Questions needing answers

[DD Brock]

1) Why does the earth look so small in the background of photographs on the moon.  The earth should be much larger.

The camera was using a wide angle lens.

That's awesome with 1960's camera technology.  In addition the astronauts had the cameras fitted to the front of the suits with no view finders so I think they did a fantastic job of getting all these great and clear shots.

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11-hass.html

From the humor department of NASA:  "The Data Camera was given a silver finish to make it more resistant to thermal variations that ranged from full Sun to full shadow helping maintain a more uniform internal temperature.".

Have you actually looked through the Apollo images online? They took a lot of really bad photos, too. No, really.

[JayUtah]

That's awesome with 1960's camera technology.

What part of "camera technology" do you think has changed since 1960?  What part do you think needs to have changed?  You can still buy the Ziess Biogon lens for a variety of camera bodies.  You can still buy the 500/EL body.

What you're seeing in this demonstration is not a product of "technology."  What you're seeing is a very straightforward application of focal length, something that's been known to photographers since the 1820s.  It's a natural feature of all compound lenses, and we've had compound lenses since Galileo.  It's also something all modern photographers are either taught or become acquainted with as they work.  Have you actually ever used a camera?

In addition the astronauts had the cameras fitted to the front of the suits with no view finders so I think they did a fantastic job of getting all these great and clear shots.

They were not "fitted," but rather could be hung there, using a bayonet-type mount on the RCU.  The RCU itself was merely hung on hooks from the PLSS straps and could be moved at will.  I've tested this myself.

Further, the horizontal field of view was about 45º.  This makes it very easy just to point the camera in the general direction of the subject and have a very good chance of framing the shot successfully.  Again, I tested this myself with an actual Apollo camera and lens.  I had no practice shots, but the Apollo astronauts were given Apollo-modified Hasselblads for several months to practice.

You seem to not know how wide-angle lenses work, or focal lengths or distances of any kind.  Yet you claim to have a degree in engineering, which would have required passing classes that teach basic optics.

From the humor department of NASA:  "The Data Camera was given a silver finish to make it more resistant to thermal variations that ranged from full Sun to full shadow helping maintain a more uniform internal temperature.".

Humor department?  The coatings on the cameras and magazines were relatively straightforward, the same sort of thing put on Thermos bottles back in the 1940s.  Aluminum paint is not rocket science, or even especially exotic.  For someone who claims to be an engineer, you don't seem to know anything about very simple engineering concepts like heat transfer.  In fact, you don't seem to know much more about "engineering" than what you read on long-debunked hoaxie web sites.

Normally when someone claims to be an engineer, it's to set forth the expectation that arguments he will make will be supported by an appropriate demonstration of engineering knowledge and skill.  You seem to have claimed it as a ploy to masquerade your ignorant bluster behind intimidation.  You really have no clue what you're talking about, and you seem to think that no one else would know these things either and therefore be unable to catch you.

[tradosaurus]

I'm amazed anyone can be so proud of their own ignorance and lack of ability to do simple google searches to answer tired old questions that have been answered over and over again.

1. The moon is quite big. Go take a photo of it and see how small it looks. Please provide any kind of evidence that supports your claim that it is too small in Apollo images, otherwise we have rely on your faith based religion.

2. What temperature ranges were being experienced in the lunar morning during which the missions landed? Please provide any kind of evidence that the technology was not up to managing that temperature range or that the battery power supply was inadequate, otherwise we have rely on your faith based religion.

3. They wriggled through the hatch carefully. Your size is incorrect. Go find the correct size.

4. Newton's laws of motion.

5.They put things away. The rover was not inside the lunar module. They did not travel to the moon in the lunar module, they travelled in the command module. 

6. The same camera technology that worked just fine in Earth orbit and on various unmanned probes. Prove it couldn't have, otherwise we have rely on your faith based religion.

7. Do some research. Google is your friend.

Please let us know which engineering projects you have worked on. I need to avoid them.

1.  The earth is supposedly 7,917 miles in diameter.  The moon is supposedly  2159 in diameter.  So the earth is almost 4 times as big as the moon but in all the camera shots from the moon the earth looks like the same size as we would see the moon from earth.  Oops!  Someone in the hollywood department of NASA didn't do their homework.
2. i asked the question.  Can you give me a reasonable answer without relying on nasa?  According the website on the PLSS the battery provided 279 W-hr supply for the system to keep the astronots from frying in 200F+ heat or freezing in -200F cold.   A typical car battery provides about 780 W in one hour.  So somehow NASA was able to create a battery to provide 279 watts in one hour and evidently recharge or have extra batteries for the astro-nots.  Doesn't compute.
3. The size is correct within 12 inches, I promise.  Refute it please.
4. Sorry, Newton laws of motion doesn't cut it.  NASA admits their computing power was as powerful as a handheld calculator.  Can't get there from here unless you have faith in NASA.
5. The rover was in the Lunar module which went supposedly landed on the moon.  http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Image-of-LM-general-arrangement.gif
6. I asked the question.  All NASA states is that they put a silver finish on the outside of the camera to withstand thermal variations.  LOL.   https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11-hass.html
7. Please answer the question.  How do you poop from a space suit when there was no room to maneuver? (according to the diagrams of the capsule from NASA).

[Zakalwe]

1.  The earth is supposedly 7,917 miles in diameter.  The moon is supposedly  2159 in diameter.  So the earth is almost 4 times as big as the moon but in all the camera shots from the moon the earth looks like the same size as we would see the moon from earth.  Oops!  Someone in the hollywood department of NASA didn't do their homework.
2. i asked the question.  Can you give me a reasonable answer without relying on nasa?  According the website on the PLSS the battery provided 279 W-hr supply for the system to keep the astronots from frying in 200F+ heat or freezing in -200F cold.   A typical car battery provides about 780 W in one hour.  So somehow NASA was able to create a battery to provide 279 watts in one hour and evidently recharge or have extra batteries for the astro-nots.  Doesn't compute.
3. The size is correct within 12 inches, I promise.  Refute it please.
4. Sorry, Newton laws of motion doesn't cut it.  NASA admits their computing power was as powerful as a handheld calculator.  Can't get there from here unless you have faith in NASA.
5. The rover was in the Lunar module which went supposedly landed on the moon.  http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Image-of-LM-general-arrangement.gif
6. I asked the question.  All NASA states is that they put a silver finish on the outside of the camera to withstand thermal variations.  LOL.   https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11-hass.html
7. Please answer the question.  How do you poop from a space suit when there was no room to maneuver? (according to the diagrams of the capsule from NASA).

Wow....so much stupid in one post. At this stage its clear that you are just trolling.

[tradosaurus]

From the humor department of NASA:  "The Data Camera was given a silver finish to make it more resistant to thermal variations that ranged from full Sun to full shadow helping maintain a more uniform internal temperature.".

What's almost humorous is that someone claiming to be a mechanical engineer has no comprehension about thermal reflectivity.  "Humorous" in that anyone with more than a few working brain cells is watching you making an eejit out of yourself.

I'm still waiting for Mythbusters to replicate the extreme temperatures on the moon while trying to take pictures without the camera being ruined.  Or borrow the PLSS from NASA (if it exists) and run an experiment 

[tradosaurus]

Wow....so much stupid in one post. At this stage its clear that you are just trolling.

it's clear that I've upset your religious belief in a globe earth universe where NASA has all the answers. 

[Zakalwe]

.... a degreed Mechanical Engineer,

Again, where did you get your degree from?

[tradosaurus]

Where's your degree from if you can't work out that the Earth isn't flat?

Now that you mention it the main reason I know NASA is a fraud and has bilked billions from taxpayers to fund their fantasy expeditions is the observable and tested facts that the earth is flat.  But I digress

[bknight]

Wow....so much stupid in one post. At this stage its clear that you are just trolling.

it's clear that I've upset your religious belief in a globe earth universe where NASA has all the answers.

WOW a flat-Earther also, but I could've guessed that.
You have been asked questions, quit stalling and provide evidence for your adolescent beliefs.

[JayUtah]

Oops!  Someone in the hollywood department of NASA didn't do their homework.

Oops, someone doesn't know how focal length works.

I asked the question.

You provide figures for battery capacity, but you don't say how much electricity you think was needed to power the space suit.  You don't get to say it wouldn't have worked unless you can provide both numbers and show that one is less than the other.

The size is correct within 12 inches, I promise.  Refute it please.

The refutation is that you wrongly believe the astronauts wore their spacesuits and backpacks continuously throughout the mission, and that they were meant to go through the docking hatch so dressed.  The problem is your ignorance of the Apollo program.

Sorry, Newton laws of motion doesn't cut it.

Then you don't know Newton.  Kepler worked out the basic laws of orbits, and Newton later proved them via his theory of gravitation.  All celestial mechanics is based on that, and was a well-developed science as early as 1900.  The same mathematics governs the natural motion of planets and moons that dictates the trajectory of spacecraft in space.

NASA admits their computing power was as powerful as a handheld calculator.

You haven't told us how much computing power is needed to get to the Moon.  You simply declare that there wasn't enough provided.

The rover was in the Lunar module which went supposedly landed on the moon.

The rover was strapped to the side of the LM descent stage in folded form.  You haven't explained why this allegedly didn't work.

I asked the question.

Your question included several ignorant layman's assumptions regarding heat transfer.

All NASA states is that they put a silver finish on the outside of the camera to withstand thermal variations.

And a real engineer knows why that works and why that's sufficient.

How do you poop from a space suit when there was no room to maneuver?

The astronauts wore diapers when in their spacesuit.  The problem is that you ignorantly seem to believe they were wearing their space suits all the time.  This indicates how very little research you've done on the Apollo program before declaring it fake.

[tradosaurus]

.... a degreed Mechanical Engineer,

Again, where did you get your degree from?

And why do you care?  Yes, I have a degree BSME (1989) from the University of Texas.  Although I'm not particularly proud of having been hoodwinked on a few principles of the universe.

[bknight]

1.  The earth is supposedly 7,917 miles in diameter.  The moon is supposedly  2159 in diameter.  So the earth is almost 4 times as big as the moon but in all the camera shots from the moon the earth looks like the same size as we would see the moon from earth.  Oops!  Someone in the hollywood department of NASA didn't do their homework.
2. i asked the question.  Can you give me a reasonable answer without relying on nasa?  According the website on the PLSS the battery provided 279 W-hr supply for the system to keep the astronots from frying in 200F+ heat or freezing in -200F cold.   A typical car battery provides about 780 W in one hour.  So somehow NASA was able to create a battery to provide 279 watts in one hour and evidently recharge or have extra batteries for the astro-nots.  Doesn't compute.
3. The size is correct within 12 inches, I promise.  Refute it please.
4. Sorry, Newton laws of motion doesn't cut it.  NASA admits their computing power was as powerful as a handheld calculator.  Can't get there from here unless you have faith in NASA.
5. The rover was in the Lunar module which went supposedly landed on the moon.  http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Image-of-LM-general-arrangement.gif
6. I asked the question.  All NASA states is that they put a silver finish on the outside of the camera to withstand thermal variations.  LOL.   https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11-hass.html
7. Please answer the question.  How do you poop from a space suit when there was no room to maneuver? (according to the diagrams of the capsule from NASA).

Wow....so much stupid in one post. At this stage its clear that you are just trolling.

I second or third that comment.

[JayUtah]

it's clear that I've upset your religious belief in a globe earth universe where NASA has all the answers.

Troll.

[JayUtah]

And why do you care?  Yes, I have a degree BSME (1989) from the University of Texas.

No.

You display no correct knowledge of engineering.

[bknight]

.... a degreed Mechanical Engineer,

Again, where did you get your degree from?

And why do you care?  Yes, I have a degree BSME (1989) from the University of Texas.  Although I'm not particularly proud of having been hoodwinked on a few principles of the universe.

I thought they were a better school than to give you a degree which you obviously did not earn.  Perhaps go back and re-take the classes you missed while partying.