Radiation

[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.

If you continue making crude comments like that you will be banned.

Which part do you find crude?  The George Bush or the ************ part or the combination or was it the recreational pharmaceuticals?  What is it ************?  was that on the list of words you can't sayA?  I missed it.  I will avoid it's use in the future and apologize for my discretion.

[benparry]

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

tim really. is that not a little bit childish.

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.

If you continue making crude comments like that you will be banned.

Which part do you find crude?  The George Bush or the ************ part or the combination or was it the recreational pharmaceuticals?  What is it ************?  was that on the list of words you can't sayA?  I missed it.  I will avoid it's use in the future and apologize for my discretion.

tim really. is that not a little but childish.

[Luke Pemberton]

Nice catch Luke I completely looked over that part.  I've been attempting to get it across to tim that A11 was out of the second torus by about 2 hours, not the 4.5 he keeps trying to invent, but you know that.

There's so much information about the trajectory and the belts. The video is a lovely resource and shows how the spacecraft misses the 'red bit' nicely. It's knowing the composition of the belts, the flux of the particles, and how the flux differentiates with energy. Which you know... 

[benparry]

Nice catch Luke I completely looked over that part.  I've been attempting to get it across to tim that A11 was out of the second torus by about 2 hours, not the 4.5 he keeps trying to invent, but you know that.

There's so much information about the trajectory and the belts. The video is a lovely resource and shows how the spacecraft misses the 'red bit' nicely. It's knowing what's in the ts and how it relaters to the flux of the particles, and how the flux changes with energy. Which you know... 

am I correct in saying they were In the belts in total for about 3.5 hours going and 2.5 returning

[timfinch]

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.

Ring? Do you mean torus. See the difference between me being able to visualise in 3D and you default to 2D?

There's even a suggestion that the second torus is made of two smaller belts, if I recall the literature correctly. Oh, see what I did there. I referred to literature as I'm a little bit of an expert in this area. You on the other hand didn't even know the outer belts mainly consist of electrons. That is lamentable.

So how did the CM hull perform against the electrons in the outer belt for different energies across the flux? I'll give you an helping hand, you're going to have to perform an integrated flux calculation here.

Allow my little Friend at NASA help you with the math.  They did this for children so I am fully confident that you will have no problems with it.  We can use NASA's figures if you like or your personal ones if it makes you feel any better.  https://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/earth/3Page7.pdf

Once again, reading comprehension isn't exactly your forte, is it?  From your latest reference:

"Also, this radiation exposure would be for an astronaut outside the spacecraft during the transit through
the belts. The radiation shielding inside the spacecraft cuts down the 13 Rads/hour exposure so that it is
completely harmless."

So, not only did your reference fail to provide the computational data from the shielding, it made a general statement that completely supports the position that the exposure was of no concern (as mitigated by the shielding and trajectory).

I am so glad you pointed out that little tidbit and I didn't.  It might have seemed a bit self serving if I had.  Let us assume both you and NASA are entirely correct and it was a mere 13 rads accumulated over the VAB  transit.  Could you please explain to all your fans and friends and the audience how you can squeeze that into a mission dosage of .22 mgy/day.  I am going to get a bag of popcorn because I love a good magics show.

[timfinch]

Did that hurt?  I seemed it would hurt from my perspective.  Maybe a virtual "Ouch!" would be order?

[benparry]

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.

Ring? Do you mean torus. See the difference between me being able to visualise in 3D and you default to 2D?

There's even a suggestion that the second torus is made of two smaller belts, if I recall the literature correctly. Oh, see what I did there. I referred to literature as I'm a little bit of an expert in this area. You on the other hand didn't even know the outer belts mainly consist of electrons. That is lamentable.

So how did the CM hull perform against the electrons in the outer belt for different energies across the flux? I'll give you an helping hand, you're going to have to perform an integrated flux calculation here.

Allow my little Friend at NASA help you with the math.  They did this for children so I am fully confident that you will have no problems with it.  We can use NASA's figures if you like or your personal ones if it makes you feel any better.  https://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/earth/3Page7.pdf

Once again, reading comprehension isn't exactly your forte, is it?  From your latest reference:

"Also, this radiation exposure would be for an astronaut outside the spacecraft during the transit through
the belts. The radiation shielding inside the spacecraft cuts down the 13 Rads/hour exposure so that it is
completely harmless."

So, not only did your reference fail to provide the computational data from the shielding, it made a general statement that completely supports the position that the exposure was of no concern (as mitigated by the shielding and trajectory).

I am so glad you pointed out that little tidbit and I didn't.  It might have seemed a bit self serving if I had.  Let us assume both you and NASA are entirely correct and it was a mere 13 rads accumulated over the VAB  transit.  Could you please explain to all your fans and friends and the audience how you can squeeze that into a mission dosage of .22 mgy/day.  I am going to ge a bag of popcorn because I love a good magics show.

can I have a go at this one. and i'm thick bear in mind. isn't the 13 a figure for outside of the spacecraft. the astranauts were inside.

[bknight]

Nice catch Luke I completely looked over that part.  I've been attempting to get it across to tim that A11 was out of the second torus by about 2 hours, not the 4.5 he keeps trying to invent, but you know that.

There's so much information about the trajectory and the belts. The video is a lovely resource and shows how the spacecraft misses the 'red bit' nicely. It's knowing what's in the ts and how it relaters to the flux of the particles, and how the flux changes with energy. Which you know... 

am I correct in saying they were In the belts in total for about 3.5 hours going and 2.5 returning

Using Bob's numbers that is about right
214 min
140 min

https://web.archive.org/web/20170821064300/https://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm

About a 1/3 of the way down.

[benparry]

Nice catch Luke I completely looked over that part.  I've been attempting to get it across to tim that A11 was out of the second torus by about 2 hours, not the 4.5 he keeps trying to invent, but you know that.

There's so much information about the trajectory and the belts. The video is a lovely resource and shows how the spacecraft misses the 'red bit' nicely. It's knowing what's in the ts and how it relaters to the flux of the particles, and how the flux changes with energy. Which you know... 

am I correct in saying they were In the belts in total for about 3.5 hours going and 2.5 returning

Using Bob's numbers that is about right
214 min
140 min

https://web.archive.org/web/20170821064300/https://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm

About a 1/3 of the way down.

cool thanks for that

[Luke Pemberton]

Let us assume both you and NASA are entirely correct and it was a mere 13 rads accumulated over the VAB  transit.

... and what part did you not understand that the 13 rads is the unshielded dose. Even your own source tells you that. Your source...

"Also, this radiation exposure would be for an astronaut outside the spacecraft during the transit through the belts. The radiation shielding inside the spacecraft cuts down the 13 rads/hour exposure so that it is completely harmless."

I am going to get a bag of popcorn because I love a good magics show.

Make sure you wash your hands.

[MBDK]

I am so glad you pointed out that little tidbit and I didn't.  It might have seemed a bit self serving if I had.  Let us assume both you and NASA are entirely correct and it was a mere 13 rads accumulated over the VAB  transit.  Could you please explain to all your fans and friends and the audience how you can squeeze that into a mission dosage of .22 mgy/day.  I am going to ge a bag of popcorn because I love a good magics show.

Ignoring the point of my rebuke is classic troll behavior.  Now deal with the point, and if you can't figure out what that is, you really have no business even walking outside, much less trying to discuss anything here.

[Luke Pemberton]

...and i'm thick bear in mind. Isn't the 13 a figure for outside of the spacecraft. The astronauts were inside.

I think they were outside, but I guess Tim would probably argue that point too. There's only one person being thick here. It's not you, and it's not me. 

[MBDK]

Make sure you wash your hands.

Now THAT is funny!

[benparry]

...and i'm thick bear in mind. Isn't the 13 a figure for outside of the spacecraft. The astronauts were inside.

I think they were outside, but I guess Tim would probably argue that point too. There's only one person being thick here. It's not you, and it's not me. 

after reading this very short thread (again sorry for that) it seems to me (and compared to everybody including tim I am very inexperienced and uneducated) there are a few bits which tangle him. firstly the trajectory through the VAB. I believe this region to be a 3d donut shaped region in space. the tli were inclined about 30 degrees which allowed them to bypass the inner more dangerous regions. then for the GCR. tim has tried to compare data on Apollo with other more recent missions which had both different vehicles, were unmanned, and occurred at different solar cycles. finally the neutron radiation which tim claims is increased by 35 percent in orbit. again this figure is derived from a more recent mission with a higher solar cycle. is what I have written here basically the crux of all this

[Luke Pemberton]

after reading this very short thread (again sorry for that) it seems to me (and compared to everybody including Tim I am very inexperienced and uneducated) there are a few bits which tangle him. firstly the trajectory through the VAB. I believe this region to be a 3D donut shaped region in space. the TLI were inclined about 30 degrees which allowed them to bypass the inner more dangerous regions. then for the GCR. Tim has tried to compare data on Apollo with other more recent missions which had both different vehicles, were unmanned, and occurred at different solar cycles. finally the neutron radiation which Tim claims is increased by 35 percent in orbit. again this figure is derived from a more recent mission with a higher solar cycle. is what I have written here basically the crux of all this

These are the salient points of the argument, but the real issue being that the problem is very complicated and cannot be distilled into convenient back of the envelope calculations and extrapolating scientific research and mapping that research on to the mission data.

The main thrust here has shown Tim is illiterate in the fields at every turn, and invokes literature that refutes his own claims. For him to ask for a reference pertaining to the VAB composition shows he's behind the curve ball. He shouldn't even be in the same 'room' as people here. We've hardly scratched the surface of the problem he's trying to boil into a few bones.