Radiation

[Jason Thompson]

You guys took a lot out of me today.  I had intended to tackle that CraTer data but I find myself unmotivated and easily distracted.  How about we tackle some other mystery that troubles mankind.  I can bring my Sherlock Holmes like intellect to bear on it and we can solve it like we did the Lunar Hoax.  What have you got?

Again, obvious trolling. I would love to know what motivates you to pull this kind of crap. You're clearly not interested in any kind of truth.

[bknight]

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..

No you have been shown that a shorter path was traveled.  No 4.5 hrs through the belts less than 2 hours. Again you fail to understand the trajectory.

NASA considered two trajectories.  The first was a direct one straight through the heart of the VAB to the moon and the second one a translunar injection using a technique invented and proven by the Russians.  They determined the direct shot would actually receive the least radiation because the speed and time in the heart of the VAB would actually reduce overall exposure.  The Russian method spent more time in the VAB but was far more fuel efficient.  They opted for the the Russian method.  There is no secret safe passage.  Many pretend it is but they cannot document it.  Why would we send the Orion into the heart of the VAB if such a path had been discovered?

Red herring.  Besides you have already been informed why the Orion trajectory was not the same as Apollo's general trajectory.  You really don't understand anything concerning orbital mechanics.  The Russians didn't "invent" any trajectory it is all in the mathematics.
Apollo's trajectory was to skirt the more intense areas of the VARB, look at the image you plotted the 2 dimensional representation of the 3 dimensional torus.  You can see for your self that the trajectory was a the edges and did not go through the whole VARB.  Not 4.5 hrs. but around 2 hrs. as Bob B. indicated in his computations, you're what, I think Jay coined the phrase, willfully ignorant.  The data is there you either refuse to accept it or hand wave it away.

Now for your calculation please, show your work as Bob did.

Edited to correct spelling

[timfinch]

We know that the VAB is 37000 miles long

Along the geomagentic equator maybe, but as you have been told and shown repeatedly, the Apollo spacecraft did not take that route (indeed it was virtually impossible for it to do so due to the different inclinations ot the orbit and the geomagentic plane) so why do you think using the full thickness of the belt is valid?

Actually a good question.  I used it because we all know the VAB expansds thousands of miles during Solar max and not having any reference I thought it a fairly conservative estimate.

[Luke Pemberton]

You guys took a lot out of me today.

There wasn't much to take in the first place. Please, save us from your delusions of grandeur; your smugness doesn't escape the fact that you couldn't read a graph in the first place and are back pedalling faster that a nuclear submarine electrician who waded into the deep water when the hull sprung a leak, and is now shouting 'don't panic!' at the top of his voice... oh wait...

Now, the CM was shielded at 8 g cm^-2. Please explain how the energies of the electrons in the outer VAB are distributed across the energies, say from 0.5 MeV - 20 MeV.

[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..

No you have been shown that a shorter path was traveled.  No 4.5 hrs through the belts less than 2 hours. Again you fail to understand the trajectory.

NASA considered two trajectories.  The first was a direct one straight through the heart of the VAB to the moon and the second one a translunar injection using a technique invented and proven by the Russians.  They determined the direct shot would actually receive the least radiation because the speed and time in the heart of the VAB would actually reduce overall exposure.  The Russian method spent more time in the VAB but was far more fuel efficient.  They opted for the the Russian method.  There is no secret safe passage.  Many pretend it is but they cannot document it.  Why would we send the Orion into the heart of the VAB if such a path had been discovered?

Red herring.  Besides you have already been informed why the Orion trajectory was not the same as Apollo's general trajectory.  You really don't understand anything concerning orbital mechanics.  The Russians didn't "invent" sny trajectory it is all in the mathematics.
Apollo's trajectory was to skirt the more intense areas of the VARB, look at the image you plotted the 2 dimensional representation of the 3 dimensional torus.  You can see for your self that the trajectory was a the edges and did not go through the whole VARB.  Not 4.5 hrs. but around 2 hrs. as Bob B. indicated in his computations, you're what, I think Jay coined the phrase, willfully ignorant.  The data is there you either refuse to accept it or hand wave it away.

Now for your calculation please, show your work as Bob did.

Just glancing through the threads are you.  Try a more detailed approach Johnny come lately. I already posted the math for the inquisitive.

[benparry]

We know that the VAB is 37000 miles long

Along the geomagentic equator maybe, but as you have been told and shown repeatedly, the Apollo spacecraft did not take that route (indeed it was virtually impossible for it to do so due to the different inclinations ot the orbit and the geomagentic plane) so why do you think using the full thickness of the belt is valid?

Actually a good question.  I used it because we all know the VAB expansds thousands of miles during Solar max and not having any reference I thought it a fairly conservative estimate.

Jason with regard to this 37000 figure do you know of a 3d picture or chat which shows the 3d path the vehicles took to transverse the edges. I have seen many 2d's but not 3d

[Luke Pemberton]

You need to understand that the outer belts, where Apollo traversed is mainly electrons. The values you cite are unprotected doses.

I'm sorry but is the Outer VAb entirely consisting of electrons?  I din't know that.  Even a genius like me can learn something.  Reference?

I didn't say entirely, I said mainly. See what you did there, you tried to change my words? Why did you change my words?

The main issue in the outer belts are the electron. The inner belts, is where there is a higher flux of high energy protons. Now what is the flux of those pesky electrons, versus their energy?

Do you also accept that you need to account for the shielding of the CM?

[LunarOrbit]

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

Umm... is that you, Mr. Trump? You seem to have a skewed interpretation of what it means to be winning.

I am easily confused but didn't Trump win the presidential race?

Yes, you are easily confused. Especially by graphs.

And Trump did not win in the way that matters. He won because the United States has the Electoral College... which is basically like a sports handicap for politicians who can't win otherwise. It's like me beating Michael Jordan at basketball... but only because every ball I get in the net is worth 1000 points while his are worth 1. But that's off topic, so I'll slap myself on the wrist and stop now.

[timfinch]

You guys took a lot out of me today.

There wasn't much to take in the first place. Please, save us from your delusions of grandeur; your smugness doesn't escape the fact that you couldn't read a graph in the first place and are back pedalling faster that a nuclear submarine electrician who waded into the deep water when the hull sprung a leak, and is now shouting 'don't panic!' at the top of his voice... oh wait...

Now, the CM was shielded at 8 g cm^-2. Please explain how the energies of the electrons in the outer VAB are distributed across the energies, say from 0.5 MeV - 20 MeV.

Why do you persist with this fabrication about graphs.  It took you two full days to grasp the significance of logarithmic scaling and why the graduations are essential in interpreting the graph.  You are trying to hide behind you bluster and I am not fooled.  Let it go, I did.  We all need an occasional tune up.  This was yours.  Why concentrate on electrons when the share territory with protons?  You know what would silence the peanut gallery?  You providing contrary readings that show a transit through the van allen belts can be in less than oh, say .01 mgy/day because if you can't then no amount of distraction can hide the fact that apollo claimed it did amidst a GCR background greater than tow and a lunar radiation level 30 % higher.  Pardner this is going to hurt because some serious anal extraction is required.

[Luke Pemberton]

I'm sorry but is the Outer VAB entirely consisting of electrons?  I didn't know that.  Even a genius like me can learn something. 

You are here talking about the finer nuances of radiation in space, and you didn't know the outer belts is mainly electrons. You didn't know that? I never thought I'd speak in a positive manner about Jarrah White, but Jarrah understands this. At least the bloke has gone out to understand the basics of the belts.

Reference?

Please, don't come here asking me to give you reference about the most basic facts regarding the van Allen belts while simultaneously arguing that the provide an insurmountable barrier. If you don't know about the structure of the belts how can you talk about them, in any meaningful way? Go out and do some research, I'm not here to do that for you.

[bknight]

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..

No you have been shown that a shorter path was traveled.  No 4.5 hrs through the belts less than 2 hours. Again you fail to understand the trajectory.

NASA considered two trajectories.  The first was a direct one straight through the heart of the VAB to the moon and the second one a translunar injection using a technique invented and proven by the Russians.  They determined the direct shot would actually receive the least radiation because the speed and time in the heart of the VAB would actually reduce overall exposure.  The Russian method spent more time in the VAB but was far more fuel efficient.  They opted for the the Russian method.  There is no secret safe passage.  Many pretend it is but they cannot document it.  Why would we send the Orion into the heart of the VAB if such a path had been discovered?

Red herring.  Besides you have already been informed why the Orion trajectory was not the same as Apollo's general trajectory.  You really don't understand anything concerning orbital mechanics.  The Russians didn't "invent" sny trajectory it is all in the mathematics.
Apollo's trajectory was to skirt the more intense areas of the VARB, look at the image you plotted the 2 dimensional representation of the 3 dimensional torus.  You can see for your self that the trajectory was a the edges and did not go through the whole VARB.  Not 4.5 hrs. but around 2 hrs. as Bob B. indicated in his computations, you're what, I think Jay coined the phrase, willfully ignorant.  The data is there you either refuse to accept it or hand wave it away.

Now for your calculation please, show your work as Bob did.

Just glancing through the threads are you.  Try a more detailed approach Johnny come lately. I already posted the math for the inquisitive.

No radiation computations, try to stay up with me.  And use the correct time and it isn't 4.5 hrs.  Tell you what read Bob" page again tonight, it might give you some ideas/leads.  And look at the 3'd video of the trajectory.

[timfinch]

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

Umm... is that you, Mr. Trump? You seem to have a skewed interpretation of what it means to be winning.

I am easily confused but didn't Trump win the presidential race?

Yes, you are easily confused. Especially by graphs.

And Trump did not win in the way that matters. He won because the United States has the Electoral College... which is basically like a sports handicap for politicians who can't win otherwise. It's like me beating Michael Jordan at basketball... but only because every ball I get in the net is worth 1000 points while his are worth 1. But that's off topic, so I'll slap myself on the wrist and stop now.

I feel your pain.  I was the same way about George Bush.  I resorted to recreational pharmaceuticals, alcohol and ************.  The ************ really helped a lot.

[MBDK]

We know that 2 hrs. and 32 minutes later it had traveled 22000 miles

Wrong.  We know that it was 22,000 NAUTICAL miles in a straight line from Earth (that's just over 25,000 statute miles), but Apollo traveled in an arc, so actual distance traveled was greater.  I point this out to show that you still cannot seem to comprehend the actualities of your data.

We know that the VAB is 37000 miles long

We also know that Apollo 11 didn't travel anywhere near the entire breadth of the belts, so that number cannot be used for accurate calculations, either.  You also haven't addressed how the shielding of the spacecraft radically lowers the exposure for the astronauts.

[Luke Pemberton]

Why concentrate on electrons when the share territory with protons?

... because the Apollo craft followed a trajectory that skirted the outer belts. The main flux in the outer belts are due to electrons. It's a bit like someone firing 1000 paintballs at you, 999 are green and 1 are red. The electrons are the green ones.

Now, how does the shielding perform against the electron flux at the electron energies that are relevant to the problem? You need to perform an integrated flux attenuated against shielding at 8 g cm^-2.

[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..

No you have been shown that a shorter path was traveled.  No 4.5 hrs through the belts less than 2 hours. Again you fail to understand the trajectory.

NASA considered two trajectories.  The first was a direct one straight through the heart of the VAB to the moon and the second one a translunar injection using a technique invented and proven by the Russians.  They determined the direct shot would actually receive the least radiation because the speed and time in the heart of the VAB would actually reduce overall exposure.  The Russian method spent more time in the VAB but was far more fuel efficient.  They opted for the the Russian method.  There is no secret safe passage.  Many pretend it is but they cannot document it.  Why would we send the Orion into the heart of the VAB if such a path had been discovered?

Red herring.  Besides you have already been informed why the Orion trajectory was not the same as Apollo's general trajectory.  You really don't understand anything concerning orbital mechanics.  The Russians didn't "invent" sny trajectory it is all in the mathematics.
Apollo's trajectory was to skirt the more intense areas of the VARB, look at the image you plotted the 2 dimensional representation of the 3 dimensional torus.  You can see for your self that the trajectory was a the edges and did not go through the whole VARB.  Not 4.5 hrs. but around 2 hrs. as Bob B. indicated in his computations, you're what, I think Jay coined the phrase, willfully ignorant.  The data is there you either refuse to accept it or hand wave it away.

Now for your calculation please, show your work as Bob did.

Just glancing through the threads are you.  Try a more detailed approach Johnny come lately. I already posted the math for the inquisitive.

No radiation computations, try to stay up with me.  And use the correct time and it isn't 4.5 hrs.  Tell you what read Bob" page again tonight, it might give you some ideas/leads.  And look at the 3'd video of the trajectory.

I explained this to those that were on time to class already.  The VAB expands during solar maximums by thousands of miles and even a third ring is created.  I thought it a conservative estimate to simply use the the stated size of 37000 miles for computation.  If I had access to better data I could accomplish miracles considering my mental acumen is exceptionally great and I stayedd at a Holiday Express once.