Radiation

[timfinch]

Abstract
A gross survey of data on Van Allen belt radiations, galactic cosmic radiation, and solar cosmic radiation is presented. On the basis of these data that are, in part, fragmentary and uncertain, upper and lower limits of rad doses under different amounts of mass shielding are estimated. The estimates are preliminary especially in the cases of chance encounter with solar flare protons. Generally, the relative biological effectiveness of the high energetic space radiations and their secondaries appear insufficiently known to give detailed biological or rem doses. The overall ionization dosage of the low level galactic cosmic radiation in free space is estimated to be even in solar minimum years equivalent to less than 50 rem/year or 1 rem/week. Mass shielding up to 80 g/cm2 would not reduce the ionization dosage but would shield against heavy primaries and heavy ionizing secondaries, thus reducing the biological dose. The flux of energetic protons in the maximum intensity zone of the inner Van Allen belt is by about four orders of magnitude higher, their energy and penetration power, of course, lower. A shield of 25 g/cm2 would reduce the dose rate from 20 rad/hour under 2 g/cm2 to 5 rad/hour. These proton dose rates and also the electron and X-radiation dose rates under some g/cm2 shielding of low z-number material will not constitute a radiation hazard for flights straight through the inner and outer belt in about two hours. Staying within the maximum of the inner belt for two days would, however, lead even within 25 g/cm2 depth of outer shield and body itself to a dose of 200 rad which is on the permissible limit. Extreme solar cosmic ray events or proton showers of high intensity and a duration of days occurred with a frequency of 1-4 per year during the last highly active cycle. For the penetrating, most intense high energy event of February 23, 1956, the dose within 25 g/cm2 is estimated to have been in the order of 50 rad. In most cases the dose decreased more rapidly with penetration depth and would have been even in multiple events with such high shielding below critical levels, especially on inner organs. On the surface of the body and in a lightly shielded space vehicle or protected by a space suit only the dose can, especially in multiple events, reach values of 1000 rad and more.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12056428

[Abaddon]

FYI

Hi genius, is the attached a log or linear graph?

Do tell.

[Abaddon]

Abstract
A gross survey of data on Van Allen belt radiations, galactic cosmic radiation, and solar cosmic radiation is presented. On the basis of these data that are, in part, fragmentary and uncertain, upper and lower limits of rad doses under different amounts of mass shielding are estimated. The estimates are preliminary especially in the cases of chance encounter with solar flare protons. Generally, the relative biological effectiveness of the high energetic space radiations and their secondaries appear insufficiently known to give detailed biological or rem doses. The overall ionization dosage of the low level galactic cosmic radiation in free space is estimated to be even in solar minimum years equivalent to less than 50 rem/year or 1 rem/week. Mass shielding up to 80 g/cm2 would not reduce the ionization dosage but would shield against heavy primaries and heavy ionizing secondaries, thus reducing the biological dose. The flux of energetic protons in the maximum intensity zone of the inner Van Allen belt is by about four orders of magnitude higher, their energy and penetration power, of course, lower. A shield of 25 g/cm2 would reduce the dose rate from 20 rad/hour under 2 g/cm2 to 5 rad/hour. These proton dose rates and also the electron and X-radiation dose rates under some g/cm2 shielding of low z-number material will not constitute a radiation hazard for flights straight through the inner and outer belt in about two hours. Staying within the maximum of the inner belt for two days would, however, lead even within 25 g/cm2 depth of outer shield and body itself to a dose of 200 rad which is on the permissible limit. Extreme solar cosmic ray events or proton showers of high intensity and a duration of days occurred with a frequency of 1-4 per year during the last highly active cycle. For the penetrating, most intense high energy event of February 23, 1956, the dose within 25 g/cm2 is estimated to have been in the order of 50 rad. In most cases the dose decreased more rapidly with penetration depth and would have been even in multiple events with such high shielding below critical levels, especially on inner organs. On the surface of the body and in a lightly shielded space vehicle or protected by a space suit only the dose can, especially in multiple events, reach values of 1000 rad and more.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12056428

Irrelevant. You have been told why repeatedly.

[timfinch]

FYI

Hi genius, is the attached a log or linear graph?

Do tell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale

[Abaddon]

FYI

Hi genius, is the attached a log or linear graph?

Do tell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale

I asked you, not wiki.

Is that a log or linear graph?

You don't know, do you?

[bknight]

FYI

Hi genius, is the attached a log or linear graph?

Do tell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale

I asked you, not wiki.

Is that a log or linear graph?

You don't know, do you?

*Raises Hand Quickly*

I know, I know.

[timfinch]

http://stockcharts.com/articles/mailbag/2014/11/what-is-the-difference-between-a-logarithmic-and-arithmetic-chart.html

[Abaddon]

http://stockcharts.com/articles/mailbag/2014/11/what-is-the-difference-between-a-logarithmic-and-arithmetic-chart.html

I asked for your answer not some random website that does not address the specific graph I posted.

What is YOUR answer?

[Abaddon]

FYI

Hi genius, is the attached a log or linear graph?

Do tell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale

I asked you, not wiki.

Is that a log or linear graph?

You don't know, do you?

*Raises Hand Quickly*

I know, I know.

Now, now. Let timfinch demonstrate his knowledge.

[Luke Pemberton]

Tim

You're now behaving like a petulant child that couldn't make his point so sulked for a couple of days. Your cutting and pasting is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming, and disregarding everyone else in the room.

[timfinch]

http://stockcharts.com/articles/mailbag/2014/11/what-is-the-difference-between-a-logarithmic-and-arithmetic-chart.html

I asked for your answer not some random website that does not address the specific graph I posted.

What is YOUR answer?

[Abaddon]

http://stockcharts.com/articles/mailbag/2014/11/what-is-the-difference-between-a-logarithmic-and-arithmetic-chart.html

I asked for your answer not some random website that does not address the specific graph I posted.

What is YOUR answer?

That is NOT an answer. I didn't ask you to post other random graphs, I asked you about the one I posted.

What is YOUR answer?

[Zakalwe]

In 1972, Apollo astronaut Harrison Schmitt sniffed the air in his Lunar Module, the Challenger. "[It] smells like gunpowder in here," he said. His commander Gene Cernan agreed. "Oh, it does, doesn't it?"

The two astronauts had just returned from a long moonwalk around the Taurus-Littrow valley, near the Sea of Serenity. Dusty footprints marked their entry into the spaceship. That dust became airborne--and smelly.


see caption

Right: Moonwalking astronaut Harrison Schmitt. [More]
Later, Schmitt felt congested and complained of "lunar dust hay fever." His symptoms went away the next day; no harm done. He soon returned to Earth and the anecdote faded into history.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/22apr_dontinhale

So now you're using quotations from astronauts that went to the Moon to support your claim that no astronauts went to the Moon. 


 

[molesworth]

Abstract

<snipped for conciseness>

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12056428

Published in 1963, five years before the first mission beyond LEO, and, as it says in the title and notes in the abstract, is discussing estimates of likely doses.  What additional information was available by the time Apollo 8 was launched, and what conclusions were drawn from it?  Have you looked in detail at the refinement of measurements and modelling of the radiation environment since the beginning of space flight?

Also, on my reading of the abstract, it implies that with proper shielding and routing, missions beyond LEO should not present unsurvivable hazards.  I'll leave discussion of the actual estimated doses and shielding to people who understand these things better than I do.

I would also ask, what further detail is provided in the full paper?  You shouldn't base any discussion or conclusions purely on the abstract.  Again, not being an expert in this area I won't go through it myself, but if you're going to be discussing estimates, measurements and analysis of the radiation in space, you need to do more than copy a few abstracts or selected graphs - you need to do a proper literature search and take the time to read, understand, and where necessary, analyse the data.

[Luke Pemberton]

So now you're using quotations from astronauts that went to the Moon to support your claim that no astronauts went to the Moon. 

I missed that, even though I asked him whether he thought they was exposed to the dust. Duh!

It reminds me of a user called stalkervision over at YT many years ago. He was arguing the line 'they could never leave Earth's orbit radiation is bad' argument. Then is his next breath he claimed that they never left Earth's orbit because on Apollo 8 the crew saw aliens, so NASA did not want to send manned missions.