is so much greater than water is why lead produces
substantially more of it's own secondary/recoil dosage of those TBI
worthy hard-X-rays, which is clearly counter productive. However, the
draw back to utilizing UHMW and/or water is that it'll require a great
deal more depth or thickness in order to achieve the desired benefit.
Thus you're somewhat damned if you do and damned if you don't.
BTW; none of this is of my science or that of my physics, as it's
entirely based upon the regular laws of physics and of the hard-science
that's been quite well documented and even indirectly if not directly
NASA certified. Go figure. Even the 32~64 w/m2 of what's UV spectrum
worthy is insurmountable if honestly respecting the unfiltered Kodak
physics of photographic standards and accountability that you and I can
take to the bank.
Brad Guth
"David Knisely", whereas otherwise life involving the regular laws of
physics and hard-science is where pesky morals or so much as having a
stitch of remorse sucks because;
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro.amateur/tree/browse_frm/thread/312c0ee1964db812/85e2050d1b0c9a78?rnum=11&hl=en&q=brad+guth&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsci.astro.amateur%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F312c0ee1964db812%2F8ee6a5d795a6cc43%3Flnk%3Dst%26q%3Dbrad+guth%26rnum%3D7%26hl%3Den%26#doc_abc3dca90eb703fc
>There are some posters out there
>who feel the need to formulate
>their own elaborate theories
>about the heavens and their fate.
And otherwise lord/rusemaster David Knisely having contributed yet
another very nicely worded mainstream status quo rant, which is exactly
why such all-knowing folks as Knisely are not likely going to
contribute an honest need-to-know squat upon this next related
sub-topic as to the lunar atmosphere and subsequent environment.
The temperature on moon surface is what I believe can become moderated
to suit, at least on behalf of greatly improving the odds on behalf of
robotics that can be robust and thus engineered so as to not care about
their local thermal or radioactive background dosage environment nor of
whatever's incoming that's producing all of that truly nasty
secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays. However, with having such a
crystal clear layer of Radon plus another extended layer of Argon
should create quit a well insulated surface baking environment that's
capable of getting a damn site hotter than the sort of hell reported by
our cloak and dagger MI6/NSA~NASA Apollo spooks.
In spite of all the brown-nosed minions of their mainstream status quo
that thinks and/or keeps insisting at we village idiots should only
think that we've already done that and been there, thus why all of
their need-to-know and/or taboo/nondisclosure that sucks and blows at
the same time, which only seems rather out of proper form, especially
when it appears that building/terraforming an artificial lunar
atmosphere for robotics has been doable without our ever risking so
much as one TBI white hair upon another astronaut:
Not that I'm insisting this as the one and only alternative, however
for further sportmanship reasons I'm thinking that the likes of Radon
gas should become liquid at night and, otherwise expand out to perhaps
an atmospheric depth of a km by day. Topped off by mostly argon that
might reach as far as 50 km by day and something less than 10 km by
nighttime/earthshine.
According to Mike Williams;
"The strength of the surface gravity (1.623 m/s/s) isn't the critical
factor. What's more significant is the escape velocity (Moon 2.38km/s,
Titan 2.65km/s)."
"The heavier gas sticks around but the useful gas escapes. The various
types of molecules settle down to having the same average kinetic
energy,
but that means that the lighter molecules move faster than the heavier
ones. They move just as fast, in fact, as if the heavier molecules were
not present."
"There's a piece of JavaScript on this page
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/kinetic/kintem.html#c4>
that will calculate the average molecular speed given the molecular
mass
and temperature. N2 molecules (m=28) on Titan (T=-197C) average 260m/s
which is about a tenth of the escape velocity. CO2 molecules (m=28) on
the Moon (daytime T=107C) average 464m/s which is about a fifth of the
escape velocity. That might sound OK, but not all molecules travel at
the average velocity, some travel faster and leak away. The Earth isn't
able to hold on to hydrogen molecules, and they average about a fifth
of
Earth's escape velocity."
"Radon atoms would travel at an average of 206m/s on the Moon, which
suggests that you could build an atmosphere of pure Radon."
Density of dry ice: anywhere from 1.2 to 1.6 kg/dm³ depends upon
compactness (avg 1.5 g/cm3)
Frozen solid form at -78.5° C
Sublimes at anything much hoter than -78°C
In a snowball form of compactness upon the moon it may represent less
than 1 g/cm3.
Radon, Rn atomic number: 86
Atomic mass: [222] gmol-1(no stable nuclide)
Isotope: 222Rn (222.017570)
Specific gravity of the liquid state is 4.4 g/cm3 at -62°C, and SG of
the solid state becomes 4 g/cm3, thus 4 tonnes/m3 if frozen solid and
especially frozen solid if that Rn were sequestered by the likes of
frozen CO2 at 1.5 g/mm3.
A cubic meter of each substance, that which Earth needs to get rid of
anyway, represents a composite sphere of 5.5~5.9 tonnes, and that's not
actually all that large of diameter of what can be easily directed at
impacting (not orbiting) the moon. From the zero-G vantage point of
such being accelerated from the nullification zone of roughly 60,000 km
away from the moon gives an hour, in that there's an unobstructed path
of least resistance that'll also benefit from the 1.623 m/s/s worth of
gravity, whereas this should not require all that much added thrust
energy for getting the final velocity up to good speed of final impact
becoming worth at least 30 km/s (9 fold better KE bang/kg than DEEP
IMPACT), although what's stopping us from achieving 60+km/s?.
Our moon is already fairly radioactive by several fold greater than
Earth, thus another clue that our moon is actually that of an icy
proto-moon as having arrived instead of being ejected out of Earth,
that plus the much having lesser density makes a whole lot more sense
than any spendy computer model that's keeping the likes of a Pope and
other terrestrial or but religions as happy campers.
Of course, my lunar terraforming notions of artificially bombing the
holy crap out of our moon with the likes of large blocks or spheres of
dry-ice having frozen Rn within, besides creating whatever horrific
meteor like impacts worth of vaporising lunar basalt into capably
releasing a ratio of 1e6:1 worth of O2, the very nature of the
delivered CO2 might subsequently revert to just good old elements of
co/o2 or perhaps react into just C and O2, whereas the Radon element
should have vanished within a few days unless we'd replaced and/or
supplemented that lunar bombing of frozen Rn with the likes of
including Ra226 which might even react quite nicely with the already
available He3 into making a nifty long-term supply of creating Rn.
After the Ra226 is sufficiently depleted, say in 6400 years it should
be at 1/16th of it's initial potency, and by then having established a
good amount of terraformed atmosphere as becoming the case since the
amount of continual Radon-222 would have extensively moderated the
hot/cold of the lunar day/night differential to something quite
manageable for the likes of holding onto O2, whereas by then there
shouldn't be hardly any significant local radioactive threat for naked
humans that could be safely accommodated for 60 earthshine days upon
the surface of our moon, that which a reasonably engineered moonsuit
couldn't manage, or at least sufficient as for accommodating the likes
of whomever we don't want living here on Earth (I have a growing list
of whom those folks should be, roughly the bulk of the upper 0.1% of
humanity that have been pillaging and raping mother Earth while
continually snookering the lower 99.9% of humanity, and I do believe
there should be plenty of available space on and/or within the moon for
accommodating each and every one of those 15e6 folks in spite of all
the deployed Ra226 that upon average shouldn't have modified the
already background radioactive terrain by more than 10%).
According to the above "Molecular Speed Calculation" of Argon-40, even
if the elevated average altitude represented at worst 100°C (373K)
would give Argon the maximum RMS velocity of 482.4 m/s which obviously
should stick around. Even that of O2-32 only jumps to an RMS velocity
of 539 m/s which should also stay put at least up until a truly nasty
solar wind of 1200~2400 km/s excavates such lighter mass elements away.
So, you tell me why artificially bombing our moon, and especially with
the sorts of nasty stuff that Earth is getting more and more desperate
to get rid of isn't such a good idea.
>So stick to just the cold hard facts
>and do not engage these fools.
>As time goes on, they should then fade
>and prove that knowledge rules!
- D. Knisely
Obviously this nifty rant closing was speaking on behalf of warning us
about himself, as for our not bothering to engage such mainstream
rusemasters because, doing so will only bring us MOS LLPOF infomercials
and thus wasting human talents, resources of expertise and energy as
well as sustaining collateral damage and continued carnage of the
innocent.
BTW; just because certain folks fade is more than likely because
they're too smart to waste valuable time and resources upon the lost
cause of humanity that's ruled by and thereby performing as brown-nosed
minions to the upper most 0.1%, of which the likes of lord D. Knisely
is apparently even somewhat above that.
Martin 53N 1W
[...]
> Yes. There's no problem with "things" travelling faster than light; what
> is "forbidden" is information travelling faster than light. Suppose your
> radar beam scans once every ten seconds and could put a visible spot on
> the Moon. We would see the spot moving across the Moon "faster than
> light" but someone on the moon wouldn't see it coming.
What I think someone on the moon could see would be a very brief flash
from the Earth and a /line/ illuminated across the moon's surface.
A good question is whether they would be able to somehow work out that
the line was in fact a scanning beam...
Regards,
Martin
--
---------- OS? What's that?! (Martin_285 on Mandriva)
- Martin - To most people, "Operating System" is unknown & strange.
- 53N 1W - Mandriva 10LE GNU Linux - An OS for Supercomputers & PCs
---------- http://www1.mandrivalinux.com/en/concept.php3
Brad Guth
their moon-walking expedition that'll be a first and, to consider that
in addition to our obtaining all of those nifty moon rocks which will
be exactly like the megatonnes of our once upon a time icy proto-moon
rock that's already situated upon Earth, and since they keep insisting
upon working the moon under a fully blazing and extremely raw solar
influx plus having to dodge whatever physical influx of debris to boot,
as such they'll also have contributed all of those TBI and nicely
perforated astronaut bodily organs to study, and perhaps still not
having deployed one interactive scientific nor astronomy instrument as
could have been up and running upon the lunar surface as of decades
ago, much less accomplishing any of those energy efficient and
extremely high data throughput interplanetary/interstellar laser cannon
transponders, or God forbid allowing anything the least bit related to
Earth science. Meanwhile, Russia and China having been establishing
their one and only LSE-CM/ISS right over our silly moonsuit noses.
Naturally, if it weren't for "NASAs disinformation campaign" plus utter
lack of their being Johny on the spot with getting raw data directly
extracted from the lunar surface, as such we'd already know a whole lot
more than another thing or two about our moon.
For being the good sport that I am, here's another one of my gravity
and surface-tension related contributions that's still formulated in
basic kg or gram format, as this time having to do with folks
interested in getting a few small but otherwise highly effective
instruments safely deployed upon our moon.
Thus meanwhile back at the Guth ranch of being as much as possible
on-topic, such as per going "back to the moon by 2018", while so many
others are continually going off-track by remaining focused upon
defending their mindset and ulterior motives of whatever suits their
pagan NASA/Apollo Koran, and/or of their social/religious and political
brown-nosed bigotry status quo, whereas I'm into honestly wondering
what's technically possible and/or just affordably doable without
busting the bank nor further polluting mother Earth to a much greater
fairlywell by that method of our having to R&D those massive to/from
lunar landers for the daunting and extremly spendy task of sending
astronauts to/from the moon.
If we or even robots are to be going back to the moon, especially by
lunar daytime, then it might actually become a darn good idea as to our
knowing; How hot the moon.
If we're talking about certain substantially dark portions of the moon
as being not more than 5% reflective, in other words nearly coal black
and thus taking in 95% of the 1.4 kw/m2, and if that sort of dark
basalt and carbon soot covered surface were to be nicely covered with a
crystal clear layer/lens of several meters worth of Rn-222 gas, then
also as having been well insulated on all sides by those amounts of
supposedly clumping bone dry moon-dust, whereas that should insure the
dark substances should continue to rise in temperature well past the
150°C mark. At least I believe that's the result of what should be
accomplished upon Earth that's typically getting a little more than
half the amount of thermal influx upon the surface of Earth to work
with.
There's also the secondary energy as having been radiated from the
surrounding territory, whereas at a IR albedo of reflecting 25% would
have to be contributing a little something extra worth of thermal
energy.
The near-surface population of Rn-222 atoms should be considerable
though perhaps not amounting to much greater than a few meters worth,
however possibly at times as great as a km worth that's topped off with
a sparse amount of crystal clear argon is another insulative
consideration that we'll all have to learn more about, along with the
variable in solar winds and thermal extremes that's making the lunar
atmosphere anything but a constant. Even Rn-222 becomes a liquid state
if not frozen into solid form in lunar nighttime, although the near
vacuum of the lunar surface may somehow prevent those alternate phases
of radon gas.
Of course, if there's actually a near vacuum of 3e-13 kPa (3e-15 bar)
as supposedly the entire moon having a mere 25 tonnes in total
atmosphere to work with shouldn't retain all that much thermal energy
so easily, especially while having to keep up with Earth at 30 km/s and
otherwise with a 300+km/s solar wind (guesting to 2400 km/s) passing by
from time to time. So, my latest question is; exactly how much depth
and/or total mass of the Rn-222 gas does the moon have to work with?
What's the spectrum color (if any) of a fully saturated Rn-222
atmosphere?
Perhaps if we actually could manage to safely deploy a little something
that's interactive without having that deployment involve vaporising
itself upon impact, as then we'd all learn another thing or two about
our lunar environment, that which under the best of circumstance has
got to be downright nasty, that's otherwise robotically survivable.
Of course, within the last couple of decades we could have deployed the
sorts of hard-science instruments that shouldn't have amounted to much
greater than one kg, whereas a fairly large area and if need be
inflated mylar parachute should have easily gotten such light weight
times affordably and safely onto our dusty and reactive lunar surface,
thus capable of reporting back to Earth with at least hourly data
packets of pressure, temperature and most certainly a basic level of
foreground/background X-ray radiation info. As of today that kg package
could have included a reasonably good 2.25 micron/pixel full color CCD
camera, surface seismic/acoustic detections, a full range of spectrum
data including the amounts of various radiation and that of detecting
any number of available though rarefied elements passing by, as being
fully solar/PV cell recharged to boot so that minute by minute packets
would be available by day and at least hourly by nighttime/earthshine.
I can't hardly imagine that any one kg delivered package amounting to
more than a 10 kg compartment stowed item as having been rocket
delivered from an extremely low orbit, thus representing a fairly small
overall rocket delivery method hosting perhaps 100 of these little
suckers could be released along the lowest possible orbit path as their
delivery method makes a one-time de-orbit retrothrust maneuver at
perhaps 10 km off the deck, whereas that 10 km mark is perhaps where
the lunar atmosphere should (at a velocity of something less than 2
km/s) represent enough atmospheric mass/m2 and thus drag as per keeping
inflated the individual spinning delivery method of what should have
easily exposed the entire worth of whatever each of these mylar
parachutes could then take the fullest possible advantage of whatever
there is to grab onto.
Here's my plan-A; at 1/6th G and perhaps using a 36 meter diameter
aerobreaking method that's offered by better than a 1000 m2 mylar
parachute is why there's not going to be all that much combined mass
involved with having to slow the final velocity down to something less
than 10 m/s, that is unless there truly isn't any of the radon or other
heavy gas elements to work with, in which case those 1 kg items as
having 1.623 m/s/s going against their survival will likely impact at
something greater than 2.5 km/s (better luck next time). If the 1 kg
probe were to be somehow situated upon the top side of the parachute,
whereas this method could even help to support the final resting upon
an otherwise extremely low surface-tension of perhaps offering as
little as 5 g/cm2, thus a kg item might require a 3.34 m2 as being
necessary due to the lesser gravity where 1 kg becomes a factor of 167
grams with a final velocity of that mass having to come into contact at
10 m/s should represent a maximum of 16.7 kg (or perhaps it's actually
half that amount) within the first ms of impact, whereas otherwise the
lunar dry-quicksand as representing a micro form of powder/dust that
has been well documented as previously enveloping other deployed
instruments that were unfortunately considerably massive, though these
extremely light weight items having a large enough surface contact pad
area shouldn't sink out of sight.
Besides a centrifugal deployed mylar parachute, there's another
interesting notion of a "Ballute" as an inflated form of aerobreaking
for getting relatively small items safely deployed where a conventional
parachute may not represent the best all around ticket to ride.
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/archive/subsystems/aero.pdf
-
Silly me, and here I'd thought this next subtopic was actually going to
become another highly interesting notion of a perfectly worthy idea
that's anything but original. Though obviously "Uncle Al's" superior
though unfortunately entirely stealth stardrive beats my
radium/radondrive via plasma/ion thrusters all to hell and then some.
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.philosophy.humanism/browse_frm/thread/a4740ef840094820/1191e16695fda8e8?hl=en#1191e16695fda8e8
"Voyage to the stars" by Leonard David,
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.philosophy.humanism/browse_frm/thread/2aa1dc4f5d3ab04b/b873b6cb7472d3ea?lnk=st&q=ion+thruster&rnum=8&hl=en#b873b6cb7472d3ea
Since we don't seem to have the latest do-everything stardrive from the
likes of "Uncle Al" at our disposal but, we do seem to have ion
thrusters, as such this is certainly not by my way of thinking such an
entirely bad notion "To send a spacecraft where none has gone before is
a dream assignment for any space scientist and engineer", or at least
to send a probe with a sufficient cash of out best digital smut onboard
in order to make those damn ETs take a closer look-see at what in the
Sam Hell went so terribly wrong back upon Earth.
However, in order to accomplish this extended/everlasting task of
getting whatever to the next available star system, I believe of what's
to be needed most is a great deal of speed and thus a great deal of
applied thrust with obviously the fuel and energy required, at least
until that probe is passing the nullification point of no return, such
as the mutual gravity-well that's situated between our solar system and
that of the Sirius star system might prove most gravity attractive.
That's why I'd suggested, perhaps there's another perfectly good reason
as to first "go back to the moon" for obtaining a large amount of
Ra-226 so that a ion gas of Rn-222 becomes the medium by which the
plasma thrust is maximum/kj.
Ionized radon plasma could still become our the next best form of
powerful ion thrusters.
Although the radon thrust itself should be WMD invisible, it's greater
density as a gas, liquid or possibly frozen substance seems rather
interesting since radon is something that's not exactly all that hard
to come by, yet as far as I can tell Earth and we humans upon it could
do without the likes of radon.
One method of artificially creating an on-demand supply of radon while
on the fly is with having a cash of radium which isn't exactly all that
available upon Earth but, perhaps upon our moon could represent
megatonnes of radium (Ra-226). Thereby the Rn-222/ion plasma thrusters
of what a moon base of operations could represent might become the very
best alternative, especially since by then solar/PV cell energy/m2
should be more than adequate for ionizing radon into a substantial
plasma flow. Getting whatever back up into lunar orbit shouldn't be all
that testy, and of course so much easier yet with the LSE-CM/ISS
accomplishing the simple and energy efficient elevator to/from task of
getting whatever products and/or folks from the lunar surface into the
ME-L1/EM-L2 gravity free trade zone.
I'm thinking 222/131 = 1.71 fold thrust improvement over using Xenon
and, a greater than 800 fold improvement in thrust duration due to
utilizing a sufficient cash of Ra-226 on behalf of producing the Rn-222
on the fly, thus a 1360:1 overall mission improvement (that's not even
taking the added velocity into account), which seems perfectly nifty
for a interstellar probe that could be making 10% light speed once
getting itself gravity pulled towards the next available star system.
Meaning that we could use Sirius as a terrific velocity booster for
sending that speedy probe far beyond.
Radium (Ra-226) offers a half life of 1600 years
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/ra.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/xe.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/rn.html
Brad Guth
anti-God freaks has it's silver lining, in that I don't have to deal so
much with all of their mainstream spermology flak simply because I'm
sufficiently right and they simply can't stand the thought.
This time it's the notion of Radium-->Radon ion plasma thrusters that
has raised the Guth bar another notch or two.
Take to mentioning the likes of our icy proto-moon along with whatever
terminology of RADIUM or even RADON is almost as mainstream flak worthy
of slamming doors as per discussing the topic of those horrific SODIUM
atmospheric storms that became a good portion of the 900,000 km comet
like trail having been CCD and narow spectrum optical filter enhanced
images of such being solar wind extracted away from the moon. Of
course, discussing anything that's photon or even physically related to
whatever's of secondary/recoil or vaporising of anything upon our moon
is entirely taboo/nondisclosure, just like the need-to-know natural
colors and otherwise deep albedo of our moon isn't to be taken into
topic consideration.
Silly me, and here I'd thought this next topic/story was actually going
to become another highly interesting notion of yet another perfectly
worthy concept that's anything but all that original. Though obviously
"Uncle Al's" superior stardrive beats my radium/radondrive via radon
plasma-ion thrusters all to hell, and then some.
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.philosophy.humanism/browse_frm/thread/a4740ef840094820/1191e16695fda8e8?hl=en#1191e16695fda8e8
"Voyage to the stars" by Leonard David,
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.philosophy.humanism/browse_frm/thread/2aa1dc4f5d3ab04b/b873b6cb7472d3ea?lnk=st&q=ion+thruster&rnum=8&hl=en#b873b6cb7472d3ea
Since we don't seem to have the latest do-everything stardrive from the
likes of wizard "Uncle Al" at our disposal but, we do seem to have ion
thrusters that need a viable resource of plasma gas, as such this is
certainly not by my way of village idiot thinking such an entirely bad
notion "To send a spacecraft where none has gone before is a dream
assignment for any space scientist and engineer", or at least to send
off a probe with a sufficient cash of our best digital smut as stowed
onboard in order to make those damn ETs take a closer look-see at what
in the Sam Hell went so terribly wrong back upon Earth, that's
otherwise been orbited and subsequently terraformed with salty ice and
the DNA/RNA within by such an icy proto-moon.
However, in order to accomplish this extended/everlasting task of
getting whatever craft or probe to the next available star system, I
believe of what's to be needed most of all is a great deal of speed and
thus a great deal of continuously applied thrust, along with obviously
the necessary element of fuel and capable plasma generating energy
that's required, at least until that probe is passing the nullification
point of no return, such as the mutual gravity-well that's situated
between our solar system and that of the Sirius star system at roughly
3.5 fold our solar system mass might prove most gravity attractive.
That's why I'd suggested, perhaps there's yet another perfectly good
reason as to first "go back to the moon", or at least get there for the
first time, as for obtaining a large amount of Radium(Ra-226) so that
subsequently a large ion worthy amount of Radon(Rn-222) gas becomes the
medium by which the plasma thrust delivers the maximum kinetic energy
and velocity/kj.
Ionized radon plasma could and perhaps should become our the next best
form of powerful ion thrusters.
Although the radon thrust itself should be WMD invisible, it's greater
density as a gas, liquid or possibly frozen substance seems rather
interesting since radon is something that's not exactly all that hard
to come by, yet as far as I can tell, it seems that Earth and we humans
upon it could do quite nicely without the likes of radon.
One method of artificially creating an on-demand supply of radon while
on the fly is with having a sufficient cash of radium which supposedly
isn't exactly all that available upon Earth but, perhaps upon our moon
could represent megatonnes of Radium(Ra-226). Thereby the Radon(Rn-222)
ions as plasma thrusters of what a moon base of mostly robotic
operations could represent might become our very best alternative,
especially since by then solar/PV cell energy conversion/m2 at better
than 75% should become more than adequate for the available starshine
to be ionizing the likes of Radon into a substantial plasma flow. As
for getting whatever back up into lunar orbit shouldn't be all that
testy, and of course so much easier yet with the LSE-CM/ISS
accomplishing the simple and energy efficient elevator to/from task of
getting whatever tonnage of products and/or folks from the lunar
surface into the ME-L1/EM-L2 gravity free trade zone.
Of course a Plutonium energy cell for deriving the necessary kj/t of
probe might be supplemented along with having a 10,000 m2 PV collector
or possibly a tether dipole method of extracting energy from space, or
these days a sophisticated deep-space probe as performing as a one-way
massage packet transponder could become as little as 100 kg, whereas
the only message need be: SOS Earth(3rd rock from the sun) SOS
Earth(3rd rock from the sun) SOS, and so forth. If ETs can't manage to
extrapolate our position from following a portion of our radon ion
trail, then they're probably not worth their salt and shouldn't bother
coming to our rescue.
I'm thinking 222/131 = 1.71 fold thrust improvement (if not the square
of that amount being 2.89) over using Xenon and, a greater than 800
fold improvement in thrust duration due to utilizing a sufficient cash
of Ra-226 on behalf of producing the Rn-222 on the fly, thus a good
1360:1 overall mission improvement (that's not even taking the added
thrust velocity into account), which seems perfectly nifty for a
interstellar probe that could be making 10% light speed once getting
itself gravity pulled towards the next available star system. Meaning
that we could use the likes of Sirius as a terrific velocity booster
for sending that speedy probe far beyond.
Radium (Ra-226) offers a half life of 1600 years (I believe that's got
to represent lots of radon gas generation potential)
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/ra.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/xe.html
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/rn.html
Our Colorful Moon :
http://www.rc-astro.com/img/moon_colors_2005-04-18.jpg
All images and site content are Copyright ©2002-2005 by Russell
Croman.
© 2005 Russell Croman, www.rc-astro.com
http://www.rc-astro.com/contact.htm
The colors in the Moon image are real, in a sense, Croman explained.
"To bring out the differences between the various regions, the color
saturation has been greatly enhanced," he explained. "The hues are
correct."
"Differences in color on the lunar surface indicate different ages and
types of materials. Croman offers prints of this and other space
images."
Giving this image of his a 50% boost in contrast is certainly worth
doing, as that'll get the albedo a bit closer to reality. There are
actually many official color images of the moon as having been obtained
from orbit that are considerably darker and yet indicating as to a good
amount of deeply rich colors while fully solar illuminated. Thus
there's no viable excuse for the nearly white-out zones of colorless
lunar terrain that went on and on for as far as their UNFILTERED Kodak
moments could record.
Brad Guth
that's getting usenet posted, then having generated vast numbers of
sub-topics that are entirely unrelated and otherwise so far off track
that it's nearly impossible for honest folks to even get the drift of
the primary topic.
Thus it's MOS tactics from hell that has in the past brought us Popes
going postal upon innocent Cathars, then Hitler and on to worse
individuals being the likes of GW Bush that sucks and blows while going
postal upon Muslims at the same time.
Apparently you may achieve sufficient nondisclosure/taboo upon
whatever's out there by way of introducing thousands upon thousands as
shouting their butts off.
The news maedia and most of the mainstream publications have long been
bought and sufficiently paid for their brown-nosed minion duties of
their having to publish whatever government sponsored infomercial that
comes along. It's that simple and, it's getting worse off by the day
because forlks that are anti-Bush are afraid to share and share alike
and the pro-Bush forces are playing it dumb and safe (the dumb part
having been nailed down real good by their resident warlord).
Thus mentioning the following will get yout topic either banished
and/or shouted down with whatever best fills up the topic index with as
much off-topic crapolla as can be spared, some of which is now being
robotically posted.
Thus we/usenet now have mainstream damage-control roboposters to deal
with. And I bet that you thought brown-nosed minions and of their junk
mail simply couldn't possibly get any worse off.
Brad Guth
if all else fails.
What a totally pathetic Skull and Bones bunch of useless robotic
crapolla that's getting usenet posted, then having generated vast
numbers of sub-topics that are entirely unrelated and otherwise getting
so far off track that it's nearly impossible for honest folks to even
get the drift of the primary topic.
Thus it's MOS tactics from hell that has in the past brought us Popes
going postal upon innocent Cathars, then the warm and fuzzy likes of
Hitler and on to worse individuals being the likes of GW Bush that
sucks and blows while going postal upon Muslims at the same time.
Apparently you may alternatively achieve sufficient nondisclosure/taboo
upon whatever's out there by way of introducing thousands upon
thousands as shouting their butts off.
The news media and most of the mainstream publications have long been
bought and sufficiently paid for their brown-nosed minion duties of
their having to publish whatever government sponsored infomercial that
comes along (as is). It's that simple and, it's getting worse off by
the day because folks that are anti-Bush are afraid to share and share
alike and the pro-Bush forces are playing it dumb and safe (the dumb
part having been nailed down real good by their resident warlord).
Thus mentioning the any of following will get your topic either
banished and/or shouted down with whatever best fills up the topic
index with as much off-topic crapolla as can be spared, some of which
is now being robotically posted.
icy proto-moon
moon radiation
space radiation
lunar geode pockets
ice surviving in space
Sirius star system
lunar space elevator
LSE-CM/ISS
Life upon Venus
anything artificial upon Venus
anything that's natural upon Venus
anything at all Venus
anything at all moon
We/usenet now have acquired mainstream damage-control roboposters as
having to deal with. And I bet that you thought brown-nosed minions and
of their junk mail simply couldn't possibly get any worse off.
Brad Guth
if all else fails.
When a new and/or improved topic that matters attracts the attention of
an honest soul, instantly it gets trashed by an overload of unrelated
contributions and/or of as much anti-topic flak as can be created,
which these days need not even be all that human generated.
Media bias which is also the same as having butt loads of brown-nosed
science bias that is either cerating disinformation on their own or
having USENET ROBOPOSTERS accomplishing the task of losing the opposing
topic focus of whatever is rocking their good ship LOLLIPOP. Otherwise
the media has long been contaminated by the very same Status Quo of
whatever sucks and blows such off-topic crapolla as well as having been
involved with contributing as much author/PC spermware if all else
fails.
What I've found is a totally pathetic Skull and Bones bunch of useless
robotic posted crapolla that's getting involved with just enough human
interface as for making a bit harder to tell when you're getting
snookered, such as a given topic for no good reason having generated
vast numbers of sub-topics that are entirely unrelated and otherwise
getting so far off track that it's nearly impossible for honest folks
to even get the original drift of the primary topic.
Thus MOS tactics from hell that has in the past brought us Popes going
postal upon innocent Cathars, then the warm and fuzzy likes of Hitler
and on to worse individuals being the likes of GW Bush that sucks and
blows while going postal upon Muslims at the same time, which certainly
has to represent a lot of extremely brown noses on their side of the
pro-collateral damage and pro-carnage of the innocent argument (or
else).
Apparently you may alternatively achieve sufficient nondisclosure/taboo
moderation upon whatever's out there by way of introducing thousands
upon thousands as shouting their robo butts off.
The news media and most of the mainstream publications have long been
bought and sufficiently paid for their extremely brown-nosed minion
duties of their having to publish whatever government sponsored
infomercial that comes along (as is). It's that simple and, it's
getting worse off by the day because folks that are anti-Bush are
afraid to share and share alike and the pro-Bush forces are playing it
dumb and safe (the dumb part having been nailed down real good by their
resident warlord).
Thus mentioning upon the any of following will get your topic either
banished and/or shouted down with whatever best fills up the topic
index with as much off-topic crapolla as can be spared, some of which
is now being robotically roboposted with just .
icy proto-moon
moon radiation
space radiation
lunar geode pockets
ice surviving in space
Sirius star system
lunar space elevator
LSE-CM/ISS
Life upon Venus
anything artificial upon Venus
anything that's natural upon Venus
anything at all Venus
anything at all moon
We/usenet now have acquired mainstream damage-control roboposters as
having to deal with. And I bet that you thought brown-nosed minions and
of their junk mail simply couldn't possibly get any worse off.
Brad Guth
space is MOS hocus-pocus taboo/nondisclosure.
Perhaps this represents as good of reason as for us to at least go
robotically back to the moon because, some fools keep thinking this has
been humanly accomplished and, as a result are betting our entire farm
that it can be accomplished again and again, as for accommodating more
extensive EVAs and with all of this somehow being accomplished in broad
daylight and without a hitch nor any need of banked bone marrow.
Of course, now I'm being the bad guy by way of asking those silly
questions that seem to only have answers as based upon the
social/political conditional laws of physics, and on as much evidence
exclusions as deemed necessary.
This perfectly nice tidbit as to the continued damage-control on behalf
of those supposed fly-by-rocket soft landings as offered by Alan
Anderson;
>Not bedrock. Regolith. Eons of micrometeorite bombardment have not
>only eroded the surface rock, but compacted it quite nicely.
I offered my thanks and thus appreciation for that correction of
"Regolith" instead of being of whatever basalt/bedrock. However, it
still seems a pretty damn nifty 6 out of 6 times as representing sort
of an extreme landing trick as having been the case of those
hocus-pocus sorts of scientifically need-to-know/nondisclosure and
otherwise of undocumented fly-by-rocket technology landers, as per
their tonnage upon arrival having managed to never compress into much
greater than an inch worth if hardly any amount into the unusually thin
deposits of lunar regolith/top-soil. I certainly wonder all the time as
to why such a nasty deposit of moon-dust was so gosh darn reflective,
wasn't even the least bit electrostatic nor otherwise photon reactive,
and as always as to why they never bothered as to obtain those natural
dark colors and deep albedo as recorded upon those unfiltered Kodak
moments while they were there.
In physics-101 and hard-science proof-positive terminology and as
referenced to whatever they've got;
How does such a near vacuum environment as having no apparent binders
and as obviously not having any terrific amount of gravity that still
somehow manages as to supposedly compact such regolith/basalt +
meteorite dirt is even possible, especially when other dry moons seem
to have been radar probed as meters deep in their fluffy moon-dust?
Being that we still have no such hard-science upon snow or raw ice in
nearby space;
Does this represent that space snowballs are highly compacted along
with having solid ice cores?
I can certainly fully appreciate the icy proto-moon as having somewhat
recently lost its 270 km worth of such an icy coating, whereas as
thereby having quite nicely compacted upon a great deal of whatever
lunar dust and soil that was previously upon it's rock of a core.
Although, what happens to such sequestered dust, sand or soil that has
been released from having been iced down and thus having been 100%
covered as per right here upon mother Earth, whereas there's still a
million fold more water vapor to work with under the absolute hottest
and driest of conditions than upon the moon?
I believe this type of soil has been called dry-quicksand, that's more
than a wee bit difficult to walk upon unless it's merely an extremely
thin layer. Even the mostly sub-frozen and thus relatively hardened
soil via dry-ice as binder from an environment as Mars represents,
whereas it seems to impose surface-tension limitations upon an
extremely light-weight robotic probe that's hardly sufficient for any
task of digging and/or mining, much less processing and exporting.
It further seems that solar/cosmic flak as well as micro meteorites,
sand and perhaps a good variety of extremely slight dust as attempting
to get into the environment of Earth hasn't hardly a chance in hell of
all that much arriving upon the surface. Of what does manage to get
through the atmospheric gauntlet has been most certainly contributing
towards displacing oceans, lakes, rivers or having become sequestered
within layers of snow and ice, and of what's eventually getting
situated where us humans walk is rather easily eroded, blown about and
otherwise frequently washed clean into our oceans, rivers and lakes
that basically makes it all go away, and then some (especially if you
included the solids contributed by way of humanity and of our mostly
bad sorts of interactions with the very nature of geology), thus we're
losing our high and dry ground at a much faster rate than any influx is
contributing to the cause.
Of course the moon hasn't any of that terrestrial stuff going for
atmospherically deflecting, vaporising or subsequently having erosions
and/or surface weather related factors that's transferring whatever
arrives into flowing off into moon-rivers and moon-ponds or lakes and
basins of moon-dust, although from time to time the solar winds should
have been causing a certain amount of surface erosion and thus at least
particially transfering such dirt/dust off the most vertical of
regolith and basalt bedrock, thus causng the mostly horizontal and/or
basin like zones to becoming extremely deep in such light dust that's
most likely anything but light in color nor of becoming all that
naturally clumping.
Even upon Earth, dry coal dust simply doesn't clump, nor would most any
such bone-dry substance. Not even the supposed samples as having been
returned to Earth, whereas we have better than a million fold more
ambient moisture, haven't clumpted. Why is that?
~
Life on Venus includes your basic Township, Bridge & Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
Russian/Chinese LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
A few other sub-topics of interest by; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Brad Guth
we've been thoroughly screwed, blued and tattooed to a need-to-know and
media snookered fairlywell.
Perhaps this being summarily screwed, blued and tattooed represents as
good of reason as for us to at least go robotically back to the moon,
and the sooner the better because, there are some fools that keep
thinking this has been humanly achieved and, as a result are betting
our entire farm and last barrel of oil that it can be accomplished
again and again, as for accommodating more extensive EVAs and with all
of this somehow being accomplished in broad daylight and without ever a
hitch nor any need of banked bone marrow (yea right! that's the MOS
LLPOF ticket, as to screw them laws of physics and exclude whatever
evidence rocks your boat).
Apparently, of whatever's blowing in the solar wind and/or being
gravity attracted or just run into at 30+km/s isn't the least bit of a
safety factor, at least not any more so than somehow walking upon less
than a 5 g/cm2 worth of surface-tension because, it seems that my TV
set gets roughly a 0.1 mm/year of carbon/soot and other micro debris
per year, thus within 10,000 years I'd have collected a meter of that
extremely fluffy dust enclosing my TV set as situated right here in
River City, and I'm not all that certain there'd be any surface-tension
of 1 gram/m2 to work with.
Is the moon and of it's extremely dry environment representing that of
a zero voltage polarity?
Of course, now it seems that I'm being the bad guy or perhaps just the
messenger from hell by way of asking those silly questions that seem to
only have answers as based upon the social/political conditional laws
of physics that can't break any of those religious creation basis
rules, and thereby upon as much evidence exclusions as deemed
necessary.
This perfectly nice tidbit as to the continued damage-control on behalf
of those supposed fly-by-rocket soft landings as offered by Alan
Anderson;
>Not bedrock. Regolith. Eons of micrometeorite bombardment have not
>only eroded the surface rock, but compacted it quite nicely.
I offered my thanks and thus appreciation for that correction of
supposedly "Regolith" instead of being of whatever basalt/bedrock being
the case. However, it still seems a pretty damn nifty 6 out of 6 times
as representing sort of an extreme landing trick as having been the
case of those hocus-pocus sorts of scientifically
need-to-know/nondisclosure and otherwise of undocumented fly-by-rocket
technology landers, as per their tonnage upon arrival having managed to
never compress into much greater than an inch worth if hardly any
amount into the unusually thin deposits of lunar regolith/top-soil. I
certainly wonder all the time as to why such a nasty deposit of
moon-dust was so gosh darn reflective, wasn't even the least bit
electrostatic nor otherwise photon reactive, and as always as to why
they never bothered as to obtain those natural dark colors and deep
albedo as recorded upon those unfiltered Kodak moments while they were
there.
In physics-101 and hard-science proof-positive terminology and/or as
referenced to whatever;
How does such a near vacuum environment as having no apparent binders
and as obviously not having any terrific amount of gravity to work
with, still somehow manages as to supposedly compact such
regolith/basalt + meteorites contributed as compacted dirt even
possible, especially when other dry moons seem to have been radar
probed and thermally analyzed as having been meters deep in their
fluffy moon-dust?
Being that we still have no such hard-science upon snow or raw ice
surviving in nearby space;
It needs to be asked; why have we only conjecturs and not hard-science
about such raw ice in space?
Does this represent that space snowballs are highly compacted along
with having solid ice cores?
I can certainly fully appreciate as to what an icy proto-moon as having
somewhat recently lost its 270 km worth of such an icy coating, whereas
as thereby such ice having quite nicely compacted upon a great deal of
whatever was lunar dust and soil that was previously upon it's near
solid rock of a core. Although, what happens to such sequestered dust,
sand or soil that has been released from having been iced down and thus
having been 100% covered as per right here upon mother Earth, whereas
there's still a million fold more water vapor to work with under the
absolute hottest and driest of conditions than upon the moon?
I believe this type of exposed top-soil has been called dry-quicksand,
that's unfortunately become more than a wee bit difficult to walk upon
unless it's merely an extremely thin layer. So, unless our moon is
somewhat newish, why is there such a slight dusting, or did the solar
wind blow it all away?
Mars has certainly become nearly moon like, though even the mostly
sub-frozen environment and thus offering a relatively hardened soil via
dry-ice as binder of what Mars represents seems to impose
surface-tension limitations upon an extremely light-weight robotic
probe that's hardly sufficient for any task of digging and/or mining,
much less processing and exporting. Cut the gravity in half and exclude
the CO2 factor by a good thousand fold and lo and behold, there's not
going to be hardly any viable surface-tension unless there's hardness
of regolith/basalt bedrock as offering an underlayment of sub-top-soil
that's been somehow glued together by the horrific influx of micro and
not so micro meteorites, or perhaps massive amounts of whatever's local
and unfiltered influx of solar/cosmic radiation is the answer.
It further seems that solar/cosmic flak as well as micro meteorites,
sand and perhaps a good variety of extremely slight dust as attempting
to get into the environment of Earth hasn't hardly a chance in hell of
all that much arriving upon the surface. Of what does manage to get
through the atmospheric gauntlet has been most certainly contributing
towards displacing oceans, lakes, rivers or having become sequestered
within layers of snow and ice, and of what's eventually getting
situated where us humans walk is rather easily eroded, blown about and
otherwise frequently washed clean into our oceans, rivers and lakes
that basically makes it all go away, and then some (especially if you
included the solids contributed by way of humanity and of our mostly
bad sorts of excavating and erosive interactions with the very nature
of geology), thus in spite of ourselves we're losing our high and dry
ground at a much faster rate than any influx is contributing to the
cause. Of course upon the moon is where it WYSIWYG that stays put
unless it's having been vaporised into lunar atmosphere.
Of course the moon hasn't any of that terrestrial sorts of stuff going
for atmospherically deflecting, vaporising before reaching the surface
or subsequently having the sorts of erosions and/or surface weather
related factors that's transferring whatever arrives into nicely
flowing off into becoming moon-rivers and moon-ponds or lakes and
basins of moon-dust, although from time to time the solar winds should
have been causing a certain amount of surface erosion and thus at least
partially transferring such dirt/dust off the most vertical of regolith
and basalt bedrock, thus causing the mostly horizontal and/or basin
like zones to becoming extremely deep in such light dust that's most
likely anything but going to remain as light in color nor of becoming
all that naturally clumping.
Even upon Earth, dry sand or even coal dust simply doesn't clump, nor
would most any such bone-dry substance. Not even the supposed samples
of moon dust/dirt as supposedly having been returned to Earth, whereas
this environment offers better than a million fold more ambient
moisture to work with, still haven't managed to clump one damn cm3. Why
is that?
Why is the mere thought of an icy proto-moon so freaking
nondisclosure/taboo?
Why do we still NOT have a single interactive scientific instrument as
deployed upon the moon?
Why was there never once an efficient 100 joule +/-1° xenon strobe
transponder deployed as pointed back at Earth?
Even a 10 joule xenon strobe that could have been laser or microwave
triggered would have bccome visible to the naked eye from Earth,
especially if triggered while within earthshine. From that beam or
rather flood of photons all sorts of viable lunar atmospherics and
other near-surface related science could have become most easily and
affordably understood. Yet 4 decades of a perpetrated cold-wars and
trillions upon trillions down the toilet has gotten us less than squat
to work with.
~
Life on Venus includes your basic Township, Bridge & Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
Russian/Chinese LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
A few other sub-topics of interest by; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Brad Guth
taboo/nondisclosure, or at best another need-to-know sort of
sequestered topic is anything having to do with the notions of "Russia
to mine the Moon?"
Unlike those having to assume we've been there and done that moon
thing, I'm not having to assume anything that's not physics-101, or
perhaps even duh-101. Of course, having seen a little of the
hard-science about the harsh solar illuminated environment of our moon
as being a whole lot more than just thermally hot and nasty isn't
exactly helping the cause of eventually habitating upon or even within
the moon because, no matters what, you still have to get folks and
whatever stuff safely to/from the lunar surface without involving the
somewhat negative PR aspects of such folks impacting and vaporising
upon their arriving at moon-base whatever.
Even the earthshine environment upon the moon is potentially lethal if
almost anything physical comes along, such as per out of nowhere as
represented as a wide-open-field of 360 X 180 degrees worth of
exposure, that which so much as an arriving dust-bunny could nail your
moonsuit butt, or even from a secondary meteorite shard that's still
capable of making better than 2 km/s isn't exactly a reassuring notion.
Thus I totally agree with your "If you are naked on the Lunar surface,
you have far more urgent concerns than the sunburn!", and for being
within a robust moonsuit is essentially still nearly butt naked if
you're having any contest between yourself and that of an arriving
30+km/s speck of dust.
Consider the ratio of crater diameter per size of meteorite and lo and
behold, you're looking at one hell of a nasty hole in your moonsuit, or
perhaps at the very least a hefty dent that should easily knock you
onto your moonsuit butt. Thus a mere spec of sand might easily become
termination of life as you know it, whereas the head-on velocity of
some of those specs of sand can become worth 100 km/s. Therefore the
more natural plus artifically generated atmosphere the better, even it
it's got a good amount of radon(Ra-222) gas. In fact, the more radon
the better.
If anything, my robust LSE-CM/ISS is all about the viable aspects of
eventually colonizing our Moon. For starters having the LSE up and
running is certainly a good thing, whereas from that point on we could
easily pulverise the moon with itself, thus releasing megatonnes of
O2/year from the raw basalt that's getting efficiently vaporised by
merely releasing a tonne at a time of lunar basalt away from being
roughly 60,000 km off the deck, thus without a kg of rocket fuel or any
other form of dedicated propulsion we'd obtain at the very least a
1000:1 ratio of each impact making O2 available. Therefore, per tonne
as having been gently tossed away from a few km below the CM/ISS that's
residing roughly 64,000 km off the deck would potentially release 1000
tonnes of O2, whereas eventually this mostly robotic process of perhaps
releasing 3t/24 hrs would create and sustain perhaps as much as 0.17
bar that's quite possibly breathable, that is if the lower atmospheric
layer of radon gas isn't remaining quite as extensive as some have
thought.
However, life should be good within the 50e6t CM/ISS abode or that of
keeping yourself sequestered 15+ meters deep and/or within hollow
rilles or hopefully a few ready-made geode pockets that could be easily
reconfigured as underground lakes of salty water, whereas this life
underground notion might be a whole lot more doable than we'd thought.
BTW; earthshine isn't an insignificant amount of illumination, at
roughly 50 fold greater off than what the best moonshine arrives upon
the surface of Earth is actually offering a fairly good standard by
which to work by, and there's even a touch of secondary IR earthshine
to warm your soul. I seem to recall that moonshine is supposedly worth
0.1°C upon the surface of Earth, thus perhaps as great as shifting the
average lunar nighttime surface temperature that's supposedly -153°C
by +5°C worth of earthshine could be the case, which is still damn
cold but, we can technically deal with being cold a whole lot easier
than being too warm.
>Jordan; I'm not sure what you mean by "surface-tension." Did you mean to say "gravity?"
Gravity is certainly another factor but not the key point of what dry
quicksand surface-tension is all about. A GOOGLE search for the
surface-tension of water, then try a search for the surface-tension of
dry quicksand, then start running off the math as to a 1/6th gravity
and that of an extremely bone dry environment that by all the regular
laws of physics shouldn't clump all that well and, much less explain as
to such a slight layer of dust as though the moon isn't very old nor so
freaking naked to whatever's coming along. Perhaps then you tell me how
your folks are going to be walking upon and/or snorkeling their way
through such fluffy and perhaps electrostatic sorts of nasty stuff.
I'm thinking that Russia may have rediscovered that they'll have to
deal with a few slight if not nearly insurmountable glitches along the
way.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/608f283f468439de/3e63740c002a9729?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=1#3e63740c002a9729
Such as;
Can you even moon-walk upon a surface-tension of 5 g/cm2 without
sinking out of sight?
Is such moon-dust actually clumping all that good, or what? (where's
the hard-science?)
At 1/6th G (1.623 m/s/s); what's available for compacting or otherwise
binding said moon-dust?
What happens as a result of mining the moon, as to the artificially
created moon-dust?
I believe that the task of mining our moon is even going to suck the
life out of a good Russian robot, that is unless you've got traction, a
periscope or perhaps a good set of stilts. Because, 5 g/cm2 worth of a
bone-dry quicksand surface-tension in places isn't exactly promising.
As for them Russians mining the moon isn't something that's going to
transpire any time soon without their first getting a good number of
their moonsuit butts safely onto the earthshine illuminated lunar deck
and, that's going to become just a wee bit ticky by way of having to
utilizing those yet unproven fly-by-rocket landers which don't seem to
actually exist, not even for the likes of any of those Russian
AI/robotic landers having since provided us with little more than
pop-up books depicting what supposedly transpired, that is since
apparently all of their R&D as should have been easily recorded upon
movie film hadn't been invented yet.
Even if such fly-by-rocket landers of any reasonable payload capacity
existed, or if having to R&D create such from scratch as for
accommodating the task at hand, whereas per tonnage of getting whatever
robotics and certainly of those moonsuit butts safely deployed upon the
moon, of then having to operate such mining technology of such
machines, processing and thus extracting upon whatever (such as He3)
and of getting the end product packaged and shipped back towards mother
Earth is per tonne going to involve at least a good 1000+ tonnes worth
of nasty pollution for mother Earth, and of that 1000:1 ratio of
pollution contributing factor is not to mention the horrific amounts of
raw energy that such efforts will have taken from Earth in the first
place, thus likely having far out-stripped any recovery potential of
He3. Without their first establishing a good lunar space elevator(LSE),
the lunar surface is technically going to continually suck so much
worse off than we've been informed. Of physics and science as having
been based upon LLPOF worth of smoke and mirrors simply isn't going to
make such happen, at least not any time soon.
Mining and thereby extracting whatever away from our moon sucks big
time energy and dollars even for a good robotic solution unless you've
got one of good traction, and perhaps one hell of a nifty periscope to
boot. Operating within the sub-frozen nighttime environment of our
moon, even with somewhat considerable earthshine and thereby some
indirect benefit of secondary thermal influx might become the only
CO2-->dry-ice-->CO2 (day-night-day) cycle of any method that worth
improving the lunar environment that'll achieve any measurable degree
of moon-dirt binding or clumping. As otherwise there's none other drier
or fluffier quicksand to be found unless you're situated upon Mercury,
as even a Venus class of hot and obviously bone dry quicksand isn't
going to be without benefit of the local elements affording viable
binders for sticking such hot and nasty Venus soil together and, much
unlike that of our electrostatic powder puff of a moon, as upon Venus
there's certainly not any significant forms of cosmic or solar influx
of sand or meteorites that could have significantly contributed to such
terrestrial depth(s) becoming whatever's Venus sand, soil or dust. In
other words, I believe that Venus is mostly Venus unless you're talking
about a time before things got all geologically hot and nasty and
subsequently developed that absolutely terrific atmospheric shield.
Perhaps the mostly Russian Venus Express mission will help to further
define as to whatever's what with regard to the various depths and
composition(s) of the otherwise geologically hot and nasty Venus soils,
plus identifying a few of those likely active lava and/or mud flows
plus S8 sulphur vents that should be atmospherically interactive enough
for the onboard science instruments to sample.
The Next Lunar Rover; may still manage to sink itself out of sight
http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/BeyondLEO/leo194/rover.htm
Having a dry mass of under 1000 kg and having six extremely large
traction wheels seems a whole lot more doable, that is as long as their
conditional laws of moon-physics of such nasty dust/soil remains as a
relatively thin coating that's somehow magically clumping within the
first 12.5 mm and apparently comprised of entirely nonreactive
substance like nowhere other.
However, along with accommodating another 1000 kg of payload brings the
tally to nearly 2000 kg, thus 333 kg divided upon 6 wheels is still
counting upon 56 kg/wheel which is at least getting somewhat suggestive
of what darn little mass that supposedly thin layer of such nicely
auto-clumping moon-dirt of lunar cornmeal and portland cement can
manage to support, and that's for using wheels offering better than 6
fold the surface contact area, thus in total accomplishing the task at
roughly 10 times the traction of what those original Apollo rovers had
to work with.
BTW; the absolute driest of our terrestrial sand dunes would still have
a million fold more moisture content as for their accommodating
whatever binding degree of soil/sand clumping, thus walking and/or
having to drive upon such a terrestrial substance that leaves no
footprints nor of even sustaining any trace of tire tracks for long is
still a surface-tension that's considerably better off than what even a
1/6th gravity and certainly more than bone dry situation upon what our
scorching hot and otherwise terribly solar and cosmic reactive moon has
to offer. Keeping in mind, that if Earth didn't have the magnitosphere
and a sufficiently thick amount of atmosphere, Earth too would be even
more reactive because of the average densitiy being greater than that
of the moon. Thus if the moon is not reactive in your good book it's
because of having a sufficient atmosphere. So make up you mind, does it
or doesn't have an atmosphere?
According to http://www.talbertmfg.com/index2.html
Supposedly sand upon Earth terrain that's bone dry (least clumping)
offers a flat surface rolling amount of extra resistance being worth
15%, whereas without taking into account as for tires sinking into said
sand but just for going the least bit vertical adds considerable insult
to injury, meaning that the rolling resistance can easily double due to
a loss of traction and thus wheel spinning. A 10% grade upon a hard and
smooth surface represents another 10% worth of base energy required for
the same task of moving a given tire upon whatever asphalt/concrete
substance, whereas on a truly lose sand or lunar composite dust that
your tires have been sinking into may more than double if not require
four times that ratio.
"The degree of traction between the tire and the ground is called the
coefficient of traction."
"Since there is never 100 percent adhesion, the coefficient is always
less than 1.0. The result of multiplying the weight on the drive axle
times the coefficient of traction represents the maximum force which
can be transmitted before the tire spins out."
"For example, a vehicle with 200,000 kg of weight on the drive axle and
working on ground conditions having a coefficient of traction of 0.6
can deliver up to 120,000 kg (200,000 kg × 0.6) of force before the
tires will spin out."
Given roughly 1000 cm2 per set or pair of over-enlarged moonboots as
having to walk upon such dusty locations offering a surface tension
worth 50 g/cm2 represents that a given moonsuit EVA that's worth 25 kg
should be doable at representing 25 g/cm2, although upon one moonboot
foot at a time or perhaps 500 cm2 applied per step would be having to
support the entire 25 kg is going to become nearly equal to whatever
the best possible surface-tension that's supposedly capable of clumping
moon-dirt eventually supporting at greater than 50 g/cm2, which
represents that whatever moon-walking may require somewhat enlarged
footprints that could represent a pair of clown shoes or those of
compact snowshoes unless the hard stuff is always an inch or so below
the dusty surface.
I'm thinking that, Even though the surface-tension is perhaps worthy in
certain places of supporting as much as 0.05 kg/cm2, in other places
this may be somewhat like having to walk through a dry fluff density of
powder snow, in that each step will have you sinking through the more
than likely a 5 g/cm2 composite of moon-dust before that amount of
magic clumping moon-dirt worth of soil compression becomes worthy of
sustaining even that 5 g/cm2 amount of surface-tension and thus becomes
all that usable, thereby any rolling tire or other flat tread like tire
or belt/tred is going to be transferring a great deal of material up
and around that form of wheel/tire traction, whereas a camel like
traveling machine might prove more acceptable, especially if it had six
legs that were long enough so as to keeping it's payload and passengers
above the thick dust that has got to be worth 10+ meters in places.
Traveling via robotic (six legged) moon-camel isn't all that far
fetched. Say if each of the six legged machines offered a m2 cupped
foot per leg, as that's potentially giving 6 m2 or 60,000 cm2 to work
with. At half-loading is where that amount of area becomes worth 30,000
cm2, upon which 0.05 kg/cm2 = 1500 kg of moon mass or 9t Earth mass,
although I seriously have my doubts we'll actually have nearly as good
as 50 g/cm2 to work with unless you've bottomed out.
A traction tread/belt as having perhaps 10 m2 of a working amount of
surface contact should do as well if not a bit better as long as it's
submerged operating depth capacity isn't limited. Thus 100,000 cm2 X
0.05 kg/cm2 = 5,000 kg or at the same half-load capacity of 15t Earth
mass.
As background info; excluding factors of buoyancy, at 1G the
terrestrial surface-tension of warm water is 72 dynes/cm. That's worthy
of just 7.34e-2 g/cm2. Obviously terrestrial dry-quicksand is offering
a great deal more surface-tension plus a better displacement degree of
buoyancy, although uncompacted moon-dust may not support a
surface-tension much better than 5 g/cm2.
Dry Quicksand
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/d/dr/dry_quicksand.htm
"Lohse found that a weighted ping pong ball (radius 2cm, mass 133g),
when released from just above the surface of the sand, would sink to
about five diameters. Lohse also observed a "straight jet of sand
[shooting] violently into the air after about 100 ms". Objects are
known to make a splash when they hit sand, but this type of jet has
never been described before."
That's roughly a total ball surface area of 50 cm2. Dividing that by 3
offers at most 17 cm2 worth of a supportive surface area that's having
been somewhat offset by a slight buoyancy factor since the above
weighted ball submerged itself to roughly a depth of 20 cm before being
supported. As then we can deduce the notion that a 133 g mass had
eventually obtained a dry-quicksand surface tension worthy of not more
than 7.8 g/cm2, or 46.8 g/cm2 worth of terrestrial mass as having been
situated upon the moon could become the case. However, being that the
same dry-quicksand as otherwise situated within the same 1/6th G
environment should also be taken into account, thus perhaps at the very
optimum best 10 g/cm2 is about all we're ever going to obtain. Thereby
not going by my previous 50 g/cm2 but having to use 10 g/cm2 if not 5
g/cm2 to safe should become the wise alternative as for keeping your
moonsuit butt and head above such obviously extremely dry-quicksand of
the moon, especially wise if that's having to involve the compression
ratio of 5:1 as being worth taking note of.
As for getting those two reasonably hefty moonsuits and especially of
their lander at something that amounted to nearly 16 tonnes resting
nicely upon 4 pads that looked as though each offered roughly a square
meter (10,000 cm2/pad), thereby having to accommodate 675 kg/pad that
barely managed to compress past the first inch is suggestive of their
having 6 out of six times set their fly-by-rocket craft down upon a
relatively firm surface-tension of something that's certainly
indicating as better than 100 g/cm2. This is either quite unexpected or
damn lucky since in places the surface-tension could have been less
than 5 g/cm2 and otherwise at most 10 g/cm2, and of course their next
generation lander that's getting proposed is going to have to become
extremely robust for taking a payload of perhaps 3 astronauts plus a
rather substantially larger and thus more of everything rover that's at
least twice the capacity of what our Apollo teams had to work with,
thus a combined terrestrial mass of certainly not less than 24 tonnes
and most likely with the necessary de-orbit and down-range plus
sufficient (what-if) spare fuel and the third person accommodation
making it worth 27 tonnes, which computes out to 1125 kg/pad. Thus even
with each 4 m2 landing pad is still having to bet the farm upon setting
down upon a dry quicksand surface-tension of better than 28 g/cm2,
which by all logic and certainly of the known laws of physics simply
may not exist unless we're talking about mostly bedrock or at least
situated upon significant piles of impact related shards that are
sufficiently vertical in slope so as to have since been blown nearly
clean by some 1200+km/s solar winds, that which should have easily
reached and reacted with the surface if there's actually as slight of
atmosphere as having been reported.
I believe getting this task of whatever safely to/from the moon surface
down to a bit more realistic measure requires a lunar space elevator:
Of any such new and "improved lunar landing architecture" certainly
needs exactly what the LSE-CM/ISS infrastructure has to offer, that is
unless we're talking about one-way tickets to ride. As per the task of
terraforming our moon into becoming a bit more robotically obtainable
is certainly a doable task without ever risking a single astronaut.
>Jordan; The Moon is _not_ particularly "radioactive." In fact it is _less_
>radioactive than is the Earth.
Please offer your basis (other than based upon those NASA/Apollo bible
scriptures) for this conclusion because, even NASA's new guard has
science published as to the average lunar bedrock that is considerably
more "radioactive" than upon Earth. Thus instead of our receiving a
local geological based dosage of 0.5 mr/day, as per existing here upon
Earth, you'd be looking at several mr/day, plus whatever's cosmmic and
solar contributed, plus whatever's of secondary/recoil dosage that's
smack dab in the hard-X-ray spectrum and, every time earth is situated
directly between yourself and the sun is when you'll get an extra taste
of what our outter most Van Allen zone of death can contribute, as
somewhat the lunar SAA sort of booster TBI shot. All and all, if things
should get a little bit testy, having banked bone marrow should save
the day.
>Jordan; I don't have a _clue_ as to what you mean by "reactive" in this context.
Search for secondary/recoil radiation, or perhaps secondary/recoil
photons. You'll find more info than this usenet cold hope to store.
Basically the direct solar radiation for the most part isn't of what's
going to nail your sorry DNA/RNA hide to the wall, although a quick
shot of whatever's being expedited along by a 1200~2400 km/s solar wind
isn't even a fair contest because, your DNA will lose big-time.
~
Life on Venus includes your basic Township, Bridge & Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
Russian/Chinese LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
A few other sub-topics of interest by; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Brad Guth
heaven about our NASA/Apollo rusemasters and of their
disinformation-R-us crapolla that overfloweth thy space-toilet, whereas
usual I'm one of these Usenet village idiots that's never quite sure
about many such things; such as, I'm not quite certain if this next one
should become another Usenet topic or sub-topic. You tell me.
KODAK's PHOTOCHROMATIC/AI FILM TO THE BLOODY RESCUE of NASA's SORRY
BUTT
For mere starters, the Kodak grey card offers a neutral albedo of
0.18(18%), which is somewhat similar to that of new PVC gray pipe (mid
tone as illuminated by the atmospherically filtered sunlight and
subsequently perceived by the human eye). A lunar form of 12% albedo as
a gray-scale tone is getting more into a mid-charcoal or deep slate
gray.
Photographic examples of albedo as based upon various real world
cement/concrete composites, each image having the 18% gray background
as color and albedo reference.
http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/resources/pdf/post_reflectance/reflectance_chap3&4.pdf
Because I'm such a nice guy, I've often used the earthshine albedo/flux
as being a conservative 50 fold that of moonshine. However, the full
Earth along with a typical amount of cloud cover being worth nearly aan
lbedo of 38% can actually represent a bit more like 80 times better off
than moonshine upon the surface of Earth. Thus 80+lux or lumena or
perhaps roughly 8.5 w/m2 and, each watt/m2 (depending upon spectrum or
frequency) can contribute 3.8e18 photons/s, thus portions of nighttime
upon our moon is getting quite nicely illuminated by earthshine.
Earthshine is also somewhat of a bluish tint and thus offers by fare
the most sensitivity as to being photo recorded upon film that's
extremely extra sensitive to the blue and near-blue spectrum, that
which the human eye isn't all that sensitive to, thus all such
photographics should have been impacted by their being a fairly
noticeable degree of a bluish shift or tint, and/or at the very least
the as-is blue of any American flag should have been a fluorescent
(extra bright illuminating) glowing amount of blue.
http://cc.ysu.edu/physics-astro/starlady/march22003.html
"The light from the full Earth as seen from the Moon is about 80 times
brighter than the light of the full Moon from the surface of Earth."
As for "The solar radiation spectrum and Transmission through different
media"
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/600/610/614/solar-water/idrc/01-09.html
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/600/610/614/solar-water/idrc/10-19.html
Terrestrial surface UV-a contributes 0.6 to 1.5 mw/cm2 (6 w/m2 to 15
w/m2) as having been extensively filtered/moderated by our atmosphere,
however much less of the UV-b get through and almost none of the UV-c
passing through the atmospheric gauntlet that's keeing us alive by
doing such a good job of being our radiation shield that's worth
roughly 10t/m2, but even that's worth a whole lot mot than any
artificial methods such a water that's a thousand fold more dense and
thus a whole lot more secondary/recoil capable of generating those
nasty hard-X-rays.
A bright-white moonsuit offers an albedo of 80%, although with extra
brighteners (retroreflective additives or micro prism like chemical
elements) can push most any super-white moonsuit to better than 85%. An
ultra white photo reflectance board is officially worth 0.9(90%)
albedo. Truly retroreflective elements of a micro corner cube like
coating of such additives can exceed 0.95(95%) albedo, and from that
point on it'll take polished aluminum in order to exceed the 0.95 mark.
Thus it's reasonably safe to conclude of moonsuits and a good number of
white painted items of those Apollo missions can and should be utilized
as the albedo reference bench mark, that plus those official
photographic gray-scale strips that were actually incorporated within
certain images is obviously offering us yet another observational
validation as to how gosh darn reflective the average lunar landscape
of 55+% for as far as the unfiltered Kodak eye could see was the case,
with certain areas or patches as having clearly exceeded 65% (a few
even seem nearly a glaring 75%) as compared to a given moonsuit plus
other artificial items that we know of for certain were of 80% albedo,
and also because supposedly there's insufficient atmosphere as for
moderating the illumination intensity and/or having color/spectrum
shifting affect upon whatever was included in each of the frames.
However, without an atmosphere and taking on the the raw solar UV
influx of 118 w/m2 that simply had to have been reacting with
everything in sight, plus fairly darn good chances of some of that UV
energy creating the near-blue photons of exactly what the
secondary/recoil photons should have been creating is somewhat of a
mystery, since in none of the images was there any hint of a bluish
color skew or that of any black-light generated near-blue, not even
fringing of blue or under any direct lighting, shadow or shadow-fill
(thus secondary) illumination offered us an example of what the raw
solar influx should have provided, especially as being photo recorded
without and color spectrum blocking filters or even that of an optical
sharp UV cut-off filter, yet the Kodak film somehow managed to exclude
all of the UV-a, extra solar near-blue, secondary near-blue and even
the bluish earthshine had a zero affect upon what had been recorded. In
other words, apparently Kodak had invented their first full-spectrum
photochromatic/AI film and ever since having lost that formula.
OK folks, someone walked upon a nearly colorless/monotone moon that
simply wasn't our moon, thus we're even better at this space-race game
and of all the required talents and expertise than anyone ever thought
possible, so damn good that we even tossed out all of the fly-by-rocket
R&D and every one of the working prototypes. Apparently the moon we'd
walked upon had a Xenon spectrum illuminating sun, that of an Earth
like planet that was either a bit smaller and/or much further away and
at times even having been situated a bit near the horizon, that plus
there was no such nearby Venus or the likes of any extremely Kodak
bluish-white bright Sirius star system. On this other moon there wasn't
but at most a couple of inches of highly clumping moon-dirt that
offered nearly 100 g/cm2 worth of easily compacted surface-tension, and
lo and behold, it wasn't even the least bit electrostatic nor even all
that dark because, the nearby sun had little if any iron or carbon to
spare. To top all of that off is that the moon had an invisible
atmosphere that nicely protected astronauts from being physically
nailed or even the least bit TBI impacted, whereas this was
accomplished in part because the density of that moon wasn't the least
bit reactive because it must have been made of anti-matter, clumping
anti-matter none the less.
Silly me, as here I'd though we'd been snookered, when in fact these
NASA/Apollo guys are freaking wizards that are beyond any known realms
of the ordinary laws of physics. I guuess you don't need any stinking
remorse if you're damn near a God like our resident warlord(GW Bush).
Brad Guth
postings upon absolutely nothing that really matters to humanity, or to
that of honest science or as to the truth and nothing but the truth
about you name it. The entire Usenet of science, physics, astronomy and
of anything having been the least bit associated with the likes of our
NASA is one sick puppy that needs to be put-down, and the sooner the
better. Lies upon lies and of countless liars giving us their bigoted
incest mutated past, present and future as to insure MOS is exactly
what brought us 9/11, and it'll bring us WW-III if not worse things to
come.
In spite of the total lack of there being any hard-science as to raw
ice in space, as well as to the less than 5 g/cm2 worth of moon
surface-tension that's certainly got a hell of a lot more depth than a
couple of inches worth to deal with, as well as being extremely dark
with an excellent deep color range of surface deposited elements and, a
bit physically as well as TBI nastier than just being damn hot in the
raw sun.
Yet still, in spite of all the brown-nosed LLPOF and spermology of your
incest produced DNA and, upon that which sucks and blows about our
perpetrated cold-war rustmasters of NASA/Apollo at the same time,
whereas you fools offer absolutely no such hard-science whatsoever that
we've walked upon the moon, not to mention a little matter of having no
actualy fly-by-rocket lander (other than what's on a static display),
and not even valid science that explains those unfiltered Kodak moments
of EVA/moonsuits walking upon some extremely passive moon other than
ours that's rather dark and nasty.
As for this ongoing example of what's been rotten and festering to the
incest core and of what stinks to heaven about our NASA/Apollo
rusemasters, and of their disinformation-R-us crapolla that overfloweth
thy space-toilet, whereas usual I'm still one of these Usenet village
idiots that's never quite sure about many such things; such as, I'm not
quite certain if this next contribution should become another Usenet
topic or sub-topic. You tell me.
KODAK's PHOTOCHROMATIC/AI FILM TO THE BLOODY RESCUE of NASA's SORRY
BUTT
or perhaps this one will have to do
THE MOON IS QUITE/EXTREMELY DUSTY, IT's GOT ATMOSPHERE, IT's REACTIVE,
IT's SUITABLE FOR ROBOTS
NASA/Apollo guys are absolutely freaking wizards that are beyond any
known realms of their being limited by ordinary laws of physics. I
guuess you don't actually need any stinking remorse if you're damn near
a certified LLPOF God like our resident warlord(GW Bush).
Brad Guth
believe that's because it would tell us village idiots way too much of
the truth and nothing but the truth as to space-travel, plus that
little matter of an icy proto-moon terraforming Earth with a serious
load of salty ice hosting a vast number of DNA/RNA that deposited the
vast majority of life upon Earth, in the process of icing Earth down to
a point whereas eventually human species could have been deployed with
any hope of their surviving.
Others having posted a topic or having imposed an ice related question
have been ignored, banished or summarily bashed to even suggest such
apparent nonsense. However, I believe all we need to realize upon is
how long would a given m3 of raw ice, saltwater ice or perhaps even as
to the likes of dry-ice surviving in nearby (1 AU) space. Are we
talking about days, hours or merely seconds/m3.
Please do a search for "ice in space" or "space-ice" or whatever
terminology turns you on. At least I've never seen a paragraph upon the
hard-science of such ice coexisting for any period of time within
nearby space. If you should discover anything, just reply to this or
most any other topic by including the key-word phrase of "ice in space"
or "space-ice" should do the trick.
Meanwhile, it seems of all the humanly accessable places that could
badly use an icy (Sedna like) proto-moon is the extremely nearby orb of
Venus.
It's perfectly true enough that thick clouds help to retain such
thermal energy, and thick clouds plus a mostly CO2 atmosphere also
contribute to the IR influx retention, that which has to then be
conducted downward some 50+km worth, which is why so gosh darn little
of the solar influx of IR ever reaches the surface. According to a good
many talented expertise in physics and science, it seems having a
global albedo of 0.75~0.8 is actually what's been keeping Venus
somewhat solar cool (anti-greenhouse), and the entire atmospheric
density having been an ocean of a nifty buffer zone keeping the nasty
solar and cosmic radiation away from whatever life (local or ET) that's
taking advantage of surviving upon Venus. In fact, there's less harmful
solar and cosmic radiation upon Venus than Earth, and it's not even
nighttime dark to a good nocturnal eye.
NOTE: hard-science proves considerable thermal energy leaves Venus than
having been solar contributed. Venus is thereby not getting itself
hotter nor even holding it's own.
Folks not unlike "Matt Wiser", "Jonathan Silverlight" and "Martin 53N
1W" that'll take to roboposting their pagan NASA bible/kroan by their
having to quote chapter and verse upon reciting that Venus is, has
always been and will remain as "hot enough to melt lead" are every bit
as snookered as they come, if not having become incest dumbfounded and
just as much without a stitch of remorse as our resident warlord(GW
Bush) was about WMD. Apparently they all missed their physics-101 class
upon what pressure accomplishes for keeping a good lid upon many
substances, thus preventing those from boiling under such heat. This is
not to suggest that mere humans can stroll about butt naked, not that
the robotics as suited for Mars or even that of our moon is going to
stand a chance in hell of surviving upon Venus, although the technology
and necessary components that would survive quite nicely have existed
for exactly that sort of robotic application.
Hard-science by many having established that such a trapped amount of
heat as having been mostly geothermally tossed into the environment,
seems as though chances have been getting somewhat better than not that
it's not quite so terribly hot and nasty upon each and every km2 of the
surface of Venus.
Imagine certain portions of Venus at a relatively cool 600K (especially
within their extended season of nighttime), then start cruising about
in your rigid airship where at good altitude that just below them nasty
clouds and haze it's getting downright chilled outside at perhaps 400K,
or push the peddle to the metal (full H2O2/C12H26 + CO + O2 feeding
their 50 MW IRRCE power plant) in order to get your massive rigid
airship cruising sufficiently above them cool nighttime clouds, say
250+knots while at 75 km by night ott to do the trick of quite nicely
accomplish the task of making their more than ice-cold beer taste
pretty good.
Folks that keep insisting I'm the bad guy or the ultimate village idiot
messenger from hell (the sort of messenger that just will not go away)
are equally if not more so at fault for their supposed talents and
expertise not independently thinking inside or much less a little
outside or their own box, as a result they generally suck and blow at
delivering their form of intellectual flatulence once having cleared a
serious butt load of their usual mainstream infomercial crapolla as
having established their usual LLPOF pathway of the past, present and
future sins plus MOS disinformation, need-to-know and/or evidence
exclusions that'll have to remain as their priority No.1, and that's
seemingly their only flak tossing damage-control option for as far as
their intellectually bigoted eyes can see, much like upon their nearly
white-out moon that's apparently a barely dusty composite of the least
reactive elements in the universe, and being of where the regular laws
of physics nor even of whatever applied fly-by-rocket technology
documentation do not apply.
These rusemasters seem to forget that our NASA/Apollo fiasco was all of
our rotten eggs as having been placed in one perpetrated cold-war
basket, and it apparently worked almost better off than they'd hoped
for by nearly creating WW-III, although I certainly never once saw any
smoking USSR gun nor had I thought it was moral to have been causing so
much global collateral damage along with the subsequent carnage of so
many innocent as a direct result of our MI6/NSA, as having been
super-fortified along by our NASA/Apollo actions that certainly
included their grand ruse/sting of the century on behalf of the
snookering most all of humanity. Too bad them darn Muslims weren't
buying into any of it.
Instead of our having easily become intellectually and scientifically
focused upon accomplishing better science and of what's been easily
within our nearby space that's reasonably obtainable and affordable,
such as for actually accomplishing our moon, as for establishing the
LSE-CM/ISS that's entirely intended for the good of Earth-science,
astronomy and humanity, and that of further exploring the possibilities
of other ETI life as having at least once upon a time been associated
with life upon Venus, and perhaps even accommodating wisdom upon the
sorts of newish or old ETI life that could still be calling Venus home,
or at least their home away from home is what I believe could have
saved the day, as well as for salvaging our global-warming sorry butts,
and this certainly could have prevented the likes of 9/11 by way of
diverting our bigotry as well as the entire focus of humanity upon what
really matters. But lo and behold, no way are the powers that be going
to allow any external non-borg individual like myself, that's not any
significant part of their mainstream collective box, and especially if
I'm simply a bit too free of a soul to roam about the countryside so as
to possibly receive any credits whatsoever.
Thus it has recently become my humble opinion that our USofA government
and of nearly every associated agency within are willing coconspirators
whether they much like it or not, and otherwise just badly enough
complicit as to deserve having big aircraft smashing into their tall
buildings, and then some. Why on Earth the likes of WW-III hasn't
kicked butt, as much as I clearly do not understand this because, we
certainly seem to have become a bit more than deserving.
In spite of out ongoing fiascos, Venus Express may just end up putting
a new and improved spin on the same old hot and nasty aspects of what
Venus actually is all about. However, I'm thinking that there's still
room for a bit more of what we think we know of other life than limited
to what good old mother Earth provides, and of all the nearby places
that are potentially Earth-like (besides sufficiently massive and
aromatic moons like Titan, of which we've recently proven that it's
technically ETI/probe accessible), whereas Venus is certainly a
perfectly good one to reconsider as long as you don't land within an
active lava pit or some hot and nasty mud-flow, that if need be we
could actually get ourselves onto that humanly hot and nasty planet.
Our moon however sucks hard at the life as we know of it (I certainly
can't imagine other than deeply sequestered microbes having survived).
Of whatever's possible moon life or even as imported astronauts are
easily taken right out of the picture from the very get-go, whereas
even without our having to worry about impacting our way onto the
surface, if once having invented a viable fly-by-rocket lander and
subsequently survived that sort of arrival is when we'd next have to
somehow keep from getting our DNA quite nicely TBI past the point of
no-return (even banked bone marrow has limits), otherwise easily
pulverised or perforated through and through, and/or just having to
avoid inadvertently sinking ourselves entirely out of sight, as some if
not all of the above having been the unfortunate case with respect to
the demise of previous items deployed upon our moon that is quite dark
and dusty, offering extremely slight surface-tension, most certainly
reasonably reactive and otherwise you're certainly a wide open sitting
duck or pin-cushion/sappository for whatever comes along.
In either case, for Venus or the surface of our moon (especially the
raw solar influx side of our moon) are jobs well suited for robust
robots, at least that's the situation for our moon until suitable
access into underground habitats within hollow rilles or perhaps that
of utilizing an existing geode pocket is established on our behalf, of
which LUNAR-A being ready to deploy as of more than a decade ago was
supposed to tell us a great deal about what's below the lunar deck.
Venus could be just the opposite, of being a touch hotter underground,
at least within geothermal hot zones it may in fact be extremely hotter
underground than above the surface. To my best estimate, Ishtar Terra
offers 600K, of which at pressure is actually getting close to what a
sufficiently insulated soul might tolerate as long as there were a
sufficient cash of cold beer on tap, although a habitat or mobile bus
or best being that of a rigid airship having a shell of R-1024/m
composite basalt and silica should be just able to sustain whatever
internal temperature they'd like without all that much applied energy,
of which whatever amounts of energy is already there to behold in the
form of 4+bar/km and 10K/km of viable atmospheric differentials.
Thus the pressure and heat of Venus are each good for go, whereas the
cold and lack of available pressure upon Mars is a seriously bad sort
thing that's only much worse off for accomplishing our moon. For the
same reason Venus is Earthly/ETI accessible, so be it for Titan and
that of any other atmospheric benefited orb. Earth has barely enough
atmosphere, to the point where most of the potentially lethal NEOs are
in fact going to remain as capable of nailing us to a fairlywell, and
if it weren't the surrounding magnetosphere that's further shielding us
from solar and cosmic influx, we'd be summarily quite dead and gone in
no time at all. Venus having a good amount of atmosphere is offering a
win-win regardless of it being geologically newish and hotter than
hell, at least it's been technically accessible along with
green/renewable energy to spare, making Venus into a viable to/from
capability that's survivable even by our standards.
Brad Guth
overflowing with diamonds. Too bad that it's remaining as
taboo/nondisclosure all the way into the nearest space-toilt of NASA's
disinformation-R-us infomercialism that sucks and blows at the same
time.
An idea that makes perfect sense because of what's having been based
upon rational deductive reasoning and/or upon subjectively honest
interpretations of what others have accomplished, or even as to what's
within a given image (of what's natural or otherwise) that so happens
to fit the regular laws of physics, is exactly what creates the initial
focus of the science to follow that'll prove or disprove whatever. The
executions of such notions on the basis that such free ideas may some
day become or otherwise lead to the likes of new and/or improved
evidence, as having to be auto-rejected simply because of their
potential boat rocking aspects, are what makes little Hitlers into the
sorts of truly dastardly LLPOF bastards like our resident fornacating
warlord(GW Bush).
Those claiming they somehow don't understand whatever I'm saying are
just proving MOS mainstream crapolla is still capable of freely flowing
up-hill because of the vast amounts and terminal velocity of that
mainstream crapolla.
On the high-road to life and the salvation of hymanity, we have Usenet
member "tomcat" as having provided us with this perfectly terrific
though somewhat outdated link
<http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/FALL2001/lecture25.pdf>(meaning as of
October 31, 2001) as to what's been publicly available for years, which
probably isn't worth hardly 10% of what was actually being accomplished
in top-secret facilities at the same time.
Helium-3 as Fusion Energy (He3/fusion) is here to stay because it does
work, with the minor exception that there's damn little natural He3 to
be found upon Earth. In spite of the spendy and energy consuming
process of artificially creating He3, I'm certain that by now there's
full scale units in the process of final testing or going into full
power mode in the very near future.
Besides Helium-3 as Fusion Energy (He3/deuterium) elements that should
be available within the moon (near the surface if not just within the
extremely dusty surface composites of mostly iron, carbon and
titanium), there's also radioactive elements within as well as many
other potentially valuable raw minerals to being had (such as for
making off with a few megatonnes of aluminum), especially interesting
since our icy proto-moon was NOT made of Earth. There's also a likely
geothermal core if not having a bit thermal nuclear induced amount of
core energy, which is entirely better off than what the much older and
nearly sub-frozen to the core of what Mars has to work with, except for
the likely aspects that Mars should have a greater mass of sequestered
raw ice below the deck.
Brad Guth
mainstream crapolla damage-control that sucks and blows at the same
time, as such here's some more of my usual dyslexic lose-cannon though
honest Klingon PGP encrypted context as to what my outside-the-box
favor return thinking is getting myself, my topics and my PC summarily
stalked, bashed and/or banished because apparently I'm a little too
right as rain and others simply are not. Whereas "Kasper Vreeland" has
been providing us with his "Disinformation Agents" growing list of all
those warm and fuzzy Usenet folks being the bad-guys and the extremely
short listing as to those of us few and far between souls as being the
good-guys, perhaps in as much as others can help the few of us
good-guys to interpret for ourselves for the benefit of humanity and
thereby for the rest of us unfortunate village idiots as being on the
"Disinformation Victims" endangered species list, as to simply
appreciate upon what this following related astronomy and science-truth
and nothing but the truth topic has to offer before it's too late, as
to explain why the heck the very best of modern CCDs apparently can't
under any circumstances manage to include a star along with the likes
of imaging Earth or much even that of a dark albedo moon shot, and
seemingly so much less capable of having both items as being within the
same frame.
The following is merely a small portion of what I've recently
contributed as to why "MESSENGER SUCKS, Venus rocks, the moon is still
dark and nasty"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sci.planetary/browse_frm/thread/1f2ba57f6141a6b0/bea4051f88f96044?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=1&hl=en#bea4051f88f96044
Dear Jonathan Silverlight and Jim Phillips (aka brown-nosed
kookbusters),
What a total bunch of phony baloney though otherwise incest cloned
borgs you hang with, so gosh darn brown-nosed that ordinary LLPOF is
just another subroutene of their status quo that's fully automatic, as
in runing amuck from their left butt-cheek brain to their right
butt-cheek brain and back again, a closed loop of disinformation-R-us
and as much evidence exclusions as their brown-nosed brains can muster,
and it's as though they actually think anyone with half a brain doesn't
notice when their pants are absolutely chuck full of the usual
mainstream worth of hype, disinformation and MOS damage-control
crapolla of evidence exclusions.
I do believe that MESSENGER's MDIS/CCD and spendy optics w/filters
should actually have included a few stars in them thar flyby images of
mother Earth, easily have otherwise delivered some Earth/moon shots,
Earth/moon+Venus shots, Earth/moon+Mercury shots, with each of those
hosting a few stars, and then some because, it seems that any halfassed
12 bit A/D converter offers 4096 gray levels or an overall per
individual scan brightness range of 4095:1, and that's not even taking
into account any applied Photochromic Image-Plane Filter that only
capably extends the dynamic range of most any CCD, that plus the
FWC/FBC(full bucket capacity) of such modern CCDs are rather good while
having far less noise to contend with.
I haven't located upon the specific MESSENGER CCD dynamic photonic
range or FWC/FBC as per pixel bucket capacity, but I can't hardly
imagne it as being all that pittiful, such as much less than a FWC of
80,000. Matching that with an unusually high noise factor of 8 is still
a DR of 10,000:1, although a more than likely S/N of 4 represents a DR
of 20,000:1 if not 25,000:1 for using a CCD FWC/FBC worth of 100,000 is
what I'd place good odds upon what the MESSENGER CCD/MDIS has to work
with.
Here's a brief list of other CCDs, whereas the larger FWC/FBC being
associated with those of larger micron sized pixels and even better S/N
makes their DR(dynamic range) far superior to what the smaller of pixel
microns can deliver. Thus the bigger the chip the better all around
do-everything performance, with the only significant drwback being a
requirement for larger optics in order to match the same magnification
and resolution factors.
CCD 47-20 FWC/FBC = 120,000
Kodak KAF 1300 FWC/FBC = 150,000
SITe 003A FWC/FBC = 300,000
SBIG ST-2000XM CCD Camera FWC(Binned) Kodak KAI-2000M + Texas
Instruments TC-211 FWC/FBC = 90,000
1600 x 1200 pixels @11.8 x 8.9 mm @7.4 x 7.4 microns and a DR of 8182
http://btc.montana.edu/messenger/instruments/mdis.htm
Both of the MDIS cameras have 1024 pixels in each column and 1020 in
each row, for a total of over a million pixels per image. The wide
angle camera takes pictures with a larger field of view, but with less
detail. This camera employs 12 different filters to better define the
light that enters it over a range of different wavelengths.
Of course, since my PC overfloweth with your Usenet Spermware, thanks
to your MI6/NSA and freelance spook efforts at stalking and bashing
whatever's the truth and nothing but the truth, as a result it's taking
myself a we bit longer to research and report what I've discovered as
being nothing but another pack of incest cloned mainstream status quo
butt-sucking liars that have been lying to the rest of us village
idiots from the very get-go.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree; War is war, thus "in war there are
Brad Guth
ever Usenet taboo/nondisclosure busting king of the hill isn't being
taken without a good fight. It seems the Usenet gangs of NOVA/GOOGLE
and of their MI6/NSA Skull and Bones spooks are hard at it again,
fornacating their balls off by way of tossing out MOS PC damaging and
Usenet blocking spermware/malware as can be accomplished. Too bad that
I don't give a flying hocky-puck as to how many private parts my lose
cannon strikes, as long as the greater good of humanity is served. If
you'd like to see myself in action, pleas stop by for a first hand
experience of a lifetime. Watching my PC doing down for the count is
like watching the proof-positive truth and nothing but the truth
rolling in with the tide.
I've certainly been asked a time or two as to where I get my info and
numbers from;
I use mostly data as extracted (strictly on a exploratory and somewhat
of a need to know basis) from NASA, then lost from the regular laws of
physics, from KODAK corporate and from the ongoing hard-science
afforded by so many others that know for a matter of fact that folks
like Art Deco and a bloody host of others are nothing but another SOB
pack of LLPOF loosers that should be exterminated for their Skull and
Bones crimes against humanity. I've asked how about yourself, of which
NOVA/GOOGLE infomercial of disinformation space-toilets and/or
cesspool-ology of yet another perpetrated *Christ on a stick* worth of
cold-wars do you get your infomercials and moral solace of your inner
most personal comfort?
If folks wish to privately believe in whatever born-again liars have to
say, and as such do not manage to involve collateral damage and the
carnage of the innocent, thus operate without public funds or otherwise
not actively recruit cult members, then so be it. As equally, my
observationology and subsequent conjectures as based upon whatever I've
interpreted as being most likely artificial about what's situated upon
Venus is just subjectively exactly what it is. Take it or leave it.
Here's a little something else about our notions of supposedly going
back to the moon that's chuck full of those pesky numbers. Actually in
this case the NASA numbers are much worse off if we accounted for the
extra millirad/day that's incoming from the solar illuminated moon,
which certainly doesn't sound like all that much until you do the
reverse math. Then there's what continues as MOS "so what's the
difference" policy that moderating even what their MESSENGER mission
has to offer.
MESSENGER SUCKS, Venus rocks, the moon is still dark and nasty
There's more than good enough reasons for imaging via MESSENGER to have
avoided our moon because, that moon is not only extremely dark and
nasty as all get-out, it's also extremely solar and cosmic reactive,
and the MESSENGER team most certainly did all they could in order to
avoid getting any such unfortunate images of that dark moon or of
anything other than Earth by simply using a closeup and 8-bit or less
capability of the lowest DR portion by merely using the fastest
appropriate scan of their CCD dynamic range (those efforts could easily
have been limited to as little as 6-bit as having given us the same
terrific 128:1 DR quality images of Earth). End of that discussion
because, all that the MESSENGER supporters ever intend to accomplish is
MOS dog-wagging, infomercial spin, hype and subsequent damage-control
as based upon MOS conditional laws of physics, as well as upon
implementing as much evidence exclusion as it takes.
Not that any self-respecting pro-NASA/Apollo individual is ever going
to accept the truth as to this notion that our NASA uses our solar
illuminated moon as their satellite instrument calibration of
hard-X-ray dosage but, if you ever bothered to accomplish the reverse
math upon what that alone represents as based upon the square of the
distance and lo and behold, the resulting near surface dosage
(especially of the solar illuminated deck) becomes real nasty.
There's roughly 376,284 km of surface to surface distance between the
two of us. A satellite or that of ISS at 400 km off the deck will bring
that down to 375, 884 km of least distance between their orbit and
closest distance from the lunar deck. Of course there's factors that'll
have to make the distance upon average a bit greater, thus for argument
sake of what's radiating hard-X-rays at us, lets give this distance a
factor of 380,000 km to work with.
If you'd like being ultra conservative (even though it's closer to a
millirem/day) give the measured secondary/recoil dosage that's
specifically of hard-X-rays as derived off the reactive moon as being
worth just one extra microrem (0.000001 rem) per day as measured by ISS
instruments.
Then because the Van Allen zone is such an expanse that represents a
significant shield or buffer worth a conservative attinuation factor of
100:1 makes the first half distance basis of available TBI dosage
amount to 400e-6 rem/day at being 190,000 km away from the solar
illuminated deck of the moon, with the remainder of the distance
strictly a ratio of increased TBI dosage increase as based upon the
square of the distance (each half distance = 4 fold increase in TBI
dosage).
380,000 km = 1e-6 rem/day
190,000 km = 400e-6 rem/day
95,000 km = 1600e-6 rem/day
47,500 km = 6400e-6 rem/day
23,750 km = 25.6e-3 rem/day
11,875 km = 102.4e-3 rem/day
5,938 km = 409.6e-3 rem/day
2,969 km = 1.638 rem/day
1,485 km = 6.552 rem/day
742.5 km = 26.2 rem/day
371.3 km = 104.8 rem/day
185.6 km = 419.2 rem/day
Thus even at 1 microrem/day that's impacting ISS or any other satellite
as having derived hard-X-rays off the solar reactive moon, and if going
into orbiting mode within 1r (1738 km) off the lunar deck is worth
nearly 6 rem/day. Even dividing that dosage in half because of your
orbiting the moon makes it worth 3 rem per day while orbiting 1738 km
off the deck. Of course, since this is almost entirely solar influx
generated and the sun itself is anything but a constant, thus if the
starting point of this measurement was actually based upon the extra
millirem/day instead of the extra microrem/day, as such you're now
looking at the orbiting dosage of 3,000 rem or 30 Sv/day that's of
hard-X-rays being external to your spacecraft as derived upon average
off the reactive moon.
Naturally our NASA/Apollo missions were so much closer than 1738 km off
the deck, and for those supposedly upon the deck were obviously getting
TBI nailed real good. Of course that's not possible if you'd take the
NASA/Apollo bible into account because, we're only off by a few
thousand to one.
Of course the lunar nighttime and the actual substance of the moon
itself is going to contribute it's fair share of background and
reactive cosmic sourced worth of hard-X-rays that shouldn't contribute
1% of what the solar impacted side has to offer, of which from such an
extreme orbit of 1738 km off the deck should be all that testy.
Although actually being on the nighttime/earthshine illuminated deck
it's going to be worth several rads/day if not per hour, which isn't a
problem for robotics w/o DNA.
Though as per usual, each and every day it's getting worse off, as I
seem to have gotten more than my fair share of the GOOGLE/NOVA V-Chip
spermware/malware gauntlet that's specifically associated specifically
with my MI6/NSA Usenet interactions, thus nearly always I'm having to
frequently reboot because of their ongoing efforts as to damage and/or
eliminate my existence as far as having any public Usenet access or
even so much as a working PC. This is the absolute truth and nothing
but the truth that's easily 100% provable, which only further
demonstrates that I'm essentially right about most everything, thus
worth targeting on behalf of damage-control. The excuses that it's all
my fault and that GOOGLE/NOVA and their partners MI6/NSA in crimes
against humanity can't possibly avoid nor track a given source of
spermware/malware, much less block it is another LLPOF proof-positive
that I'm right.
BTW; using a MAC isn't offering any PC form of a safe buffer or other
worthy shield against the vast expertise and gauntlet of formal
spermware/malware generated and delivered by way of GOOGLE/NOVA and
their MI6/NSA disinformation partners in crimes against humanity. It
seems they have most if not all of the back-door keys to either
operating system. Possibly Linux offers a third-party degree of
isolation, although that accomplishes nothing on behalf of our ISPs and
of other external servers taking and sharing as much info, just as
capably allowing their data and Usenet pathways to being moderated
and/or diverted as need be.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree; War is war, thus "in war there are
Brad Guth
undergoing R&D by "scaled & SS2/WK2"
>Marko Horvat; Yes it's wonderful, magnificent and inspiring, but...
>they still haven't achieved 7.9 km/sec - the 1st orbital speed.
As per usual, they(scaled & SS2/WK2) are certainly not on the receiving
end of any viable support from our MI6/NSA~NASA, instead only the usual
lack of sharing rocket-science and otherwise need-to-know info upon so
much other science which is simply MOS "high standards and
accountability" of our NASA status quo of essentially excluding
evidence. This is why private ventures have to tough it out, by way of
their making due with far less cloak and dagger spookology (meaning you
can't have the cloaked advantage of having three sets of the usual
Arthur Andersen cooked books). Perhaps China, Russia or India might
spare a few affordably honest SBRs, that plus helping to create their
CNT/Basalt composite spaceplane for ten cents on the dollar, and if
made large enough may become just as commercially doable as the C380
R&D required. If using a similar two-step(SS1) launch method like
before, I'm thinking it'll involve at least 100+ billion for
accomplishing something that'll accommodate the likes of hundreds of
folks per flight for achieving those multiple extended LEOs (possibly 7
days and nights spent aloft) and safely back to Earth.
In this case, I believe bigger is better. Thus an extremely large
spaceplane as touted by "tomcat" and others is most likely the best
do-everything and all-around ticket to ride. If going a bit further out
than LEO, once in orbit is where the massive outer protective shell of
a mostly basalt composite layer of interlocking armor can be
re-attached and, then it's off they safely go into the wild black
yonder. I see no insurmountable payloads of achieving 200,000 lbs,
although the initial launch phase of getting the entire spaceplane
along with it's full payload to an initial cruising altitude of even
47,000' is going to be impressive by itself, if not pushing a good many
known limits well past the red-line.
Once going past the point of no return and thus obviously having sped
through the Van Allen badlands, of their slowing down into going merely
1+ km/s is somewhat of a coasting velocity that's slightly better off
than a parallel parking speed. From that point on the likes of
Radium(Ra226)-->Radon(Rn222) ion thrusters should get real interesting,
with possibly a Xenon/Radon ion cocktail that might offer a little more
push per MJ.
Our moon is only making 1.023+/- km/s, whereas of the ME-L1/EM-L2 zone
of our mutual gravity-well is getting the velocity requirement down to
less than 860 m/s, thus chasing after the moon is more or less about
putting on the breaks, and especially once having somewhat coasted
(retro-thrusting) into being reasonably situated within the interactive
nullification zone, as this is where next to hardly any energy/tonne
can keep that interactive status quo until it's time to return home for
their banked bone marrow injections.
The ME-L1 station-keeping zone should be relatively safe enough of and
external environment (averaging an extra 5 mr/day up to 5 rem/day as
secondary/recoil radiation derived off the solar impacted moon) for
more than a year at a time unless the sun gets seriously nasty along
with whatever pico-flak/m3 within those 1200~2400 km/s winds, in which
case advanced warnings should permit the option of returning home which
should not take but 12 hours at averaging 27 km/s by way of using the
moon itself as a near-miss flyby of having first thrusted nearly
directly down towards the moon and plan-A being thrust diverted just
enough off to the lunar horizon of this spaceplane becoming less than
10 km off the deck should make for the gravity assisted phase of going
extremely fast a rather simple and energy efficient task (not to
mention quite a second by second thrill), as otherwise the Spaceplane
could simply ion thrust itself out of the comfort zone of ME-L1 in
order to temporarily relocate to the solar backside of the moon for a
little timely safe keeping until the worse of the solar flak plus
primary and secondary worth of TBI threat gets past. Then maneuvering
itself back into the relatively safe and sane Earth-side pocket, as
well as being the most energy efficient zone, as this mode of
station-keeping within the ME-L1 sweet-spot should do quite nicely
untill it's time to return to Earth.
Since some of the lunar terrain could be worth 8 km, permitting their
speed-run of cruising this extremely large spaceplane twice past the
lunar surface at perhaps 10 km off the nasty deck might get a little
testy, but that's where computers and TOP-GUN piloting along with those
powerful Radon(Rn222) ion thrusters and full usage of the onboard
multi-hundred MJ energy resources gets to accomplish their thing.
Either that or having a few spare SBRs just in case.
I'll have to believe that I'm not entirely sure that most folks even
remotely appreciate the truly horrific importance and primo relevance
of the mutual gravity-well/nullification zone that's always situated
between Earth and our moon, supposedly at roughly 84% the distance
towards the moon or 16% the distance towards Earth (+/- solar gravity
and just a wee bit of extra influence from Venus every 18 months). Thus
perhaps all of what I'm suggesting is simply going way over thy head
and clean through thy legs. I've attempted many a time as to getting
such a topic regarding this ME-L1/EM-L2 sweet-spot into this Usenet and
many other forums, with essentially a zero return factor, other than my
having to take MOS mainstream status quo flak. So, I guess this is
another taboo/nondisclosure and/or need-to-know facet that's lethally
enforced by those MI6/NSA (aka Skull and Bones) MEN-in-BLACK.
I might as well add that the likes of Einstein was nearly always being
ludicrous about something, and if he wasn't so well backed by the
almighty might and supreme power of the Jewish religion (I believe he
even had the Pope on his side of that BIG-BANG theory, of which he
never actually endorsed), plus a few extremely wealthy and thus
powerful Jewish banks, Einstein probably wouldn't have amounted to
squat. What if Einstein was a Muslim; as then what?
~
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree; WAR is WAR, thus "in war there are
no rules" - In fact, war has been the very reason of having to deal
with the likes of others that haven't been playing by whatever rules,
such as GW Bush.
Brad Guth
perfectly viable alternative way to the nearby stars that's reasonably
doable within our lifetimes, at least robotically speaking, by way of
using an initial inventory of sub-frozen Radon(Rn222) plus having an
onboard Radium-->Radon breeder reactor -->ion thrusters.
Folks like "tomcat" certainly have great CNT Spaceplane ideas and good
intentions. However, I'm not some village idiot suggesting that I'm
some all-knowing wizard, or that all forms of conventional SBRs and
slush liquid whatever worth of rocket fuels and of their complex as
well as massive engines along with all of the testy and not to mention
well documented lethal consequences should be abandoned. I'm just
imposing my limited exposure as to what others have had to say about
using Radon(Rn222) for what it is, whereas putting 2 and 2 together is
somewhat like my observationology of connecting those 8-bit and 36-look
per pixel dots into suggesting upon their representing a whole lot more
artificial patterns than not.
A Single Stage Reusable Ballistic Space Shuttle Concept, by Dietrich E
Koelle;
The conventional methods are by the numbers doable, though somewhat
energy inefficient, not all that reusable and, birth to grave highly
polluting for the humanity that's sequestered upon this already badly
polluted and thus global-warming and ocean-rising planet that's running
itself out of affordable fossil fuel alternatives faster than either of
us can shake a fist full of flaming sticks at.
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beta_a_single_stage_reusable_ballistic_space_shuttle_concept.shtml
There are also numbers associated as to what Radon energy can
contribute as much as 6.28e9 joules/g.
Taking 50% conversion efficiency into account; ion thrust = 3.14e9 per
gram of Radon usage per second.
Adding in the plasma energy influx of a few megajoules seems to suggest
upon creating an ion thrust velocity that's only going to become worth
a whole lot greater than 3.14e9 joules/gram/second.
Supposedly the likes of Xenon-->ion thrust is being accomplished at
165e-3/4.5e3 = 36.666e-6 N/J
If my initial SWAG(scientific wild ass guess) on Radon(Rn222)-->ion
thrust is 1e6 fold better = 36.666e-6 * 1e6 = 37 N/J
Without calculating for the added ion mass of Rn222 ions as opposed to
those wossy Xe ions, it's looking like 37 newton/joule isn't all that
unlikely. That's certainly an impressive 3.773 Kgf per applied joule.
Radon is already in a high state of flux, having a half life of roughly
92 hours means that it's already in motion and simply waiting somewhat
briefly around for a little incentive in the right direction before it
turns itself into lead, perhaps in the form of hefty ions leaving the
thruster at a thousand fold greater velocity than of those relatively
passive Xe ions.
There's certainly no shortage of Radon(Rn222) upon Earth. It's oozing
out of just about everything that's decaying, including as a nasty
byproduct of most forms extracting and consuming fossil fuel and most
certainly from that of our utilizing unclear energy.
Obtaining a substantial on-demand inventory of either sub-frozen and/or
highly pressurized Radon isn't one of those insurmountable nor
otherwise horrific energy consuming problems. Storing Radon as a
sub-frozen liquid phase isn't the least bit complex nor unsafe. Radon
is one of those use-it or lose-it resources that for the most part
we've been ignoring and thus wasting.
http://www.chemicalelements.com/elements/rn.html
Name: Radon
Symbol: Rn
Atomic Number: 86
Atomic Mass: (222.0) amu
Melting Point: -71.0 °C (202.15 K, -95.8 °F)
Boiling Point: -61.8 °C (211.35 K, -79.24 °F)
Number of Protons/Electrons: 86
Number of Neutrons: 136
Classification: Noble Gas
Crystal Structure: Cubic
? Density @ 293 K: 9.73 g/cm3 (? = 9.73 t/m3)
Color: colorless
Density/kg m3: n.a. [solid]; 4400 [liquid at boiling point]; 9.73 [gas,
273 K]
Radon(Rn222) liquid/gas density ratio of 4400/9.73 = 452:1
http://www.atral.com/ElementsRadon1.html
Ionization enthalpies
1st: 1037
2nd: 1930
3rd: 2890
4th: 4250
5th: 5310
According to this link and most any other you'd like to review:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:IaOK3EGLZ64J:www.crcpd.org/Radon/Reno/10-29-02_0835_Burkhardt.ppt+polonium-214&hl=en
Radon(Rn222) changes into polonium-218. Polonium-218 is the first of
four relatively short-lived "radon decay products". Polonium-218
turns into lead-214. Lead-214, in turn, becomes bismuth-214.
Bismuth-214 then becomes polonium-214. When polonium-218 becomes
polonium-214, "bang", there goes another alpha particle.
Thus without having introduced external electron excitement as to
taking advantage by way of creating a highly directed and accelerated
plasma flow of ions from all that's transpiring naturally, it seems
that freshly made Radon is prime energy, that in most cases is just
going to waste somewhat like so much natural gas being burned off at a
given oil wellhead or refinery that has no other viable alternative for
dealing with all of the surplus natural gas, which btw is highly
radioactive (including loads of Radon). In either case, what a pathetic
unconscionable waste of natural energy resources.
The 452:1 increase in Radon density as a fluid phase as opposed to a
gas phase seems like another nifty win-win for packing a great deal of
such energy into a relatively small space, thus leaving whatever
Spaceplane/shuttle with volumes of interior available for the crew,
hundreds of passengers and perhaps 100+tonnes of cargo/payload to boot.
I'm certain that my SWAG worth of info isn't the last word nor is my
dyslexic math of any importance. What's important is that we're
underestimating the worth of Radon by a very large extent. Possibly a
Radium-->Radon breeder reactor can become the onboard solution as to
creating a continuous supply of Radon on the fly, thus once
sufficiently beyond the gravity influence of mother Earth there's no
limits as per at least robotically going where no robot has gone
before. There's not much sense sending actual humans along for the ride
because, we simply can't possibly live long enough to matter
(especially with the likes of GW Bush in office), not to mention making
each and every interplanetary and especially inter stellar exploration
effort at least a thousand fold more costly and perhaps a million fold
more complex while also cutting the potential mission velocity by a
good 10:1 if not 100:1. At most visiting Mars and Venus via human
expeditions is about as dumb and dumber than we mere humans ever need
to understand about such other worlds. Although, if having to pick
between Mars and Venus, there's no contest as to which of those two
worlds I'd select.
Brad Guth
now the MI6/NSA spooks (E-men in black) are into more than merely
delivering their usual gauntlet of spermware, whereas it has gotten
into bringing their disinformation-R-us usenet throughput down it it's
knees, so that it takes forever to navigate about and post whatever.
Due to all of the ongoing MI6/NSA spermware attacks and my having a few
better words to offer; here's the replacement/update as to what I'd
just posted on behalf of tomcat's "How Rockets Differ From Jets".
>tomcat; I just wish they would ask 'real' questions regarding the
>engineering/construction of a spaceplane, not jeer, leer, and carry on.
Unfortunately, that isn't going to happen any time soon, at least not
until pigs fly, hell freezes over and a few of them NASA/Apollo cows
come home. Thus it's up to the few and far between folks like us to
accomplish as much as possible in spite of all their topic/author
stalking, bashing and/or banishment (not to mention our having to
recover from all of their GOOGLE/NOVA sponsored PC terminating
spermware attacks).
>To me a gigantic gleaming white spaceplane would be a sight to behold.
>With 11 SSME's generating 5.5 million pounds of thrust and a cargo hold
>filled with 200,000 pounds of satellites, lunar modules and the like.
At less than half the combined inert mass and being of everything
that's going to become new and improved as per your CNT/basalt
composite spaceplane, in which case just three (not eleven) of those
SSMEs is good enough for the next generation of do-everything
spaceplanes. Remember as to the vast consumption rate of even the three
SSMEs is still rather impressive, thus an extremely large although
fully composite ET may have to go into orbiting the likes of Venus on
behalf of getting our folks headed back toward Earth, although assuming
our having the U238-->Ra226-->Rn222 breeder reactor onboard for
providing lots of spare energy and thus a sufficient long-term supply
of LRn to ionize, thereby accomplishing CO2-->CO/O2 while on the fly
seems perfectly doable as a viable method of filling up the onboard
tanks with CO and O2 and possibly even obtaining a little H2 as
extracted and processed into LH2 from out of those thick clouds before
entirely exiting the Venus atmosphere, which BTW according to team KECK
and of others before having already established the presents of a
perfectly good layer of O2 existing just above them cool nighttime
clouds.
Remember that any such viable composite spaceplane having to venture
itself below them relatively cool nighttime clouds of Venus is going to
have a rather tough time of opposing that much buoyancy, thus damn
little applied energy should get the craft safely through those fast
moving thick clouds and into a safe and energy efficient rigid-airship
mode of cruising along via LRn222-->ion thrust at roughly 25 km off the
geothermally hot and nasty deck, thereby saving the SSMEs and of their
liquid/slush fuel & oxidiser for accomplishing the exit phase and
establishing their essential return home flight path that's going to
need all of the SSME and LRn-->ION thrust you've got to spare.
Here's a wee bit more of my usual dyslexic/Klingon encrypted thoughts
as to our efforts having to continually oppose and/or recover from all
of the mainstream of "jeering, leering, and carrying on", with our best
efforts of returning the favor with just as much warm and fuzzy love as
we can muster.
Venus Express, Lunar Space Elevator and anything of CNT/basalt
composite spaceplanes get nothing but usenet flak and spermware.
Members of this usenet which claim to NOT understand and/or appreciate
as to what the few of us non-mainstreamers are sharing about the most
likely truth(s), as to what these two extremely nearby orbs of our moon
and that of Venus have to offer, are only doing such because of their
inbred arrogance, hatreds and intellectual as well as biological
bigotry that's within the very DNA/RNA of their soul that's keeping the
disinformation-R-us walls up and thereby the rest of us and the vast
bulk of humanity as far away from the rest of the truth as possible by
way of using conditional laws of physics, soft-science and as much
hocus pocus of evidence exclusions that would make the likes of OJ
Simpson extremely envious.
There's nothing that's all that technically misunderstandable about the
Lunar Space Elevator and of it's eventual 1.28 km diameter of a Counter
Mass and 1e9 m3 of International Space Station within. The LSE-CM/ISS
and of it's tethers to/from the moon as well as for the tether dipole
element that's headed directly towards Earth, for reaching to within
50,000 km of mother Earth (25,000 km if you'd dare), that is nothing
but the utmost win-win for moon/Earth sciences as well as for extreme
astronomy and the all around salvation on behalf of the environment of
Earth, and thereby on behalf of the sequestered humanity upon planet
Earth. Of what's not understandable is so much more than the following
list of interesting sub-topics that are seemingly taboo/nondisclosure;
What's the average and interactive range of the mutual nullification
point?
What's the final impact velocity of deploying an item away from the
ME-L1 zone?
What's the profile of the daytime lunar atmosphere being mostly of
radon, argon and sodium?
What's the profile of the nighttime lunar atmosphere being mostly of
radon, argon and sodium?
What's the average daytime surface TBI dosage and spectrum profile of
secondary/recoil photons?
What's the average nighttime surface TBI dosage and spectrum profile of
secondary/recoil photons?
What's a typical day (per 24 hours) of receiving micro whatever impacts
per square meter?
How much of the solar wind is getting deflected/moderated by the
14,000+km lunar atmosphere?
What's the depth and surface tension of a composite dust of meteorites
and impact related shards?
What's available in the way of hallow rilles and/or of potentially
accessible geode pockets?
Why is there so little honestly known about our once upon a time icy
proto-moon?
Why are the CEV teams having to reinvent their fly-by-rocket
moon-lander wheel?
What are all the usenet MI6/NSA moles and spooks so afraid of?
Why is topic/author stalking, bashing and/or banishment along with
delivering spermware their status quo?
There's certainly another worthy list of related sub-topics as to the
observationology and honestly deductive 2+2 worth of humanly subjective
reasoning, as to what simply looks far more artificial than not about
Venus, meaning that Venus locals or ETs must have been there (could
even still be there) as having accomplished a great deal upon Venus
right under the very best of our extremely brown noses. Of course, it's
fairly hard to appreciate what's so nearby and so easily obtainable as
compared to our moon or even Mars, and so much harder yet when most of
our best talents and resources have gone into a mutually perpetrated
fiasco of cold-wars that has sucked most of the life out of humanity
and that of our global energy resources taken nearly bone dry, badly
polluting our environment in the process of creating our very own
artificially induced global-warming thermal imbalance via albedo
reduction. We seem only further diverted and at the ongoing demise of
accomplishing so much collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, so
much so that it's truly amazing we can even devote another honest
dollar and much less talent to anything other than surviving our own
terrestrial doings.
Those of us like "tomcat" and myself suggesting upon improvements
and/or replacements of using composite SRBs, a composite ET as well as
per creating most of the entire shuttle/spaceplane, that even though
being of larger volume and of better capability in more ways than our
existing fleet of two antique shuttles, whereas their replacement as
becoming a combined SRBs, ET and spaceplane composite package should
have half the dry inert mass, while at the same time manage larger and
essentially better than twice the payload tonnage that's capable of
getting such payloads safely deployed to 400+km is seemingly every bit
as topic/author bad off as per discussing the viable relocation of ISS,
or even that of the Radium(Ra226)-->LRn222-->ion thrusters that could
only improve upon the way such things are accomplished. Whereas instead
of receiving positive influx of similar and/or better notions, thus
better math as associated with the available hard-science that's usable
as is, instead all that's coming along this usenet path of
self-destruction and demise upon humanity is more of the same old
mainstream flak and PC terminating spermware, that which usenet servers
like GOOGLE/NOVA have known about and certainly know of exactly where
such spermware code is originating and in most cases they'd know
specifically by whom because, server computers are not nearly as dumb
and dumber than those encharge which continually claim to know all
there is to know, yet somehow can't find it in their black-hearts to
share and share alike.
Brad Guth
anything regarding "jets" but otherwise for all of the other nifty
contributions by "tomcat" and myself, such as this latest blast of
ongoing topic info;
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.shuttle/browse_frm/thread/368ff2e3b379f686/cf03bae1d059c3d8?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=3&hl=en#cf03bae1d059c3d8
>tomcat; It may have something to do with 'X amount of energy
>requirement for a 200 mile high orbit'. Wings or not you have
>to have 'X amount of energy', they say.
"They say" a lot of things. "They say" the mutual
gravity-well/nullification zone between us and the moon is roughly 84%
of the distance towards the moon, and thereby we're talking 16% of the
distance away from the moon. "They say" we've walked upon the moon but,
somehow managed to lose all of their related fly-by-rocket lander R&D
as well as having lost their Kodak conditional laws of photon and film
physics that apparently only applies to our moon.
16% of 384,400 km is 61,504 km away from the center of the moon and
thereby 59,766 km off the gravitational center portion of the lunar
deck that's always nicely aligned with the gravitational center of
mother Earth (actually the Earth CG somewhat moves about as Earth
rotates and the moon doesn't seem to budge so much as a micro-degree
with respect to the whole of Earth, suggesting that the moon in fact
has a slushy core that's somewhat self aligning to the well certified
variable CG alignment of mother Earth.
With regards to spaceplane wings or perhaps that of one massive
aerodynamic foil worth of a waverider spaceplane body, thus affording
far more usable interior than any tile covered wing outfitted body as
suggested by your "huge gleaming white triangular spaceplane";
>Rocket equations take drag into consideration, but not gravity's
>assistance. While vertical/tubular rockets have drag too, it doesn't
>apply to them, because they don't have wings for using atmospheric
>energy.
>This is why it is true that it takes 'X amount of energy' to do a given
>amount of work for whatever vehicle is chosen. And, it explains why a
>'winged rocket' does so much better than a vertical/tubular rocket.
>Wings draw energy from gravity itself through the medium of air
>molecules that are being 'squeezed' to the Earth.
>So, all in all it means that success will come by making one gigantic
>monster of a waverider: tomcat's huge gleaming white triangular
>spaceplane.
I see no problem with your bigger is better. Of course folks like
"George Evans" seem to think small by way of continually thinking
inside the box, as well as having those pesky ulterior motives of
saying one thing while acting upon getting something entirely different
across.
Just wondering a bit; Are you thinking of a 45 degree final atmospheric
assent?
The composites of what basalt fibers and basalt microballoons as having
a degree of CNT involved seems likely of what should eventually become
doable. However, of what I've already provided upon existing basalt is
just the iceberg tip of what that composite alone can achieve as a
structurally insulative material that need not exceed 64 kg/m3 unless
the added mass of using more fibers and less balloons becomes a
priority.
Too bad that what I have to suggest is much like what you have to offer
as a plate full of the first, second and third helping, all of which
should more than have the inert mass of what any SRB assisted
spaceplane and of it's massive ET should amount to. Thus a replacement
shuttle as in the form of your "bigger is better" spaceplane should
have any problem whatsoever achieving those 100t deployments at 400+km,
with energy to spare.
Of course, if my Ra226-->LRn222-->ION thruster arrays become the
alternative to those SSMEs that are worth a 10t investment plus fuel
and the vast volumes necessary for accommodating such fuel per each
fully integrated SSME and, no matters what these SSMEs should still
suck LH2 and LO2 like there's no tomorrow, whereas without SSMEs but
instead LRn-->ION thrusters might represent payloads that can become
half again or roughly 50/50 of the spaceplane package. Meaning a 150t
spaceplane that's still having to be SRB assisted (possibly two-stage
SRBs) past 250,000'(76 km) could thus manage to safely deploy a 150t
item or that of multiple items that amount to 150t past the 400 km
mark.
Unfortunately the ulterior motivated likes of "George Evans" being
rather mindset upon carbon fibers that are extremely frail and spendy
as all get out compared to basalt fibers, whereas as far as I know of
there are no such things as carbon microballoons, nor for that matter a
CNT microballoon. There are however terrific insulative and combined
structural capability per cm3 of basalt, along with those existing
graphite epoxy as binders is still the overall king of the hill that's
not one cent on the dollar per carbon fibers and, perhaps not .001 cent
on the CNT dollar that's still another good decade down the winding R&D
road.
>George Evans; Here again, the extreme thermal conductivity of CNT is a
>drawback. Everybody mocks the TPS tiles on the shuttle but they really
>are amazing. If they are banded to a CNT/graphite epoxy composite
>structure, those fillers you are concerned about probably wouldn't be
>necessary.
George is another all or nothing sort of guy by way of his thinking
100% CNT or bust. Whats' so hard about thinking a little outside the
box, such as incorporating the CNT fibers as a fabric layer or perhaps
that of a wise matrix of CNT/basalt fibers representing the outer
structural composite layer that's containing the bulk of basalt
microballoons?
In inner most hull layer and certainly the likes of stringers, ribs,
decks and bulkheads could be 100% structural basalt composite that
could range anywhere from 32 kg/m3 to 2560 kg/m3. Purely insulative
basalt microballoons might easily represent less than 1 kg/m3 if those
little basalt suckers are full of H2 or even He. Christ almighty folks,
what more can you or the likes of lord/wizard "George Evans" possibly
ask for that has been doable for the past several decades?
I'd actually think that a little extra thermal conductivity for what's
directly below the Corelle/ceramic tiles or whatever spray-on ceramic
microballoon coating would be highly desirable, as possibly performing
a similar thermal rate of expansion by which this CNT/basalt outer
shell could best match the rate of ceramic expansion. I do agree with
"George Evans" that tile fillers need not be incorporated unless no
other thermal expansion alternative becomes available. I seems
over-lapping (double wedged) tiles might prove somewhat interesting.
BTW; I'm not exactly sure how LH2 and slush LH2 differ in energy
density by all that much. In either case, a terribly insulative
containment of the likes of LH2 (slush or not) and the same goes for
LO2 could each be accommodated by way of using a composite of basalt
fibers and those highly insulative balloons along with the graphite
epoxy binders if not in some cases just utilizing good old end-user
friendly JB-WELD. A metallic internal coating via plasma spray could
make for quite another weight saving improvement. In fact, there could
be two or three viable containment layers of plasma applied metallic
coatings at less weight impact than a conventional tank that's
composite wrapped.
Brad Guth
no-fly-list, as up against their high standards and apparently
need-to-know accountability continues in spite of their "so what's the
difference" facts upon whatever's supposedly better than hard-science
and the regular laws of physics that isn't on the side of their
MI6/NSA~CIA NASA/Apollo and DoD ruse/sting of the century. My goodness,
that's a lot of rotten eggs to deal with.
Unfortunately, because I've been sufficiently right about our cloak and
dagger NASA and of their perpetrated MI6/NSA~CIA as cloaked by the
likes of Apollo on behalf of MOS cold-war crapolla, and that I'm also
sufficiently right about our once upon a time icy proto-moon, as well
as I've certainly been correct as to my subjective interpretations with
regard to other life(locals or ETs) as having existed upon Venus, and
as such lo and behold in spite of being on their taboo/nondisclosure
sort of do-not-fly list and otherwise the usual need-to-know basis,
apparently I'm getting myself just as right about Ra-->LRn-->Rn-->ion
thrusters. Whereas such my PC has been and is currently under a good
deal of Usenet attack via the ongoing gauntlet of their
spermware/malware as having been knowingly accommodated by the Usenet
servers of whatever's GOOGLE/NOVA, and otherwise as contributed from
their freelance warm and fuzzy (mostly pro-Jewish and thus anti-Muslim)
MI6/NSA spooks and brown-nosed Skull and Bones cult. Therefore it's
been taking myself a bit longer to accomplish just about anything.
You don't suppose they'd be making such an all out effort as to
infecting my PC and otherwise keeping their orchestrated collective of
members into topic/author stalking, bashing and/or applying banishment
for no other good reasons, do you?
Asking and/or suggesting upon anything that's related to our moon, as
even with honest regard to better understanding the mutual gravity-well
is outside the box and not to be contributed to because?????
Same goes for topics upon anything related to the lunar atmosphere, of
those nifty fly-by-rocket landers that no longer have any of their
original R&D, just the same applies as to questions and notions
pertaining to the lunar space elevator or God forbid Venus and the
likes of the Sirius solar system are about as taboo/nondisclosure
and/or as need-to-know as it gets.
Brad Guth
touted about Venus have to say, especially those having our NASA stamp
of approval, there is actually a great deal of potential for other life
upon Venus that's of a whole lot more substantial life than atmospheric
microbes. Even though there's little argument as to Venus being
geologically alive and kicking out more heat than is contributed by the
solar influx, there's actually no technical limits as to ET life taking
advantage of such a good thing and, oddly there's been every
conceivable reason(motive), infomercial opportunity and certainly ample
means within the good NASA/Apollo book and of their 'so what's the
difference' policy by which our government would badly want to foil
private alternatives worth of observationology that's backed up with
the likes of hard-science and the regular laws of physics that's
related to Venus, or especially that of our moon. Of course the
communities of individual science, physics and of astronomy types have
been well known to eat their own kind in order to keep whatever
information and/or whomever sequestered away from getting a gram worth
of support, whereas usually the person(s) involved with the real
research and discoveries has to be dead and gone before the truth gets
applied in the fine print that burried in some obscure journals that
are unlikely to get discovered for decades to come.
Typical sites that have been 100% focused upon the purely natural
geology and thus purely natural atmospherics of Venus are nearly
identical to this one;
http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nineplanets/nineplanets/venus.html
Having no topic nor offering any hint of anything that's the least bit
artificial with regard to what Venus has to offer. It's as though
arizona.edu is anti-ET and thus anti-God, while otherwise being 100+%
pro resident warlord suits their 'high standards and accountability'.
It's that simple, and it's especially true for Americans that would
just as soon start each and every day off with another good lie, and if
possible end each day with having further damaged the environment as
well as improved the prospects of WWIII. The likes of topic/author
stalking by "Art Deco" is rather brown-nose typical of those having no
intentions of their contributing any worth of discussion that's
on-topic, thus proving that I'm entirely right as to their skewed
motives and ulterior agendas, of which isn't just applied against
myself but against any outsider that's pushing those 'do not push'
mainstream buttons. Check out their usenet record on such individuals
and you'll see that I'm right.
Most of yesterday my PC had been spermware free, meaning that I can
keep sharing my point of view without having my mouse going postal,
and/or having my PC auto-resetting and thus essentially shutting itself
down for no apparent reason other than for following the
spermware/malware code. Funny how MI6/NSA~CIA spooks can mange to
accomplish such back-door/side-door malware with the full knowledge and
expertise of Microsoft and of GOOGLE/NOVA servers being at their
disposal. Though often affecting my usenet pathways are what's getting
moderated and thus much of my internet access is slowed to a crawl if
not dead as a door nail, to the point where nothing works.
However, usenet damage-control has recently switched their
damage-control tactics by yet another alternative method of going into
full nondisclosure/taboo failsafe mode in order to defend against my
lose cannonballs. This being accomplished by way of over-filling their
infomercial usenet groups from the top down with MOS mainstream
crapolla, of random topics that are nearly meaningless to all but
extremely select individuals or nitch groups that seem to have little
if any intentions of their contributing by way of sharing whatever's
not already public knowledge. This method of jamming their usenet
medium is also called roboposting, whereas it may even includes
roboreplies designed for accommodating a borg-like keeping of these
random generated topics on top of their usenet pile, thus only
sufficiently smart folks might know enough to otherwise search for
topic specifics, or by author and/or way of taking a good look-see a
bit further than what's displayed on the first of these usenet topic
index pages.
This well proven method diversion of news/media via overload with
whatever isn't hardly worth mainstream publishing is simply another
cloak and dagger method these disinformation and damage-control moles
and spooks have at their disposal, as for flooding their own
MI6/NSA~CIA usenet with whatever odd topics that can cause the most
top-fill worth of news info, thus creating media distractions away from
much of the good stuff getting posted by a supposed village idiot
person(VIP).
Therefore, we outsiders(VIPs) get see MOS unimportant topics as having
been piled high upon the MI6/NSA~CIA usenet that's serviced by the
likes of GOOGLE/NOVA, orchestrated into doing a really good job of
avoiding our moon and Venus like there's no tomorrow. In fact, you
can't even discover anything related to the Sirius solar system, of
Oort zone icy proto-moons like ours, about other potential life upon
Venus that's obviously used to being a bit toasty warm but not
insurmountably so.
Interplanetary communications is still off-limits and/or remaining as
taboo~nondisclosure.
Topics pertaining to interstellar communications is even worse off than
interplanetary.
Raw ice surviving in space is still the sort of 'missing in action'
hard-science that's need-to-know because, there's still nothing of ice
hard-science published otherwise.
Secondary/recoil photons as contributed from our reactive moon as
visible colors and of invisible radiation is still bucking the usual
conditional-science that's basically need-to-know and/or of as much
evidence exclusion as it takes to comply with our NASA/Apollo ruse.
Of anything related to the ongoing R&D of creating proof-testing
prototype fly-by-rocket landers is ultra top-secret. They can't even
show us a scaled demonstration of any drop and down-range soft landing
in the parking lot. (must have something to do with those extremely
powerful gyros that seem to have been excluded from any of their
engineering drawings or even discussion topics that I can uncover).
There's still no interactive hard-science feedback from our own moon,
only extremely remote obtained data and of satellite obtained images,
otherwise terrestrial sensing that's not even being entirely honest at
that. Even team KECK as been officially sequestered away from offering
anything related to our moon (amazing what these 'E-men in black' can
accomplish once they have a firm grip on your private parts).
Kodak film physics is still every bit as skewed as ever. Apparently
only the conditional laws of physics pertains to such Kodak moments as
having been obtained upon the surface of our moon that seems to have a
very Xenon illumination lamp spectrum to work with instead of a raw
(unfiltered) solar influx.
Our very best CCDs as onboard MESSENGER absolutely suck at their being
the worse possible camera and optical performance, that which most
cellphone cameras would have accomplished a better job. How can such a
spendy mission have such a pathetic 6-bit limited dynamic range that's
at the very bottom realm of a 12,500:1 DR CCD, especially when a free
cellphone camera would have recorded Earth along with our dark moon,
other planets and even a few stars in addition to accomplishing the
near fly-by images of Earth as offered by team MESSENGER ?????
MESSENGER SUCKS, Venus rocks, the moon is still dark and nasty
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sci.planetary/browse_frm/thread/1f2ba57f6141a6b0/9f4244ed3a77af9f?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=1&hl=en#9f4244ed3a77af9f
Brad Guth
Check it out folks, and see for yourself as to all of the new and
improved usenet topic jamming. Topic roboposting running amuck and,
there's no apparent end in sight.
If I post something new or otherwise contribute and/or update anything,
suddenly there's dozens of those damage-control crapolla topics dumped
into usenet.
Brad Guth
been hours upon hours ago and it still isn't showing up as planned
within "sci.space.policy, sci.space.history, sci.physics, sci.astro,
alt.news-media". It must have been something that I'd said that's
rocking yet another mainstream status quo boat. Perhaps this is another
one of those taboo/nondisclosure buttons that I'm not supposed to be
pushing by way of firing off my lose cannons.
topic: Brad Guth feeds the brown-nosed incest cloned clowns of usenet
Since wizards/perverts (aka MI6/NSA~CIA spooks) "Bookman" and "Art
Deco" have intentionally bashed and having diverted my topic of: What's
actually HOT and NASTY about Venus?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/77e25d90e807f3de/ff4ebc88a0e7ac57#ff4ebc88a0e7ac57
as into their mutually brown-nosed cesspool of disinformation clubs of
"alt.fan.art-bell, alt.usenet.kooks", as for that reason alone I'll
have to repost a few of my most interesting contributions so that the
original groups of "sci.space.policy, sci.space.history, sci.physics,
sci.astro, alt.news-media" can fully appreciate all my efforts in
sharing as well as per returning the favor.
>Bookman;
>I notice that you keep snipping away those facts, Guthball. You know,
>the pictures, moonrocks, films and transmissions from the face of the
>moon, as well as the testimony of the men who walked on the moon.
Hmmmm, that's hardly sharing of news we can use.
Would you like to explain the Xenon lamp illumination of color spectrum
that's clearly the case of those Apollo/EVA unfiltered Kodak moments?
I've already given way more than the proof-positive that you're so gosh
darn stupid to realize squat when you're stepping in your own.
Therefore, how can you and of all your incest of disinformation
possibly understand squat about photons and film?
>OK, here you go: Due to the inverse square law of radiation, Venus is
>radically hotter than Earth is. And an atmosphere that is much hotter
>and denser than Earth's, and very much higher in CO2 isn't conducive
>to life as we know it.
I 100% agree, and always have.
>Oh, that's rich, Guthball - you're calling on SpongeBob Squarepants to
>support your "position"? LOLOLOL!!!
No sir fool on the hill, I'm just sharing that "SpongeBob Squarepants"
is a whole lot smarter then yourself, and has remorse to boot.
>Earth to Guthboi: Kodak doesn't claim that "Apollo didn't happen" the
>way that you k'lame it. That's because the photographic experts at
>Kodak know that the photographs taken on the moon are real. HTH.
Please quote whatever, as in share and share alike because, others and
I've looked for and still can't manage to identify any such official
Kodak coporate support whatsoever.
>I represent the scientific facts of the lunar landings, Borgboi.
Then you represent another dripping butt load of soft-science that's
remote obtained at best, and otherwise you represent conditional laws
of physics that's so gosh darn brown-nosed that it can't breath.
>Why does the truth about men walking on the moon "rock your boat",
>Guthball?
It can't be accomplished (not even robotically) with the available
technology of today, much less of the mid/late 60's. Micro/small
satellites of as little as a kg could and perhaps should have been
deployed to the lunar surface as of a couple of decades ago, but as of
today we can't even manage that much. It doesn't require a very big
fly-by-rocket effort for getting a few kg worth of a few such small
satellites into extremely low lunar orbits that'll at best soon decay
into somewhat hard-landings.
Brad Guth;
- - - - - - If you're not looking for the truth, you will not find it.
"To believe with certainty we must begin with doubting."
-Stanislaus I
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes,
but having new eyes."
- Marcel Proust
"Truth is given, not to be contemplated, but to be done. Life is an
action, not a thought."
-F.W. Robertson
~
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree far beyond; WAR is WAR, thus "in war
there are no rules" - In fact, war has been the very reason of honest
folks having to deal with the likes of others that haven't been playing
by whatever the supposed rules, such as our resident warlord(GW Bush).
Brad Guth
that's been hours upon hours ago and it still isn't showing up as
sci.space.policy, soc.culture.scientists, sci.philosophy.tech". It must
have been something that I'd said that's rocking yet another mainstream
taboo/nondisclosure buttons that I'm not supposed to be pushing by way
of firing off my lose cannons.
topic: Can light haul and thus transfer DNA/RNA code?
Besides my microsatellites topic being a good thing that's so good that
it's getting summarily trashed by the mainstream status quo;
MICROSATELLITES; how small? How cheap?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/cf44a7ab4ce942aa/ff18f3cac76fbd18#ff18f3cac76fbd18
here's a bunch other nifty micro-stuff as food for honest thought:
"Scientists in Germany have used a Ti:sapphire laser to transfer DNA
into a cell. Femtosecond lasers improve the transfer of DNA into cells
and could advance the fields of gene therapy and DNA vaccination,
according to Uday Tirlapur and Karsten König of Friedrich Schiller
University in Jena (U Tirlapur and K König Nature 418 290)."
http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/6/7/14/1
Apparently opening up the DNA barn door so that a DNA/RNA transfers can
most easily transpire as having been accomplished with the aid of
photons. The next logical step could be the actual DNA coding itself
being part of that door opening via photon process. Obviously Diatoms
are to some extent DNA photon encoded and/or evolved as based almost
entirely upon the influx of available photons, whereas without visible
and UV photons there are no populations of such diatoms to being had,
especially of the 250~750 nm photon receptive and thus photon energy
processing if not as though having been photon DNA encoded diatoms.
Interesting topic involving the matrix of what diatoms represent: Space
and Time travel
http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=sciastro&Number=312873&page=15&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=
I sort of like this guy that quotes; "To believe with certainty we must
begin with doubting."
-Stanislaus I
"other galaxies are theorized as once being a part of a spiral, and
that clustered galaxies are the result of galaxy collision or other
unknown phenomenon. The spiral is the galaxy in order."
"look at nature all around you. Your skin is bound together by these
same patterns of force. look at this Diatom frustule. See how it's
matter is bound together at the microscopic level. That is the same
force that binds a spiral galaxy."
"It is the underlying pattern of magnetic force that binds all things
matter. ALL THINGS. Everything that is matter is bound together by
these micro patterns of magnetism. A spiral galaxy is just a very large
version of this same pattern that emerges."
"I see the universe as it is. Small. Very small, and simple. Yet it
reveals it's mysteries in very complex patterns. Simple law yielding
very complex patterns. a lot like E=mc2. A very simple equation, yet it
produces a very complex solution."
Although as "Tex_1224" gets every bit as per usual "uplink.space.com"
bashed out of context to as much death as possible, rather than the
warlords of uplink.space.com subjectively contributing to this honest
topic as a viable string of science, in spite of their flak there's
still a good amout of worthy persistance of considers as having been
honestly contributed by the original topic author: Tex_1224
Obviously this next one qualifies that "Tex_1224" is every bit as
delusional as myself, beyond the point of no return.
"One day, we Humans will overcome our pethetic fueds, and form a sigle
One world Government. At that time, we will join the rest of the
Galaxies civilizations. Time will be no more. We should look to the
center of the Galaxy for life, for its there that it thrives in all
forms."
Too bad that even NASA's uplink.space.com is so into their brown-nosed
intellectual arrogance and bigotry upon that of anything being the
least bit near the outside their all-knowing box of incest cloning,
thus clearly such topic/author honesty is representing a potential
threat to their Skull and Bones agenda, which is why such topics and
their authors are automatically placed upon their chopping block, as
their NASA version of E-Book Burning and/or E-Witch Burning at the
E-Stake of their insider usenet cultism that's little more than
providing a spendy infomercial of creating and farming out MOS
disinformation until them Apollo cows come home.
Just for keeping you folks on your tippy toes, here's some extra news
we can use;
Diatomaceous Earth offers a rather unique combination of physical
properties:
Diatomaceous Earth / PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
http://www.agriorganics.com/products/insect_stop.html
High Porosity: Up to eighty-five percent of the volume of Diatomaceous
Earth is made up of tiny interconnected pores and volds. It is quite
literally more air than diatom.
High Absorption: Diatomaceous Earth can generally absorb up to 1 times,
its own weight in liquid and still exhibit the properties of dry
powder.
Diatoms as an element offers:
Silicon Dioxide SiO2 83.7%
Aluminum Oxide A1203 5.6%
Iron Oxide Fe203 2.3%
Calcium Oxide CaO 0.4%
Magnesium Oxide MgO 0.3%
Other Oxides 1.9%
Ignition Loss at 1000 5.3%
Semi quantitive spectrographic analysis of other elements:
Copper 2ppm
Strontium 100ppm
Titanium 1800ppm
Manganese 200ppm
Sodium 2000ppm
Vanadium 500ppm
Boron 50ppm
Zirconium 200ppm
Diatom mass (typically wet): @2.3 g/cm3
diatom skeletal mass (typically dry/inert): 0.48 g/cm3
Bulk inert/dry diatom mass = 320 to 640 grams per liter
Vacuum dried diatom mass would likely be somewhat less than 256 g/liter
Diatoms typical average size is 5 to 20 microns in diameter
@1e18 inert diatoms/liter = 1e12 diatoms/cm3 = 0.48/1e12 = 0.48e-12
g/skeletal diatom
Diatoms span a range of volumetric sizes, from 5e-3 millimeter(5
microns) up to 5 millimeters (5000 microns), although the vast majority
are of those less than 25 microns in diameter.
By some accounts there's enough diatomaceous diatom sketalital remains
in existance to cover the entire surface of Earth by more than 20
meters. As a biologials instrument of planetary terraforming, diatoms
might represent the very best of an all around adaptive solution.
Greater than 50,000 species have existed upon Earth, with far more than
6,000 as still living and thus populating species at our disposal that
are either bilaterally or radially symmetrical. By some accounts
diatoms are probably vegetable rather than animal. Although, when was
the last time any vegetable took nearly 2000 K to cook.
Boiling point: 2200°C (2473 K)
Melting point: 1710°C (1983 K)
Maximum wet density: 2.3 g/cm3
Diatoms offer most any shape, complexity, color and size. Here are just
a few related web pages.
Dr. Kenneth Sandhage
"diatom reproduction rates can exceed several times per day."
http://www.matsceng.ohio-state.edu/~SANDHAGE/
"At a sustained replication rate of 3/day, 1.07 billion (2e30)
similarly-shaped 3D frustules can be generated from a single parent
diatom in 10 days!"
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/GeolSci/micropal/diatom.html
http://chemistry.jcu.edu/nicholsweb/diatoms/diatoms_web_page.htm
http://chemistry.jcu.edu/nicholsweb/diatoms/labeled_structures.htm
http://www.mbari.org/staff/conn/botany/diatoms/john/basics/repro.htm
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/May05/DNAcount.ws.html
"With a refined technique, they have detected a single DNA molecule,
weighing in at 995,000 Daltons -- a shade more than 1 attogram" = 1e-18
gram, suggesting that typically vacuum dried diatom skeletal remains
are individually at roughly an impressive 500,000 times heavier.
DNA mass/Daltons: Double Stranded DNA/RNA
DNA/dalton atomic mass:
DNA extractable from fingerprints
http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=20030730-040600-4102r
"Although 10 "nanograms" might not sound like much, for DNA analysis,
even 0.1
nanogram is enough"
Obviously at 1 attogram (1e-18 g), the individual DNA/RNA string of
code is getting about as quantum string like close to being photon mass
hauling worthy as it gets. What say a viable DNA/RNA stran of code gets
down to a zeptogram (1e-21 g), as then we're talking of nearly atom to
atom alignments of which laser beams of photons have been accepted as
accomplishing such alignments as viable conduits of spinning atoms
quite nicely.
http://www.nyu.edu/classes/tuckerman/honors.chem/lectures/lecture_2/node6.html
>From this given physics web/lecture page offers that one atom of 12 C
is supposedly worth 1.9926465e-23 g, or 0.019926465 zepogram.
http://www.neutron.anl.gov/hyper-physics/atom.html
This .gov web page has one atomic mass unit (1 AMU=1.6606e-24g) as
1/12th the mass of the C12 isotope, thus 1 AMU = 0.0016606 zepogram.
Why the slight difference of 12C = 0.0199272 as to the previous
0.019926465 zepogram is outside of anything I can share.
http://cnx.rice.edu/content/m12432/latest/
"There are over 18 million known substances in our world."
Sounds pretty much like whatever intelligent design as having been
running amuck.
Brad Guth;
- - - - - - If you're not looking for the truth, you will not find it.
"To believe with certainty we must begin with doubting."
-Stanislaus I
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes,
but having new eyes."
- Marcel Proust
"Truth is given, not to be contemplated, but to be done. Life is an
action, not a thought."
-F.W. Robertson
~
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree far beyond; WAR is WAR, thus "in war
there are no rules" - In fact, war has been the very reason of honest
folks having to deal with the likes of others that haven't been playing
by whatever the supposed rules, such as our resident warlord(GW Bush).
Brad Guth
progress.
As per usual, Art Deco, Bookman and the like are still into acting
and/or reacting exactly like one of those sanctimonious public
prosecutors, that regardless of after the fact of having been given
multiple forms of hard-evidence, such as per DNA and even eye-witnesses
willing to stipulate along with collaborating support that the usually
poor sucker you've gotten set for lethal injection, the electric chair
or just plain old life imprisonment is actually innocent, that no
matters what it's not going to alter their plan of action, other than
for using every available expertise and resource conceivable for
tossing up the usual gauntlets of evidence exclusions and/or banishment
by way of eliminating and/or merely losing as much of whatever evidence
as possible.
I'm not exactly certain but, I'm thinking that's pretty much what sort
of happened to Jesus Christ, and for certain to all of those Cathars as
a result of a certain Pope going postal.
The taking of public information that's eventually having to involve
the connecting of a few dots are what represents the staff of life as
we've come to know it, especially of them nifty pixel dots as offering
us even better facts by which to judge our selves and of our
surroundings, especially by way of those images offering us 36
looks/pixel and of 8-bit radar imaging depth of such image dots are
really quite good at delivering the sorts of hard-science that far
exceeds the performance realms of our human eye and of the usually
bigoted brain attached that generally sees whatever it wants to see,
thus automatically filters out so as to exclude by way of not bothering
to record whatever is in disagreement with your mindset, no matters
what. Fortunately, the radar composite images obtained by the Magellan
mission have been sort of carved in stone, as for being archived for
all to see and to ponder over and over, without their having excluded
anything as based upon politics or religion. At least at the time of
obtaining such images there was no underlying cloak and dagger reasons
as to have artificially modified and/or exclude one damn pixel.
Science is always into connecting dots, as well as for subjectively
interpreting the likes of pixels which are nothing more than somewhat
fancier dots, and of otherwise connecting just about anything else they
can get their dirty little hands on. These folks of pagan cults just
don't seem to like it if any such dot connecting affects their cozy
little wet beds of incest cloning that's only intended for sustaining
their grand ruse/sting of the century, plus creating more of the same
sorts of their assimilated borgs. Hells bells folks, even the bible is
nothing but page after page of theological dot connecting and thus
having created a perfectly good book of deductive reasoning, yet these
same folks that supposedly believe in their God and of thir beible
don't much care to consider dots other than their own, especially if
any of those dots might get associated with the likes of ETs,
especially getting more so defensive about the off chance that such ETs
could be smarter than us (actually, I don't foresee how ETs could
possibly be any dumber than us). Thus we've had a few too many world
wars and the continuing cold-wars as having been perpetrated upon
humanity insuring that WW-III is just around the corner, so as to of
lately benefit the upper most 0.1% at the ongoing burden and demise of
the lower 99.9%. Seem fair or is this another 'got cross'?
I'll even accept the status quo dot connecting worth of their arguments
as shared by others that don't have an ulterior motive and as such an
absolute mindset of a butt sucking duty to the likes of our resident
warlord(GW Bush). I guess that pretty much count's the likes of our
warm and fuzzy Usenet lords and wizards Bookman and Art Deco out.
1) besides the rather unusually Xenon lamp spectrum illuminated terrain
that's reacting as oddly 55+% retroreflective though otherwise entirely
nonreactive for as far as their unfiltered Kodak eye could see, there's
absolutely no possible way that such an actual dingy and basalt dark
and nasty moonscape of having such a crystal clear and dark sky along
with a lunar horizon that's under a low angle of solar illumination as
offering zones of less than an albedo of 6 couldn't have managed to
have included a few Kodak moments showing us the likes of Jupiter,
Mars, and most certainly the nearly blinding intensity of Venus. Of
course, since the unfiltered spectrum sensitivity as to whatever's
near-blue, near UV and of UV-a being namely contributed by the horrific
intensity of the Sirius star/solar system is simply way too obvious as
for being that each of 6 times out of 6 EVAs, as per somehow every
other planet and vibrant star remained entirely out of every frame by
frame field of view, of which those fields of view would have to have
included multiple 360° look-sees upon each and every moon walking EVA.
Especially Venus and then a Sirius star system intensity is not all
that insignificant on a pixel by pixel or rather a upon a film grain by
grain recording basis of being rather easily recorded upon a somewhat
bluish spectrum sensitive film that's far more near-UV and UV-a capable
than the human eye.
The mainstream opposition to all of this is like I've discovered yet
another disinformation generated black hole; by way of including the
words 'sirius and moon' and perhaps 'image', 'photo', 'jpg', 'gif' or
'tif' into any combination thereof, and do remember that the visual
magnitude of Sirius being -1.45 is purely in a relationship to the
human eye that's actually rather insensitive to the mostly near-blue,
more so insensitive of the near-UV or violet spectrum, and being
essentially totally blind as to the rather terrific UV-a worth of what
Sirius actually has to share, of which an unfiltered Kodak moment sees
and records such spectrums just fine and dandy, especially from the
extreme vantage point of being situated upon our moon.
All of the sudden the most intense illuminating and gravity massive
neighboring star system we've got at our disposal is not being imaged
along with the likes of our moon within the same frame. Even though in
places upon Earth it would be nearly impossible to exclude such a
combination. We do have combined moon and planet images, even along
with a few stars to boot, especially those of an earthshine illuminated
moon as sharing rather bright planets within the same frame.
However, I've located at least one composite image example that's worth
a look-see, of Sirius and Moon as obtained by Mark Woodland, aged 16,
using a Skywatcher Explorer 200 with camera support bracket for
eyepiece projection.
http://www.madviewers.org/media/lo.jpg
I'm fairly certain that Mark Woodland isn't working for Osama bin
Laden, or even worse yet as working on behalf of our resident
warlord(GW Bush), thus perhaps this is a sufficiently honest example of
what such an expensive telescope and camera (just kidding folks) as
operated by such a high degree of expertise as having been contributed
by "Mark Woodland" can manage to have accomplished.
The only reason why Sirius is so gosh darn vibrant and blue is because
of the horrific degree of extra UV-a, near-UV and near-blue energy
coming from Sirius star system, of which unfiltered film and certainly
of unfiltered CCDs are extremely sensitive per recording such a bluish
to UV-a spectrum. However, if this same image were being taken from the
surface of the moon, as with having the surrounding dark albedo surface
of the lunar horizon within frame, whereas then Sirius would have
become many fold brighter yet because, there simply would not have been
the extent of photon moderation as otherwise provided by our polluted
and H20 rich atmosphere as also having way more than it's fair share of
N2 affecting those incoming photons.
Jupiter - Moon occultation
Taken by Becky Coretti with Bill Williams, using a 15" Obsession and a
Tom O Compact Platform. A ToUCam was used with a TeleVue 4x Powermate.
For some odd reason this original image file got itself improperly
named as "moon.saturn.jpg", but otherwise having been properly
published and otherwise posted on the web as being that of our moon and
Jupiter.
http://www.equatorialplatforms.com/moon.saturn.jpg
Take notice how Jupiter isn't all that much less of a pixel by pixel
photographic worthy item than is the natural dark brownish composite of
a somewhat nasty carbon/soot, iron and titanium dusted surface that
represents our mostly dark basalt moon, a perfectly natural color by
the way that's actually a whole lot more true to life than having been
obtained by any NASA/Apollo EVA. Thus even the relatively piss poor DR
of their Kodak film shouldn't have had any difficulty with the likes of
recording a fairly dark (5~6% albedo) sunrise illuminated moon's
surface along with the likes of a Jupiter, Mars and most certainly
taking on Venus should have been nearly impossible to have excluded
upon two of those Apollo missions.
Here's a few other images of interest, although if you're not looking
for the truth is the most likely reason why you'll not be seeing
anything that's the least bit unusual, or otherwise learning something
new about our moon that might suggest you've been snookered like most
of the rest of us village idiots.
Lunar Observations with the Boston University Imaging System
http://sirius.bu.edu/planetary/moon.html
The moon is a rather salty place, and of its boiled off sodium
atmosphere is actually rather extensive and even being very comet tail
like to boot. Each month we(Earth) receive another salty composition of
the lunar atmosphere as we pass directly through that extensive sodium
zone of our moon's comet like tail.
Venus, Moon, and Neighbors / Credit & Copyright: Joe Orman
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap000406.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0004/vm_orman_big.jpg
Unfortunately, we still have no interactive hard-science as being
derived from the actual surface of our moon, as well as we have thus
far after four decades and counting having not established hard-science
data as to raw ice surviving in space, nor of salty-ice in space or
even as to CO2 as raw collectives of dry-ice coexisting in space. We
have only mathematical based conjectures along with slight indicators
via remote instruments that'll suggest as to sufficiently massive
bodies or other proto-moon like orbs that seem to include a percentage
of raw ice, with those being large enough to include a gravity
sustained surrounding of whatever atmosphere withstanding the best odds
of their retaining such ice in any bulk. Meanwhile, our 'once upon a
time' icy proto-moon is just sitting there, as so extremely nearby yet
having been ignored to death and yet having more taboo/nondisclosure
issues than our resident warlord(GW Bush) has about Osama bin Laden or
of all those supposed WMD. Even the terrific optics and multiple CCD
imaging capability of the MESSENGER mission managed to exclude frames
of our dark and nasty moon, as well as having excluded all other stars
and planets by way of simply intentionally using their lowest possible
dynamic range(DR) plus involving whatever PhotoShop automatic
exclusions. In other words, Earth is absolutely naked, without moon and
a rather dull planet at that.
-
I seem to have uncovered a few complex problems along the way, whereas
these problems are not because of me, nor is it of any fault caused by
what the vast majority of honest and hard working folks that have been
responsible for their managing to survive in spite of our LLPOF
administration and of those before contributing to this global mess. As
of lately, I'm into the belief that we're up against a highly select
group or cultism that situated within the upper most 0.1% of humanity,
and perhaps at most 0.1% of those represents a nifty club or cult of
merely 6,700 folks that are basically encharge of damn near everything
they've chosen to be encharge of.
It's their borg like "Art Deco" and "Bookman" sorts of social/religious
cops that seems to either be the primary culprits of their own free
will, of their blindly following whatever their MI6/NSA~CIA cultism has
programmed into their sick and perverted mindset, or perhaps it's that
these mainstream borg types are the actual problem to begin with.
Either way, I believe it certainly takes an audience if you're going to
pull off whatever perpetrated cold-war(s) of such a grand ruse/sting
and somehow manage to get away with it.
Since I've been having to take so much of their flak with respect to
whatever I'd interpreted about Venus as being most likely artificial,
thus offering my perceptions as to that hot and nasty orb having been
inhabited at one time or another by either locals or ETs, as such I
felt it was my obligation as to returning the warm and fuzzy favor of
sharing as much of the very same flak as based upon the same third
degree of topic bashing, with every bit as much love and affection as I
could muster on behalf of my reviewing those NASA/Apollo EVA and Kodak
moment obtained images that quite frankly sucked every bit as bad off
as have all of those images of their WMD.
Other than our NASA having the means, opportunity and more motives than
you and I can shake a fist full of flaming sticks at, there's also the
hard-science and regular laws of physics along with those well
established Kodak physics of photons as having supposedly been recorded
as unfiltered Kodak moments that so oddly offered us such a very Xenon
lamp spectrum illuminated environment of what simply does not look
anything like our dark and nasty moon, of a reactive surface that's
covered from head to toe with a cosmic morgue worth of a whole lot more
than everything under the sun, especially as having been recorded upon
such film that was highly sensitive to any near-blue, near-UV and even
a portion of the UV-a spectrum which had to have the raw lunar
environment under extremely intense illumination.
Either way we have a real problem that's gotten itself way out of hand,
to the point of their evidence exclusions, soft-science and all of
those skewed conditional laws of physics keeping the truth as hidden
and/or as misunderstood as possible. Thus keeping our moon and Sirius
as well as for the likes of Venus off-limits or at best on a need to
know basis.
Because it's true, I'll keep saying it again and again; - there's has
been other significant life on Venus that's not limited to microbes or
merely other local forms of life, and that our moon is actually an
extremely nasty place to be anywhere near that nearly naked and thus
reactive sucker (especially by day), and there's a wee bit of an
interesting connection to our mother solar system of what Sirius solar
system represents. At least all of the hard-science and of the regular
laws of physics are on my side of there arguments, just as being on
behalf of my observationology as to having interpreted what looks so
gosh darn artificial and thus interesting about Venus.
Of course, interpreting from a radar image that's only got 36 looks per
monochromatic 8-bit pixel supposedly isn't nearly as good as any one
look per pixel optical CCD look-see of whatever's on Mars that's
supposedly been worth all of those billions upon billions worth of our
attention of essentially telling us what we pretty much already knew
was the case of Mars being for the most part extremely sub-frozen,
quite badly TBI to death and otherwise easily pulverised by whatever is
coming along. Yet they're not even focused upon some of the most
interesting zone, one of which includes the motherload of a
geothermally dead but otherwise extremely massive volcano.
-
"If you're not looking for the truth, you will not find it."
-Brad Guth
"To believe with certainty we must begin with doubting."
-Stanislaus I
"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes,
but having new eyes."
-Marcel Proust
"Truth is given, not to be contemplated, but to be done. Life is an
action, not a thought."
-F.W. Robertson
~
Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree far beyond; WAR is WAR, thus "in war
there are no rules" - In fact, war has been the very reason of honest
folks having to deal with the likes of others that haven't been playing
by whatever the supposed rules, such as our resident warlord(GW Bush).
Brad Guth
nondisclosure or need-to-know.
MICROSATELLITES; how small? How cheap?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/cf44a7ab4ce942aa/52d461ba752980b8?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=2&hl=en#52d461ba752980b8
This topic has been basically asking along the same line of questions
as per another topic of "Smallest orbital launch vehicle".
Unfortunately, because I'm sufficiently right about our moon and about
Venus is why it has become another matter of my having to survive the
usual gauntlet of Usenet (aka MI6/NSA~CIA) stalking and bashings, thus
my PC gets more than it's fair share of MI6/NSA~CIA malware/fuckware,
plus each of my topics gets summarily nailed by whatever their
mainstream cultism collective of brown-nosed spookology thinks is best.
It seems that just about anything that I can think of is going to
become topic taboo. Anything from establishing terrestrial footprints
of 25 kw/m2 that's capable of providing green/renewable energy for
making us H2O2 and LH2 to burn, and even for the mere thought of an
honest consideration of using a Von Neumann machine which apparently
can't ever become associated with our moon, nor on behalf of ever
establishing anything within the LL1/ME-L1 zone. Hells bells, I could
claim having Osama bin Laden living and sleeping within my house and no
one would give a tinkers damn, other than to bash at every possible
opportunity. God and the likes of Jesus Christ is another tough nut to
crack, as these absolute fools are so anti-ET that being anti-God and
of placing Christ on another stick is simply the next best thing to
their Skull and Bones cultism having unprotected sex with animals.
Once again, here's some perfectly good although perhaps somewhat
underexposed and otherwise believable shots of our fully solar
illuminated moon from orbit, as showing us of all silly things, good
old mother Earth as depicted along with the extremely dark albedo worth
of our extremely nasty moon. Take most any image; such as AS11-44-6554,
AS11-44-6639 or AS11-44-6648, then go figure as to what went the hell
went so terribly wrong on the surface.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/magazine/?44
-
Brad Guth
Brad Guth
ulterior motive.
Many of the naysayers are those sequestered within the creation via
happenstance arena, in this case meaning that in order to stay their
course of a thousand lights, keeping all exactly as is and as
unchangeable means their having to exclude most everything of reasoning
that comes along, that is unless it is of something that reinforces
their mindset, whereas such reinforcements are most often not required
to their having hard-science, yet given all the hype and front page
infomercial space at public expense, plus set upon another fast-track
into their educational standards of supposed higher learning that'll
further insure the future outcome as maintained on top of the heap of
knowledge, and thus shining brightest upon their side of the argument.
Thereby selective knowledge remains as king, and disinformation is
better than God.
By disallowing deductive reasoning involves a good deal of evidense
exclusions which are absolutely mainstream paramount, whereas whatever
dot connecting is regarded as taboo as pixel connecting or even upon
photographic grains of film worth of connecting, meaning that no
matters what you can not use the old or even the new and improved
science of others, nor even so much as interpret the available science
of dots or image pixels to mean anything other than the 1:1 where is
and as is mainstream status quo of published interpretations, that once
again has to support their mindset, or else. The "or else" meaning that
if you break ranks by ignoring such rules you are as fair game as folks
hiding WMD, and that's even if those WMD were invented so as to justify
your actions. Thus another mainstream status quo standard is having no
soul of remorse, as in none whatsoever.
As with the naysayers of this Usenet that in my view have sucked and
blown seriously big time for decades, it's clearly those naysayers that
keep insisting that our moon was born of Earth, and that all of our
local planets are thereby of nearly the same or relatively singular age
of a stellar plus an extremely complex happenstance creation, and that
somehow without intervention only Earth had been blessed with life
because, thus far Earth is the one and only planet blessed with vast
oceans of water, of extremely salty water none the less. Thus naysay
physics-101 is entirely conditional, most often depending on the color
of your race, your religion or lack thereof, and especially as based
upon your personal associations and whatever conclusions that'll
determiine the amount of brown-nose you have to contribute to their
status quo collective pot. No brown-nose and you're not going to be
accepted into their Skull and Bones hall of fame, thus no matters what
you have to contribute, if it's without sufficient brown-nose it is
only entitled to being stalked and bashed at every possible turn in the
road. Apparently, instead of accepting that mainstream folks may have
overlooked a thing or two about the Sirius star/solar system, or with
regard to Venus or you name it about our moon isn't an option. Thereby,
it is case closed from the very get-go upon whatever's new and improved
or otherwise having come along that is the least bit contrary to their
way of allowing whatever truth to being shared.
Clearly the new information or interpretations thereof existing
knowledge can not rock thy boats or otherwise infringe upon thy high
standards and accountability of whatever the mainstream status quo has
previously invested into, and you can't even so much as suggest that
others haven't been doing their jobs, much less infer that ulterior
motives and/or hidden agendas are at work. Yet the mainstream can
officially stalk and bash to any extent upon the influx of whatever's
coming along the pike that might possibly accomplish a little boat
rocking, thereby pointing out a possible flaw or two with the almighty
soup of knowledge that isn't supposed to change no matters what.
Apparently seeing is not believing, and thereby observationology of
having created whatever's humanly subjective but otherwise of honestly
deductive reasoning is just as out the window as any other forms of
soft, hard or deductive science that'll suggest upon anything other
than what has their NASA/Apollo good house keeping stamp of approval.
Clearly, it is still a mostly white boys and girls upper class club,
with only token nonwhite's as members where absolutely necessary in
order to suggest that all is well and good. The regular laws of physics
do not even count for squat if any of those laws imply support on
behalf of whatever's external to the prevailing mindset, especially if
that prevailing mindset was badly polluted. Thus you name it, if it's
going to upset what we've been indoctrinated with, it is going to get
more than it's fair share of mainstream flak, plus taking on everything
else that can be tossed at the notions of whatever the outsider(s)
might have to share.
Good folks that basically agree with me are still either too
dumbfounded or merely afraid of their own shadows to step up to the
plate, too afraid of their getting caught by any secondary/recoil worth
of flak that could potentially involve taking a brick or two out from
whatever foundation they've created for their own job security and
retirement benefits, that which especially these days can't afford
getting pulverized, perhaps losing out on the next round of those
brown-nosed cult dollars and privileges that's worth taking on as much
personal brown-nose as you can stand.
So, of associations and/or interactions with Sirius are clearly just as
nondisclosure/taboo as for the truth about our moon, and just as worthy
of being as excluded as for other intelligent life having coexisted
upon Venus (regardless of the WYSIWYG and regular laws of physics
factors), whereas other life (locals or ETs) upon Venus is having to
remain as insane as for my not having believed in WMD or much of
anything our resident and supposedly born again warlord(GW Bush) has
had to say. Why am I and of my brown deficient nose not the least bit
surprised?
-
Brad Guth
Brad Guth
as anything pertaining to our moon ever gets. However, taking another
look-see at what the future must hold isn't exactly going to ruin your
day. This is a backup post of a sub-topic that should be of interest to
private, commercial and even government enterprise that's having little
if anything to do with the usual cloak and dagger fundings. If need be
I'll make it into a primary new and improved topic that'll start off
relatively clean and to the point, especially about the commercial
considerations for viable utilizing our moon for something other than
tides and moonlight sex.
Lunar incarceration isn't quite as bad off as you'd think: especially
if there's remains of saltwater to being had within that nasty sucker.
Firstly; I happen to believe that ETs exist, and that most such ETs are
smarter than us but certainly not infallible nor immortal. I've
believed that some of their intelligent design (the good, the bad and
the ugly) is the seed/reality for at least a portion of life as we know
it. As you otherwise should know, I do not believe man has walked upon
our highly reactive moon, at least not as previously reported by our
perpetrated cold-war ruse/sting fiasco of what our NASA had publicly to
say, whereas I'm no longer convinced that our robotics survived the
gauntlet of safely getting deployed upon the surface (because if the
nearby relationship to mother Earth, it's bad enough just for safely
orbiting that moon). I also do not agree that Muslims deserve being
exterminated, thus clearly I'm unlike what the vast majority of
Usenet's science.space spooks have been insisting upon assimilating all
they can into their non-muslim cultism. I'm not some fool suggesting
that the Islamic religion is such a lost cause that's out of control to
the extent by which this mostly white pro-NASA/Apollo cultism is so
mindset upon insisting we accept as their absolute matter of fact. I'm
also not in favor of turning this world over to amy religious cult
(born again or otherwise) that uses their religion as any basis of
taking on war by way of being the aggressors, especially if that born
again aggressor is deeply invested in oil, plus having to invent WMD.
God forbid if I actually had my way, whereas most religions would soon
become assimilated into three or possibly four categories, along with
the usual clusters of local spin-offs that are unavoidable, whereas
only their publicly recorded community efforts to improve the quality
of life for others would remain as tax exempt (meaning not their
temples). There would be no offshore banking allowed, their books would
have to be posted on the internet and updated to within 48 hours worth,
or else they'll lose in status as being exempt from most anything (a
private cultism that's focused upon the taking of profits from others
is not a church nor as such doing God's work, meaning that Halburton
and of it's offshore money laundering is not a qualified religious
order). In other words, any and all sources of moneys or investment
grants received or subsequently spent must be made public within 48
hours, or else those amounts become fully taxable as regular income of
whatever the church received, as well as for those having subsequently
received amounts of financial suppost are red-flagged as for such being
regular and thus taxable incomes. Since the donation side of the
equation was being fully taken as a tax avoidance contribution to the
church, I'm thinking that between whatever the church received and of
whatever the final recipient obtained, if those sums were not publicly
posted within 48 hours would amount to a combined 50% basis of taxation
(25% each party or all 50% as taken from the church side if there's any
problem with their disclosing whom received the funds and/or equivalent
worth in benefits).
Of course that would be my perverted way of punishing the work of
mostly big religion that's totally out of control of it's predator
priest (thus having created the worse possible new and improved
terrorist among us), though only upon the dishonest side of their God's
supposed work, as it would also be highly rewarding upon the publicly
honest religions that supposedly have nothing to hide. Naturally, this
should be applied to all of the ENRON's and other greedy corporate
forms of religious cults that had no intentions of their ever paying a
red cent in tax from the get-go. In case you're wondering, I have other
viable tax related solutions that would eliminate most forms of
skimming, cheating and you name it methods of what's otherwise
supporting the likes of greedy and dishonest folks getting by at the
expense and/or if need be demise of others. I guess that's what makes
myself into the really bad guy, or the sort of messenger from hell that
this Usenet has to get rid of before some other crazy media freak gets
wind.
Without public support and thus public dollars, or at least matching
funds, most of our space related adventures would have ground to a
halt. Therefore, you'd think of whatever methods improves upon the net
expendable and thus sharable tax dollar the better. Private enterprise
and the likes of the ESA group have been proving that outer-space is
not purely a governmental(aka publicly funded) domain. Sooner or later
we'll see these privately funded groups doing exactly what our
government should have been accomplishing as of decades ago.
However, being at war with your own two left feet hasn't exactly been a
good sign of our going in the right direction. Technologically, there's
been no good reasons of war being fought over oil or other forms of
energy, or even mineral related matters. Only the dumb and dumber fools
that haven't a clue as to the existing and even somewhat better-off
alternatives are those having no viable mindset except that of wars
upon wars, and that's including whatever religious tit for tats and
especially of cold-wars that have been perpetrated for their
remorseless blood and money sport of super-powers getting their way, or
else.
Each decade of a perpetrated cold-war has the potential of dragging the
intellectual worth plus all resources of humanity backwards by at least
two decades worth. By way of my math, that's not a very good return on
the dollar, much less upon the loss of humanity and of what could have
otherwise accomplished at not ten cents on the dollar.
By the way, folks. This isn't my suggesting that there wouldn't be a
few testy complications along the way, whereas it just represents that
if there wasn't an ongoing perpetration as having been the case with
the likes of super-powers running amuck, chances are that we'd be
decades upon decades and thus trillions upon trillions further ahead
than we currently are, especially on a global basis by way of setting
the best example.
Setting that best example doesn't represent that mistakes wouldn't be
made, as only a fool would exclude the human nature of arrogance, greed
and even bigotry that'll stay upon the course of those thousands
lights, no matters what. In which case, I have an even better solution
for that as well, as involving habitats within our moon for those
thinking so much of themselves rather than of the greater community of
humanity. I'm thinking outside the box, whereas these holier than thou
folks should be given first dibs on lunar accommodations, whereas their
eventual decay will only add towards recreating the lunar atmosphere.
Thereby, indirectly we got us a nifty win-win for the old gipper.
Lunar incarceration might not be quite as bad off as you're thinking.
At least they'd be free to moonsuit stroll about the earthshine
illuminated surface for a few hours at a time, and otherwise rather
nicely accommodated underground, as for always having a terrific
telescopic view of mother Earth (right down to the very street they
used to live on or corporate buildings within which they used to screw
whomever they could), and certainly via interactive communications as
much in touch with humanity as they'd care to get.
Remember that one-way tickets to the moon are becoming relatively
energy efficient alternatives to the $50 thousand per year that the
better half of inmates typically involve, and obviously that's having
excluded whatever internal strife or aftermath being their true birth
to grave impact upon society. The worse bunch of inmates are of those
costing us $100 thousand per year, and far too many of those are such
defective souls that they're in for life. As for those entitled to
lethal injections, whereas upon the moon they be given a suitable
moonsuit(aka body bag) and set free to enjoy the view.
A good many terrestrial incarceration facilities could be reinvented as
community centers or into entire villages of actual humans that give a
tinkers damn about one another, thus back on the tax rolls instead of
being the money pits and drug overloaded perverttoriums they currently
represent.
-
Brad Guth