Radiation

[timfinch]

Jason, Jason, Jason....  I ask the question again.  Should you not be summing readings over a day to arrive at a daily dose rate and shouldn't some type of multiplier be used to account for the fact that you were not continually monitoring.

Asked and answered. The data presented are daily dose rate equivalents. If you needed to do anything else they would not be presented in units of cGy/day.

The Crater Data is literally 24 discrete captures taken each day.  How in your mind do you equate each discrete data point as a daily dose.  Please explain that slowly because I am not as smart as the rest of you guys.

[Luke Pemberton]

The CraTer Data is correct.

I did not ask it the data was correct, I asked if was correct to use the data for cycle 20.

If Solar activity does not raise overall background radiation why would the average radiation be higher during solar peak?

Simply put, the three main areas of concern for dose are:

• GCR
• SPEs
• van Allen belts

You need to stop interchanging between background radiation and dose. The solar wind and CME contribute to background radiation but do not contribute to dose as they are readily shielded owning to the low energy of the particles.

The GCR is modulated by solar activity. At a solar maximum the GCR dose is reduced. At a solar minimum the GCR dose is increased. Solar cycle 20 was a more active cycle than the current cycle. So, what do you think is going to happen to the GCR dose? The graph that you now like shows you the answer.

This means you cannot use the CRaTER data from Cycle 24 to assess dose in Cycle 20. If you do, then all you can do it say it was lower based on all the data. So you initial premise of < 0.22 was fallacious. That's the point.

If we took the data and eliminated peaks above a certain magnitude would not the remaining level be higher than GCR level.

No, why should it? We're talking about dose, not background flux.

[timfinch]

So no one but me has directly addressed the elephant in the room in regards to the CraTer data.  Do we need to correct it to a daily dose or not and if we do is that adjustment a multiplier of 24 times?

This has been addressed. Look at the units, then explain why I would take 24 measurements in cGy/day and multiply them by anything to get another measurement in cGy/day. Units are important, but you don't seem to get it.

If you had a pocket dosimeter that measured radiation when you pressed a button and you pressed that button hourly then after one day would you dosimeter reflect your total esposure or would it simply reflect the exposure you had received in the 24 seconds of actual measurement?

[Luke Pemberton]

This should clarify it all for me.  If you were planing a tourist trip to the moon, would you plan your trip during solar maximum or solar minimum or something in between?  Why?

Doesn't matter. You can skirt the van Allen belts with the right orbital mechanics, avoiding the inner proton belt.

The GCR dose is not sufficient to cause a hazardous accumulated dose on a short mission.

You can use a risk model to avoid SPEs. You might get unlucky, you might not.

The moon is not a radioactive wasteland.

[timfinch]

Is anyone keeping score?  It seems like I am winning.  Am I winning?

[timfinch]

This should clarify it all for me.  If you were planing a tourist trip to the moon, would you plan your trip during solar maximum or solar minimum or something in between?  Why?

Doesn't matter. You can skirt the van Allen belts with the right orbital mechanics, avoiding the inner proton belt.

The GCR dose is not sufficient to cause a hazardous accumulated dose on a short mission.

You can use a risk model to avoid SPEs. You might get unlucky, you might not.

The moon is not a radioactive wasteland.

That sounds like a serious cop out to me.  Are you throwing in the towel?  Before you do consider this amazing fact.  The lowest recorded level in all of the VAB is .0001 rads/sec.  Now if there existed a tunnel of radiation at this level in which a craft could travel then the transit directly through the VAB would still be 6 times the reported level of the apollo 11 mission.  Do the math and then throw that towel into the ring.  You just got knocked out.

[Jason Thompson]

The Crater Data is literally 24 discrete captures taken each day.  How in your mind do you equate each discrete data point as a daily dose.

Because those are the units given. Clearly. All over the place.

The data are not raw data showing how much radiation was detected that hour. This is clear from the headings and the units used.

[bknight]

I'm waiting for your calculation why the delay?

[Luke Pemberton]

Do the math and then throw that towel into the ring.  You just got knocked out.

I have stated on multiple occasions that I acknowledge the solar cycle is different but I am under the impression the current solar cycle is more active and as a consequence GCR levels are much higher in this cycle than in 20.

Says the man who thinks the current solar cycle is more active and that means the GCR levels are much higher, despite being told its cycle 20 that is more active, and more active cycles have lower GCR doses.

[timfinch]

I calculated the VAB transit time at 4.5 hours based on the Apollo 11 logs.  You can use any transit time you can defend but it doesn't really matter.  Whatever time you use or whatever average background radiation you surmise the results will be magnitudes above apollo 11's dose.  There is no getting around the facts.  It can not have happened and therefore it didn't.  I have shown you that it was a magic trick now you need to figure out how they did all that impossible to fake video because the evidence of the hoax is before you..

[nomuse]

So no one but me has directly addressed the elephant in the room in regards to the CraTer data.  Do we need to correct it to a daily dose or not and if we do is that adjustment a multiplier of 24 times?

This is why units matter. This is why terminology matters. This is why dimensional analysis matters. Gray is defined as absorbed energy in joules per kilogram. You don't get to throw in "time" or "area" or "flux" or whatever a second time.

Gray is also not seivert -- it has no quality factor imposed for the effect of that absorbed energy in human tissues.

[timfinch]

The Crater Data is literally 24 discrete captures taken each day.  How in your mind do you equate each discrete data point as a daily dose.

Because those are the units given. Clearly. All over the place.

The data are not raw data showing how much radiation was detected that hour. This is clear from the headings and the units used.

What actually are the units of the 24 daily readings? and how did they arrive at them?  In your mind how does the detector convert discrete readings into daily averages and if it does then why isn't their a single reading for each day?

[timfinch]

So no one but me has directly addressed the elephant in the room in regards to the CraTer data.  Do we need to correct it to a daily dose or not and if we do is that adjustment a multiplier of 24 times?

This is why units matter. This is why terminology matters. This is why dimensional analysis matters. Gray is defined as absorbed energy in joules per kilogram. You don't get to throw in "time" or "area" or "flux" or whatever a second time.

Gray is also not seivert -- it has no quality factor imposed for the effect of that absorbed energy in human tissues.

are you sure about that?

[Abaddon]

I could halfway go along with that premise except for the glaring fact that they closed the thread.  Why would they do that if I were the problem and not the subject matter.

Because you violated the rules that YOU SPECIFICALLY AGREED TO when you signed up.

One last graph before I go to bed.  This is a very interesting one.  It plots GCR with SPE  ans Solar activity.  It makes loud and bold statements that scream Lunar Hoax.

Why are you posting another graph? It has been demonstrated that you do not understand graphs at all.

[timfinch]

21.5 hours on the lunar surface
Distance to the moon:  238,900 mi
Length of VAB =37000 miles
Time to the moon: 
Translunar injection engine cutout 1:40:50
Lunar orbit insertion 63:23:27
Elapsed time:  61:43:37
Average rate of travel:  238900 miles/ 61.76666 hours = 3870.92 miles/hour
We know that Apollo 11 entered the TLI at 24200 mph @ 12:22
We know that 2 hrs. and 32 minutes later it had traveled 22000 miles
22000/2.53 hrs. = an average speed of 8695.65 mph.
We know that the VAB is 37000 miles long
22000/37000 = 59.5% of the VAB had been crossed
After 2.53 hours the Apollo 11 was traveling 12,914 feet per second.
12914 ft/sec * 3600sec/hr * 1 mile/5280 ft = 8805 mph
37000-22000 =15000 miles of VAB left to travel @ 8805 mph slowing
15000 miles/8805/miles/hr = 1.7 hrs plus 2.53 hours = 4.23 hours but let’s round it to 4.30 because the Apollo was in constant deceleration throughout the VAB transit.
Now the lowest radiation area in all of the VAB is the blue region which is .0001 rad/sec
.0001 rad/sec * 4.5 hrs * 3600 sec/hr * 10 mgy/rad = 5.22 mgy
5.22 mgy/8days = 0.6525 mgy/day
Now if we assume GCR of .24 mg/day and lunar radiation raises that 35% then 1.35* .24 mg/day = .324 mg/day for 2 days lunar orbit and 1 day on the surface or 3 days.
.324 mg/day * 3 days = .972 mgy
.972 mgy from lunar orbit and lunar landing plus 5.22 mgy from VAB transit plus 5.22 mgy return transit through the VAB = 11.412 mgy
11.412 mgy/8.33 days = 1.369 or as I originally said a full magnitude less than it should be.

https://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/apollo11_log/log.htm