Radiation

[timfinch]

Show me on the graph where the bad man hurt you?  If both crafts entered into the VAB at the same inclination traveling in the same direction then they share a similar flight path.

Which part of 'one had an apogee in the belt and one shot right through' isn't clear in terms of describing their flight paths as different?

Apogee would reflect the length of the elliptical and has nothing to do with the plane of the elliptical.  From a side view each would appear as straight lines of different lengths on the same angle.

[timfinch]

On the surface, this seems so simple.  I posted a graph delineating two paths that I defend by citing NASA data.  I would think it to be a simple matter to refute it with a similar graph and different NASA data.  Why are we hung up here?  Is there no one with the technical skills to refute my claims or is there no evidence to support such a refutation?

[timfinch]

Who silenced the moderators and what did you use for a gag?

[timfinch]

The inmates have taking control of the prison?  We are warden-less?

[Jason Thompson]

Apogee would reflect the length of the elliptical and has nothing to do with the plane of the elliptical.  From a side view each would appear as straight lines of different lengths on the same angle.

Which is irrelevant as a 3D spaceflight problem. Different eliptical eccentricity = different path even if it is on the same plane. It also, incidentally, has a huge effect on time by virtue of speed. But no doubt you won't grasp that either.

[timfinch]

Apogee would reflect the length of the elliptical and has nothing to do with the plane of the elliptical.  From a side view each would appear as straight lines of different lengths on the same angle.

Which is irrelevant as a 3D spaceflight problem. Different eliptical eccentricity = different path even if it is on the same plane. It also, incidentally, has a huge effect on time by virtue of speed. But no doubt you won't grasp that either.

Dancing like a butterfly.  Is it in your mind the path cannot be accurately described on a 2d illustration and if so then why the proliferation of such depictions?  NASA used a 2d representation and so did Braeuninig.  Why can't you?

[Luke Pemberton]

The inmates have taking control of the prison?  We are warden-less?

... and there's one of the inmates barking at the moon from the confines of the asylum. LO doesn't patrol 24-7. I cannot speak for him, but I wouldn't irk him about the running of the forum. He's the only mod, he has a job, family and other interests. He runs the forum voluntarily. Do you run internet forums? No. So don't throw stones as the glass might fall around you.

1.  Explain why the Apollo 3D trajectory would appear to be a straight line when projected onto 2D.

2.  What types of secondary radiation are produced in the CM as it traverses the belts?

3.  Explain the mechanism for the secondary radiation.

4.  How does the material in the hull affect the spectrum of radiation produced.

5.  Describe the penetration of that secondary radiation through the CM.

6.  How does the integral flux for electrons > 1 MeV change with energy?

Talking about throwing stones. If you want to talk  about moderation, then I'll invoke it and ask LO for you to answer these questions tonight while Mag 40 is putting together a figure for you.

I won't accept flounce-Google time. They are one the table now, show you understand and support your claims about the radiation being prohibitive.

[timfinch]

Apogee would reflect the length of the elliptical and has nothing to do with the plane of the elliptical.  From a side view each would appear as straight lines of different lengths on the same angle.

Which is irrelevant as a 3D spaceflight problem. Different eliptical eccentricity = different path even if it is on the same plane. It also, incidentally, has a huge effect on time by virtue of speed. But no doubt you won't grasp that either.

Rotate your drawing to a side view and how would each of those orbits be seen?  two straight lines of different lengths?

[timfinch]

The inmates have taking control of the prison?  We are warden-less?

... and there's one of the inmates barking at the moon from the confines of the asylum. LO doesn't patrol 24-7. I cannot speak for him, but I wouldn't irk him about the running of the forum. He's the only mod, he has a job, family and other interests. He runs the forum voluntarily. Do you run internet forums? No. So don't throw stones as the glass might fall around you.

1.  Explain why the Apollo 3D trajectory would appear to be a straight line when projected onto 2D.

2.  What types of secondary radiation are produced in the CM as it traverses the belts?

3.  Explain the mechanism for the secondary radiation.

4.  How does the material in the hull affect the spectrum of radiation produced.

5.  Describe the penetration of that secondary radiation through the CM.

6.  How does the integral flux for electrons > 1 MeV change with energy?

Talking about throwing stones. If you want to talk  about moderation, then I'll invoke it and ask LO for you to answer these questions tonight while Mag 40 is putting together a figure for you.

I won't accept flounce-Google time. They are one the table now, show you understand and support your claims about the radiation being prohibitive.

I led off with a question that you refused to address.  It was a simple question.  Did the Orion EFT mirror the apollo's path into the VAB.  If it did not show the facts to explain the differences.  You have provide no answers yet you demand your unrelated questions be answered in short order.  Tit for tat.  Show me yours and then I will show you mine.

[Jason Thompson]

Rotate your drawing to a side view and how would each of those orbits be seen?  two straight lines of different lengths?

Yes, but since neither craft was travelling in a straight line it doesn't matter. Because you can see simlarities from one position doesn't mean they exist in the full reality of space and time. My diagram is a valid indication of the fact that Orion and Apollo had different flight paths.

2D representations are used because they are simple to construct. They are not intended to be totally accurate representations to be used in the manner you try to here. As an example, in a 2D representation, whether from the side or from above, Pluto and Neptune have intersecting orbits. In the actual 3D reality their orbital paths never actually intersect.

[timfinch]

Rotate your drawing to a side view and how would each of those orbits be seen?  two straight lines of different lengths?

Yes, but since neither craft was travelling in a straight line it doesn't matter.

2D representations are used because they are simple to construct. They are not intended to be totally accurate representations to be used in the manner you try to here. As an example, in a 2D representation, whether from the side or from above, Pluto and Neptune have intersecting orbits. In the actual 3D reality their orbital paths never actually intersect.

are you claiming that the path deviates from the orbital plane?  If so, why and by how much?

[gillianren]

Gillianren, the only reason I entertain this forum and the abuse it provides because I had hoped I was incorrect.  I don't want to believe that my government is capable of such a deception.  I had hoped that I could be shown an alternative that resolved my issues but alas it was not meant to be.  I  have been distracted, deceived and lied to.  I have not had a single question resolved in a manner that my intellectual integrity can be satisfied with.  Nothing to be seen here beyond the smoke and mirrors.  Will you please stop asking the same question over and over?  It has become tiresome and it is distracting.

When you provide a satisfactory answer, I'll stop asking it.

You are not an expert in the field.  We all know that.  So is it not more reasonable to assume that you don't understand the numbers than that the numbers disprove Apollo?  Or is it simply impossible for you to ever be wrong about what the numbers show?

[timfinch]

I remind you that a circle, an ellipse and a straight line look the same when viewed along the plane of reference.  They all appear as lines of varying lengths.

[Jason Thompson]

are you claiming that the path deviates from the orbital plane?  If so, why and by how much?
[/quote]

No, and I never have. Are you being deliberately obtuse at this point?

I'll write it again to make it easy: orbits on the same plane do not have 'similar' flight paths. Is that not clear from the diagram? Even if those orbits are on the same plane they are clearly not similar in any sense when it comes to passing through the van Allen belts.

[timfinch]

Gillianren, the only reason I entertain this forum and the abuse it provides because I had hoped I was incorrect.  I don't want to believe that my government is capable of such a deception.  I had hoped that I could be shown an alternative that resolved my issues but alas it was not meant to be.  I  have been distracted, deceived and lied to.  I have not had a single question resolved in a manner that my intellectual integrity can be satisfied with.  Nothing to be seen here beyond the smoke and mirrors.  Will you please stop asking the same question over and over?  It has become tiresome and it is distracting.

When you provide a satisfactory answer, I'll stop asking it.

You are not an expert in the field.  We all know that.  So is it not more reasonable to assume that you don't understand the numbers than that the numbers disprove Apollo?  Or is it simply impossible for you to ever be wrong about what the numbers show?

I gave you my answer.  Now if you want me to answer it in your voice then tell me what to say.  I will say it to remove the incessant ringing in my ears.