![]() |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
Am 17.10.2011 19:11, schrieb RD Sandman:
Thomas wrote in news:9g1qeuFioqU1 @mid.individual.net: Am 16.10.2011 18:47, schrieb RD Sandman: Thomas wrote in : ... This is the kind of stupidity that is so typical of the conspiracy nuts (Actually its not my business and I'm not a 'conspiracy nut'. ) .. ... Several here have tried. You aren't unique no matter what your mum told you. So far, none of their theories have held any more water than yours ... But if the ideas have their own value and are is some respect 'better' (as explanation), than they sooner or later outrun the competitors. Yes, but so far, the facts don't fit the conspiracy theories. In the subjects you call 'conspiracies', there are several ideas, that seem to be more 'true' (hence: 'truthers'), what gives these ideas advantages over official explanations. Only in the minds of those who have trouble handling the truth. The 'truthers' will inevitably outrun official fairy tails, because truth has advantages in explaining things. Well, that happens (and it hasn't yet) it will be interesting....but so far the truth remains and conspiracy theories are like weeds. If you don't like the one you just saw, wait a bit and another will show up. Certainly interesting... What if these 'theories' are in fact true. Not every one of course, but one of them. What would it tell you about the people in the government? No good things, I guess. Hope everything comes to a good end. But there are dangers and that is the possibility of massive violence in your country. This could not be beneficial for the rest of the world. My suggestion would be, that Americans try to solve their issues, possibly in a peaceful manner. Greetings Thomas |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
"Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 19:11, schrieb RD Sandman: Well, that happens (and it hasn't yet) it will be interesting....but so far the truth remains and conspiracy theories are like weeds. If you don't like the one you just saw, wait a bit and another will show up. Certainly interesting... What if these 'theories' are in fact true. Not every one of course, but one of them. What would it tell you about the people in the government? No good things, I guess. Hope everything comes to a good end. But there are dangers and that is the possibility of massive violence in your country. This could not be beneficial for the rest of the world. My suggestion would be, that Americans try to solve their issues, possibly in a peaceful manner. Greetings Thomas Maybe you should spend a bit of time studying some comparative history Let's say comparing the US and Germany over the last 100 years Do tell us which of the 2 countries has had more violence against it's own people and against it's neighbors over the last 2 centuries And how many people died because of those actions Before you ignorantly tell others what they should be doing, I strongly suggest that you make sure your own house is in order. |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
Wild dogs terrorizing Saint Louis.
http://www.drudgereport.com The three S S S.Shoot, Shovel, and Shut Up. They eat dogs in the Philippines? cuhulin |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
"Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 07:01, schrieb Scout: .. For Earth orbit you need much faster flight than you would need to stay in orbit around the moon, but nevertheless it is quite fast. On Earth it took a Saturn V rocket, to lift the craft into orbit. On the Moon it would take less fuel, but way more, than the few gallons, they had in the lander. Ok, let's see your math. I mean if you know they needed more, then clearly you have calculated all this out and know exactly how much they would need and whether they could have that much on the lander. So let's see your work. ---- Insert mathematical proof here. Here I will even aid you with the specifications for the mass, amount of fuel, type of fuel, specific impulse, thrust provided, available delta-V, and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_...Specifications Well, I'm a little too lazy, but a rough calculation is possible: There is the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation velocity_final=v_exhaust* ln(mass_start/mass_finish) V_end= 2200 m/s * ln (4547 kg/(4547-2353) kg) that is : v_end approx. 1603 m/s this is an estimated calculation without gravity. the final velocity is reduced by delta v = g_moon * (time of engine running) Don't know that number (time_ engine) Maybe 100 seconds (???) makes: delta v = 1.6 m/sē*100 s=160 m/s What gives a rough estimate for the final velocity of the landers ascending stage of v_end = 1440 m/s. Now the orbital velocity had to be compared. But I don't have the data and actually I'm too lazy to find them out. But usual orbits should be a little less than escape velocity, what is v_orbit_escape = 2380 m/s. V_end is a rough estimate ('thumb times pi'). For better calculations someone with more experience in rocket science is needed. I cannot even tell you, if the ascent stage is fast enough or not. But my intuition tells me, it is not. IOW, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're too lazy to do the work needed to find out if what you think actually has merit or is simply bat **** crazy. |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
"Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 19:11, schrieb RD Sandman: Thomas wrote in news:9g1qeuFioqU1 @mid.individual.net: Am 16.10.2011 18:47, schrieb RD Sandman: Thomas wrote in : .. This is the kind of stupidity that is so typical of the conspiracy nuts (Actually its not my business and I'm not a 'conspiracy nut'. ) .. .. Several here have tried. You aren't unique no matter what your mum told you. So far, none of their theories have held any more water than yours .. But if the ideas have their own value and are is some respect 'better' (as explanation), than they sooner or later outrun the competitors. Yes, but so far, the facts don't fit the conspiracy theories. In the subjects you call 'conspiracies', there are several ideas, that seem to be more 'true' (hence: 'truthers'), what gives these ideas advantages over official explanations. Only in the minds of those who have trouble handling the truth. The 'truthers' will inevitably outrun official fairy tails, because truth has advantages in explaining things. Well, that happens (and it hasn't yet) it will be interesting....but so far the truth remains and conspiracy theories are like weeds. If you don't like the one you just saw, wait a bit and another will show up. Certainly interesting... What if ..... you could actually stick to what you can prove rather than relying on supposition, intuition, and poor reasoning? |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
"SaPeIsMa" wrote in
: "Gray Guest" wrote in message .100... Thomas Heger wrote in news:9g1pg5FcguU1 @mid.individual.net: Well, I would agree to 'just math and knowing where things are'. But that 'just math' is quite challenging, if you have only a handcranked 'computer' with a few k Ram. And knowing where everything is is difficult, too. Today they have GPS, that would help a lot - if installed at the moon. But without radar and satellite navigation things are VERY di Are you a complete and utter moron? How do you think people navigated across open oceans or seas before all that crap was invented? How do you think navigators, navigated? You will deny every aspect of reality to feed your delusions. I'll also point out that in the 60s there were no handheld calculators that did various algebraic and trigonometrical functions. You had slide rules for 3 meaningful digits and log tables for more meaningful digits. And computers were mainframes that had very few real-time applications where you could dynamically change the data set on the fly, and immediately recalculate. Not to mention that their processing speed was slower than a cheap $5 calculator you pick up at Walgreens or Wal-Mart. How does he think ballistic calculations were done back then? American warships were getting first shot hits on a moving target form a moving gun platform in WWII! The moment guns could fire other than direct fire ballistics became an issue and ballistic tables were generated - by hand. Lordy, what has the world come to? -- Words of wisdom What does not kill you... probably didn't cause enough tissue damage. |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
Am 18.10.2011 10:14, schrieb Scout:
"Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 07:01, schrieb Scout: .. For Earth orbit you need much faster flight than you would need to stay in orbit around the moon, but nevertheless it is quite fast. On Earth it took a Saturn V rocket, to lift the craft into orbit. On the Moon it would take less fuel, but way more, than the few gallons, they had in the lander. Ok, let's see your math. I mean if you know they needed more, then clearly you have calculated all this out and know exactly how much they would need and whether they could have that much on the lander. So let's see your work. ---- Insert mathematical proof here. Here I will even aid you with the specifications for the mass, amount of fuel, type of fuel, specific impulse, thrust provided, available delta-V, and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_...Specifications Well, I'm a little too lazy, but a rough calculation is possible: There is the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation velocity_final=v_exhaust* ln(mass_start/mass_finish) V_end= 2200 m/s * ln (4547 kg/(4547-2353) kg) that is : v_end approx. 1603 m/s this is an estimated calculation without gravity. the final velocity is reduced by delta v = g_moon * (time of engine running) Don't know that number (time_ engine) Maybe 100 seconds (???) makes: delta v = 1.6 m/sē*100 s=160 m/s What gives a rough estimate for the final velocity of the landers ascending stage of v_end = 1440 m/s. Now the orbital velocity had to be compared. But I don't have the data and actually I'm too lazy to find them out. But usual orbits should be a little less than escape velocity, what is v_orbit_escape = 2380 m/s. V_end is a rough estimate ('thumb times pi'). For better calculations someone with more experience in rocket science is needed. I cannot even tell you, if the ascent stage is fast enough or not. But my intuition tells me, it is not. IOW, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're too lazy to do the work needed to find out if what you think actually has merit or is simply bat **** crazy. I haven't claimed to be a rocket scientist. I'm totally happy with an rough estimate. I could do it better, for sure, but do not want. The reason is, that to figure this out is not my business - as I have written. You gave me that link and demanded to tell, what's wrong with the Apollo program. I made a few comments to the picture on that page. Than you wanted a mathematical proof, that the lander could not reach the orbiter with the fuel in the ascent stage. I gave you a short version and explained, that better calculations are certainly possible, but I don't want to provide them. You could do that, if you like or ask somebody. It is not THAT difficult. (Maybe there are simulators already or Mathematica packages. ) It is certainly more interesting for American people than for me as a German. The reason is, that the Apollo program would allow to understand, how your government actually acts. Greetings from Berlin TH |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
Thomas Heger wrote in news:9g42k9F672U1
@mid.individual.net: Am 17.10.2011 19:11, schrieb RD Sandman: Thomas wrote in news:9g1qeuFioqU1 @mid.individual.net: Am 16.10.2011 18:47, schrieb RD Sandman: Thomas wrote in : .. This is the kind of stupidity that is so typical of the conspiracy nuts (Actually its not my business and I'm not a 'conspiracy nut'. ) .. .. Several here have tried. You aren't unique no matter what your mum told you. So far, none of their theories have held any more water than yours .. But if the ideas have their own value and are is some respect 'better' (as explanation), than they sooner or later outrun the competitors. Yes, but so far, the facts don't fit the conspiracy theories. In the subjects you call 'conspiracies', there are several ideas, that seem to be more 'true' (hence: 'truthers'), what gives these ideas advantages over official explanations. Only in the minds of those who have trouble handling the truth. The 'truthers' will inevitably outrun official fairy tails, because truth has advantages in explaining things. Well, that happens (and it hasn't yet) it will be interesting....but so far the truth remains and conspiracy theories are like weeds. If you don't like the one you just saw, wait a bit and another will show up. Certainly interesting... What if these 'theories' are in fact true. So far, none of them have proved to be. Not every one of course, but one of them. What would it tell you about the people in the government? No good things, I guess. Most folks in government are just like you and me. They go to work, they try to do a good job and then come home. Hope everything comes to a good end. But there are dangers and that is the possibility of massive violence in your country. There is the possibility of violence in virtually all countries. Yours, mine, the one across the river.... This could not be beneficial for the rest of the world. My suggestion would be, that Americans try to solve their issues, possibly in a peaceful manner. We do. My suggestion is that you should mind your own business and fix things in your country rather than to try and fit conspiracy theories to ours. -- Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman) Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue over a bar bill on the Titanic..... |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
Am 18.10.2011 18:27, schrieb RD Sandman:
Thomas wrote in news:9g42k9F672U1 @mid.individual.net: What if these 'theories' are in fact true. So far, none of them have proved to be. Not every one of course, but one of them. What would it tell you about the people in the government? No good things, I guess. Most folks in government are just like you and me. They go to work, they try to do a good job and then come home. I do not agree. Do you know, why 'conspiracy theories' bear this name? The claim is actually, that there are hidden forces, that try to manipulate the society by hidden means. Since they are hidden, these issues are not openly discussed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeYgLLahHv8 I really liked JFK and especially this speech.. Hope everything comes to a good end. But there are dangers and that is the possibility of massive violence in your country. There is the possibility of violence in virtually all countries. Yours, mine, the one across the river.... This could not be beneficial for the rest of the world. My suggestion would be, that Americans try to solve their issues, possibly in a peaceful manner. We do. My suggestion is that you should mind your own business and fix things in your country rather than to try and fit conspiracy theories to ours. Well this is in fact true and everything you can do in reality is local. So I try to fix things in my neighbourhood or in my own vicinity. But the UseNet gives us the unique opportunity to discuss such subjects around the globe, almost in realtime. TH |
Small gun, the serious protection you need ...
"Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 18.10.2011 10:14, schrieb Scout: "Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 07:01, schrieb Scout: .. For Earth orbit you need much faster flight than you would need to stay in orbit around the moon, but nevertheless it is quite fast. On Earth it took a Saturn V rocket, to lift the craft into orbit. On the Moon it would take less fuel, but way more, than the few gallons, they had in the lander. Ok, let's see your math. I mean if you know they needed more, then clearly you have calculated all this out and know exactly how much they would need and whether they could have that much on the lander. So let's see your work. ---- Insert mathematical proof here. Here I will even aid you with the specifications for the mass, amount of fuel, type of fuel, specific impulse, thrust provided, available delta-V, and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_...Specifications Well, I'm a little too lazy, but a rough calculation is possible: There is the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation velocity_final=v_exhaust* ln(mass_start/mass_finish) V_end= 2200 m/s * ln (4547 kg/(4547-2353) kg) that is : v_end approx. 1603 m/s this is an estimated calculation without gravity. the final velocity is reduced by delta v = g_moon * (time of engine running) Don't know that number (time_ engine) Maybe 100 seconds (???) makes: delta v = 1.6 m/sē*100 s=160 m/s What gives a rough estimate for the final velocity of the landers ascending stage of v_end = 1440 m/s. Now the orbital velocity had to be compared. But I don't have the data and actually I'm too lazy to find them out. But usual orbits should be a little less than escape velocity, what is v_orbit_escape = 2380 m/s. V_end is a rough estimate ('thumb times pi'). For better calculations someone with more experience in rocket science is needed. I cannot even tell you, if the ascent stage is fast enough or not. But my intuition tells me, it is not. IOW, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're too lazy to do the work needed to find out if what you think actually has merit or is simply bat **** crazy. I haven't claimed to be a rocket scientist. I'm totally happy with an rough estimate. I could do it better, for sure, but do not want. What you have isn't even a rought estimate that applies. You simply threw some stuff up there, came up with some answers, but didn't use the data from the apollo program, which it should be noted I was even nice enough to lead you to by the hand, much less show that the results produced proved that a landing and take-off physically could not occur given those conditions. You simply flopped around trying to put together an argument. Free hint: If you're going to say someone else is lying, then you need to make sure you have your ducks in a row and can PROVE IT. All you've shown is that you are an empty headed conspiracy theorist, with lots of notions, but no facts, no proof, and from all evidence absolutely NO desire to find out what the facts really are. snip |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com