Radiation

[Luke Pemberton]

It matters not the speed when you really think about it.

Except that it does, very obviously, from even the most basic understanding of maths...

I've been following on Tapatalk and replying on my mobile tonight, so it has been tricky to keep up. You beat me to this. Of course it depends on speed. But then I don't think Tim understands how this changes eccentricity and flight through 3D space, nor can he link speed to exposure. Speed through the belts is key for two reasons, but of course the primary reason for the speed is to provide an orbit for TLI. This is another reason to doubt his understanding if he can't make these connections. Will he acknowledge this error?

We know that The Apollo 11 mission occurred during solar max and we know the electron belt expands during solar maximum.

I never knew this. I understand the VAB changes if the solar wind increases speed, is this correct?

One of the most interesting phenomenon of the belts are the whistler waves that accelerate the electrons.

So yes, the belts are actually non-uniform in space, flux, composition and particle energy.

[Abaddon]

If the radiation in the ring is uniform in respect to radii then it matters not what azimuth you enter.  The only relevant factor would inclination.

Do you think the radiation is uniform? Yes or no. I appeal to LO that Tim answers this question. I want to ascertain his understanding of the VABs which I have asked about several times.

Sent from my G3311 using Tapatalk

did you answer my question?  You first.

What do you think? Tell me what you know, is the radiation uniform?

Sent from my G3311 using Tapatalk

Do you not read my post?  I told you it is for a given radii.  Do you need a translator?

Even in the diagram one you 'brought clarity to' (a claim, by the way, which was absolute crock as shown by myself and others) Does that look uniform for a given radius outward to you? Because I would get your  eyes checked after your break if so.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1444.0;attach=721;image

Meh. Now that I have Adobe cranked up, mercy will be in short supply. 

[Luke Pemberton]

Do you not read my post?  I told you it is for a given radii.

Your first post was a question, your second was a statement in reply to my question. I misread as I did not have my reading glasses on. I've been using Tapatalk and my mobile to answer tonight. I'm now at home on my PC. I apologise, you did answer my question.

You are telling us the radiation in the VAB is uniform at a given radius. Except it is not.

1) What makes you think the radiation is uniform at a given radius?

2) I assume you are making this assumption with respect to comparing Apollo and Orion? If so, why?

Do you need a translator?

No just my reading glasses.

[Abaddon]

Break time.  BBL.

Sorry Tim but "BBL" does not cut the evidential mustard.

I made a series of claims. I claimed I would bork you in photoshop. Did that. I claimed I would mount said images on an independant site, did that. I claimed that I would then link those images right here. I did that . In fact, everything I claimed I would do, I did do. All you have is empty claims and doing SFA.

[LunarOrbit]

It has been a day and Abaddon has not been suspended for for an act I received a suspension for.  Does that seem fair to everybody?  Is he privileged or am I simply not deserving of the respect each of you take for granted?

You were banned for trolling and insults. The "mentally challenged" insult was just one example and the last straw.

Abaddon did insult you, and it does need to stop. But I also take into consideration the years of valuable contributions he has made to this forum. One insult isn't going to get him banned. You, on the other hand, have been here for a month and have been a troll the entire time. That puts you on thinner ice than Abaddon. History matters.

I saw the moderator report you sent me about this last night, but since I can't reply to them I will just tell you now that yes, I have given Abaddon a free pass this time. But since he made that comment last night, I figure I've given you multiple free passes for comments you've made since then. For example:

You have insulted members of the forum and made unfounded accusations against them...

Bob Braeunig is a government shill.

I am starting to believe that either you are actively in opposition of the truth because you really couldn't be this dumb.

You lie like a cheap rug.

Where is the intellectual integrity in this group

You are spatially challenged and find it difficult to transition between perspectives.  I understand and you have my sympathies.  I cannot fix that which is terminally broken.  I will just move on without you and hope you find success with your impairment.

You have evaded important questions that have been repeatedly asked of you...

I don't want to seem impatient but does anyone have anything?

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?

These are indeed all good questions but most distract from the focus of the original inquiry.

And you have ignored our reponses that ought to resolve your questions, only to repeat those same questions as if we hadn't responded. You've even pretended we had previously agreed with you in cases where we had not. That is dishonest and I consider it trolling.

I thought we all agreed after rigorous debate that Orion mirrored the apollo's path into the VAB.  Did something happen while I was hospitalized?

So you're right, Abaddon did get away with an insult. But you've gotten away with many things that you shouldn't have. Consider yourself lucky and move on.

[timfinch]

Let's talk about these differences.  Is it you are implying that there exist a difference in the van allen belt radially along it's inner wall?  Is the radiation not uniform 360 degrees around the earth?

In a very basic and simplistic view, yes, the VAB encompasses 360 degrees around Earth.  Although that leaves out a lot of detail and makes a lot of assumptions.

In a more realistic, and relevant view, it is not uniform, and it has a specific, approximately toroidal shape, aka a doughnut (donut for you folks on the west of the Atlantic) aligned closely with the Earth's geomagnetic axis - not the physical axis, ecliptic, or the Moon's orbital plane.

This torus is a three-dimensional shape, and the extent above and below the "geomagnetic equator" is well mapped.  It is relatively straightforward to calculate an orbit which travels above and below the doughnut, or which only intersects particular parts of it.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all orbits must be aligned to the same plane as the VAB, and must necessarily pass through the centre...

If you were smarter than the average three year old you would realize that a side view 2d representation is repeated over 360 degrees.  What it is telling you that any point is identical at any other point around the circumference of the vab.   Is is so difficult dealing with the spatially challenged.  It doesn't matter where around the earth you enter the VAB the only thing that varies is the incident inclination.  If it is the same inclination then the radiation is the same.  If you were any denser you would sink into lead.

[timfinch]

It has been a day and Abaddon has not been suspended for for an act I received a suspension for.  Does that seem fair to everybody?  Is he privileged or am I simply not deserving of the respect each of you take for granted?

You were banned for trolling and insults. The "mentally challenged" insult was just one example and the last straw.

Abaddon did insult you, and it does need to stop. But I also take into consideration the years of valuable contributions he has made to this forum. One insult isn't going to get him banned. You, on the other hand, have been here for a month and have been a troll the entire time. That puts you on thinner ice than Abaddon. History matters.

I saw the moderator report you sent me about this last night, but since I can't reply to them I will just tell you now that yes, I have given Abaddon a free pass this time. But since he made that comment last night, I figure I've given you multiple free passes for comments you've made since then. For example:

You have insulted members of the forum and made unfounded accusations against them...

Bob Braeunig is a government shill.

I am starting to believe that either you are actively in opposition of the truth because you really couldn't be this dumb.

You lie like a cheap rug.

Where is the intellectual integrity in this group

You are spatially challenged and find it difficult to transition between perspectives.  I understand and you have my sympathies.  I cannot fix that which is terminally broken.  I will just move on without you and hope you find success with your impairment.

You have evaded important questions that have been repeatedly asked of you...

I don't want to seem impatient but does anyone have anything?

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?

These are indeed all good questions but most distract from the focus of the original inquiry.

And you have ignored our reponses that ought to resolve your questions, only to repeat those same questions as if we hadn't responded. You've even pretended we had previously agreed with you in cases where we had not. That is dishonest and I consider it trolling.

I thought we all agreed after rigorous debate that Orion mirrored the apollo's path into the VAB.  Did something happen while I was hospitalized?

So you're right, Abaddon did get away with an insult. But you've gotten away with many things that you shouldn't have. Consider yourself lucky and move on.

is Robert Brauenig a member of this group?

[LunarOrbit]

is Robert Brauenig a member of this group?

Yes, although he hasn't been active in over a year.

[Luke Pemberton]

It doesn't matter where around the earth you enter the VAB the only thing that varies is the incident inclination.

Are you aware that inclination is one orbital parameter that defines the orbital plane. If the spacecraft enters that plane at a higher speed, you map out an ellipse with a completely different eccentricity. The path is different through the van Allen belts.

The radiation in the VABs depends on radius, azimuth and polar angle, so does the ellipse on the orbital plane. It follows that the exposure of Apollo and Orion are different.

[timfinch]

Let's talk about these differences.  Is it you are implying that there exist a difference in the van allen belt radially along it's inner wall?  Is the radiation not uniform 360 degrees around the earth?

In a very basic and simplistic view, yes, the VAB encompasses 360 degrees around Earth.  Although that leaves out a lot of detail and makes a lot of assumptions.

In a more realistic, and relevant view, it is not uniform, and it has a specific, approximately toroidal shape, aka a doughnut (donut for you folks on the west of the Atlantic) aligned closely with the Earth's geomagnetic axis - not the physical axis, ecliptic, or the Moon's orbital plane.

This torus is a three-dimensional shape, and the extent above and below the "geomagnetic equator" is well mapped.  It is relatively straightforward to calculate an orbit which travels above and below the doughnut, or which only intersects particular parts of it.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all orbits must be aligned to the same plane as the VAB, and must necessarily pass through the centre...

You are simply incapable of understanding the obvious.  the elliptical inclination of orbit should be referenced to the magnetic equator if you are to ascertain the interaction of the VAB.  Try to stay focused and on point.  I grow frustrated with your opaqueness.

[nomuse]

Let's talk about these differences.  Is it you are implying that there exist a difference in the van allen belt radially along it's inner wall?  Is the radiation not uniform 360 degrees around the earth?

In a very basic and simplistic view, yes, the VAB encompasses 360 degrees around Earth.  Although that leaves out a lot of detail and makes a lot of assumptions.

In a more realistic, and relevant view, it is not uniform, and it has a specific, approximately toroidal shape, aka a doughnut (donut for you folks on the west of the Atlantic) aligned closely with the Earth's geomagnetic axis - not the physical axis, ecliptic, or the Moon's orbital plane.

This torus is a three-dimensional shape, and the extent above and below the "geomagnetic equator" is well mapped.  It is relatively straightforward to calculate an orbit which travels above and below the doughnut, or which only intersects particular parts of it.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all orbits must be aligned to the same plane as the VAB, and must necessarily pass through the centre...

If you were smarter than the average three year old you would realize that a side view 2d representation is repeated over 360 degrees.  What it is telling you that any point is identical at any other point around the circumference of the vab.   Is is so difficult dealing with the spatially challenged.  It doesn't matter where around the earth you enter the VAB the only thing that varies is the incident inclination.  If it is the same inclination then the radiation is the same.  If you were any denser you would sink into lead.

You are the only one who thinks there's some argument about an angle in the plane of the major radius. Everyone else is working with a solid torus.

(Actually, though, if you wanted to be accurate, the VARB is deformed by the solar wind. But we haven't been discussing that.)

[Luke Pemberton]

If you were smarter than the average three year old you would realize that a side view 2d representation is repeated over 360 degrees.  What it is telling you that any point is identical at any other point around the circumference of the vab.

It's not though, the orbital plane is defined geocentrically with repsect to the ecliptic plane, the geomagnetic plane is not. The torus axis is inclined to the normal of the orbital plane. This has been explained to you several times now.

Your assumption would only apply if orbital plane, geomagnetic plane and ecliptic plane are all co-planar.

[nomuse]

Let's talk about these differences.  Is it you are implying that there exist a difference in the van allen belt radially along it's inner wall?  Is the radiation not uniform 360 degrees around the earth?

In a very basic and simplistic view, yes, the VAB encompasses 360 degrees around Earth.  Although that leaves out a lot of detail and makes a lot of assumptions.

In a more realistic, and relevant view, it is not uniform, and it has a specific, approximately toroidal shape, aka a doughnut (donut for you folks on the west of the Atlantic) aligned closely with the Earth's geomagnetic axis - not the physical axis, ecliptic, or the Moon's orbital plane.

This torus is a three-dimensional shape, and the extent above and below the "geomagnetic equator" is well mapped.  It is relatively straightforward to calculate an orbit which travels above and below the doughnut, or which only intersects particular parts of it.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all orbits must be aligned to the same plane as the VAB, and must necessarily pass through the centre...

You are simply incapable of understanding the obvious.  the elliptical inclination of orbit should be referenced to the magnetic equator if you are to ascertain the interaction of the VAB.  Try to stay focused and on point.  I grow frustrated with your opaqueness.

Tim...I can't speak for LO -- his forum his rules -- but learn how to debate without this kind of insult.

If other people don't seem to understand your point, DON'T assume they are stupid. Assume it is one of two things; you aren't explaining very well, or, you are wrong.

[timfinch]

It doesn't matter where around the earth you enter the VAB the only thing that varies is the incident inclination.

Are you aware that inclination is one orbital parameter that defines the orbital plane. If the spacecraft enters that plane at a higher speed, you map out an ellipse with a completely different eccentricity. The path is different through the van Allen belts.

The radiation in the VABs depends on radius, azimuth and polar angle, so does the ellipse on the orbital plane. It follows that the exposure of Apollo and Orion are different.

Luke, I have shown you that the only relevant factor is the inclination of the plane of orbit. Because the distribution of radiation is uniform around the circumference of the earth then it matters not the azimuth of entry.  Why is this so difficult to understand?  Speed is only important because of the component of time.  The less time you spend in each zone then the less the dose received.The larger the elliptical orbit the greater the time spent in each zone.  A straight line shot would result in the least time in each zone.  Can't you see that?

[timfinch]

Let's talk about these differences.  Is it you are implying that there exist a difference in the van allen belt radially along it's inner wall?  Is the radiation not uniform 360 degrees around the earth?

In a very basic and simplistic view, yes, the VAB encompasses 360 degrees around Earth.  Although that leaves out a lot of detail and makes a lot of assumptions.

In a more realistic, and relevant view, it is not uniform, and it has a specific, approximately toroidal shape, aka a doughnut (donut for you folks on the west of the Atlantic) aligned closely with the Earth's geomagnetic axis - not the physical axis, ecliptic, or the Moon's orbital plane.

This torus is a three-dimensional shape, and the extent above and below the "geomagnetic equator" is well mapped.  It is relatively straightforward to calculate an orbit which travels above and below the doughnut, or which only intersects particular parts of it.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that all orbits must be aligned to the same plane as the VAB, and must necessarily pass through the centre...

You are simply incapable of understanding the obvious.  the elliptical inclination of orbit should be referenced to the magnetic equator if you are to ascertain the interaction of the VAB.  Try to stay focused and on point.  I grow frustrated with your opaqueness.

Tim...I can't speak for LO -- his forum his rules -- but learn how to debate without this kind of insult.

If other people don't seem to understand your point, DON'T assume they are stupid. Assume it is one of two things; you aren't explaining very well, or, you are wrong.

Point taken.  Thank you.