Ulterior motives of "Pseudoscience" against "craterchains"

Brad,
You keep mentioning shedding light on the truth, but you yourselves don't even know what the truth is like why I closed the threads down.

I didn't close them because they were outputting any truths, I closed them for a mixture of the information being "DISINFORMATION" and because of the overall commentary that was flying about after the topics themselves have been found to be Science Fiction (I would have said Hoaxes if I was disinforming you since I have not the evidence to prove that).

The reason I closed a thread about NASA alleged Lunar landing hoaxes was purely because the topic has been done to death, anything conspiracy theorists could potentially dream up has been covered and the overall outcome is it happened, Live with it. (If you disagree then your just attempting to fake up a story to be a bad hack [Crap writer])

I know you want Free Speech and Disclosure, however Free Speech is no good if someone keeps talking and doesn't listen to what others have to offer up, as for disclosure I think you would all prefer the DoD to *LIE* and tell you they have an alien body in a freezer somewhere.

It's daft really you complain about them lieing then the only truth you want to hear from them is a lie.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why blame the topic stryder?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

FOCLMFAO

Yer full of self, and shit. :bugeye:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

craterchains (Norval,
I think you should edit your last couple of remarks, at least the final remark could be improved upon.

Stryderunknown,
Unlike yourself, and all of your wizard friends that can say whatever they like without remorse or otherwise being locked down, I do not know all there is to know. Thus I propose notions and share upon what I do know, and I even try to provide some specifics, so that others supposedly smarter than myself can offer their better formula and or specifics.

The vast bulk of my topics are looking for the alternatives on the positive side of the what-if.

I have no problems with honest folks sharing their honest points of view. However, if I were intent upon obtaining only the negative points of view upon a given topic, I'd have changed the topic to something like "what wrong with folks that do not believe", or "Life is absolutely impossible on Venus", or what if I wanted to promote upon the mainstream status quo, as how about "The moon is a walk in the park" or "There's no point in going back to the moon", or perhaps something on behalf of Mars being "Life on Mars isn't all that bad", or "It's just money, and what global warming?".

"It's daft really you complain about them lieing then the only truth you want to hear from them is a lie."

Obviously that's not at all the true and nothing but the truth, or rather that statement is in fact a lie, thus I object, which is obviously something "daft" with regard to conversing with such a well programmed moderator that offers such an intellectually limited tunnel.

BTW; you are absolutely full of it when it comes to protecting those NASA/Apollo rusemasters running humanity and the sciences amuck. In fact, the horrific amounts of near-UV and UV/a never skewed a damn spectrum worth of anything, and that's of hard science that's firmly supported by the laws of Kodak physics, which rejects the notion that them Kodak moments simply didn't transpire upon the moon.

Addressing a few of those pesky photographic details; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-photo-entro.htm
NASA uses LLPOF anti-flak to protect Apollo butts; http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=38195

There's other ongoing arguments, on a fairly wide range of topics as summarized in the following UPDATE index, although I admit that I'm sharing a bit further outside the box than most individuals would care to venture.
Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thus I propose notions and share upon what I do know... The vast bulk of my topics are looking for the alternatives on the positive side of the what-if

Herein lies the problem - they ARE only notions, founded on the basis of Brad Guths' own brand of fantasy logic. The methodology is simple - stay the opposing course no matter how far fetched, although this has been defined in the Book of Guth as alternative thinking-out-of-the-box.

One can only picture the vast bulk of my topics as approaching encyclopedic proportions, destined to become the next leap in scientific achievement.

I have no problems with honest folks sharing their honest points of view

That's not true and you know it. Many here provide salient points of view only to depicted as 'toilet borgs' or some such other peurile delineation.

So, Brad, what is it you REALLY want to tell us?

I do not know all there is to know

There, that wasn't so bad, was it?

 

Fair enough.

Two or three questions, as it's answers that I want, and/or the directions as to obtaining access to those having the answers, as obviously I do not wish to becoming the all-knowing wizard such as yourself, as I simply wouldn't ever want to become that arrogant and intellectually bigoted.

1) How much raw tonnage of moon-rock has been deposited upon Earth?

2) The terminal velocity of local space is primarily an overriding factor of gravity issues, at least for the speeds that we've achieved thus far. Although, once into and/or especially beyond the nullification point of no-return, and if sort of coasting ever faster, there's going to become a measurable amount of friction. That is unless we're down to an environment of one atom/m3, of which I'm of the impression there's more than likely 1e7/m3, and/or at least 1e6 atoms/m3, and surely not all of them atoms are going to be of hydrogen.

Since Sirius is most likely where Venus came from, and of perchance that same conjecture might even provide the substance as to where and/or how our moon was derived. As such be the impossible argument that it is, and in spite of that supposed fact, I'm going to ask a simple question, at least it should be quite simple for most any rocket scientist.

If we constructed our best ever deep-space capable probe (say 10 m3 worth), and outfitted that probe with the utmost powerful and longest duration capable propulsion technologies, of just what we actually have at our disposal; how fast could that probe be sent on it's way (meaning as exiting our solar system)?

Or otherwise, of how much SOA can that sort of probe sustain as it heads itself (via ION or whatever alternative thruster power) for the Sirius nullification zone (roughly 0.7 LY) towards Sirius?

As if such were to happen, what would become the arriving SOA into that sort of gravity null-point of no-return?

Now then, and without my ever mentioning lizard folk or some exoskeletal survivors upon Venus, and not even any hint of what's wrong with our NASA/Apollo fiasco, of just answering the above will do just fine. As otherwise, I certainly have a few thousand other questions but, there's no point if your all-knowing collective is intent upon the "opposing course no matter how far fetched". So, unless you still have that ulterior motive of keeping "Pseudoscience" poised against whatever, there shouldn't be any further problem.

 

just answering the above will do just fine

Absolutely an exercise in futility there, Brad. You're not interested in our answers because they can't be verified from the Book of Guth.

Besides, I'm just another 'toilet borg' - what do I know?

 

2) The terminal velocity of local space is primarily an overriding factor of gravity issues, at least for the speeds that we've achieved thus far. Although, once into and/or especially beyond the nullification point of no-return, and if sort of coasting ever faster, there's going to become a measurable amount of friction. That is unless we're down to an environment of one atom/m3, of which I'm of the impression there's more than likely 1e7/m3, and/or at least 1e6 atoms/m3, and surely not all of them atoms are going to be of hydrogen.

Since Sirius is most likely where Venus came from, and of perchance that same conjecture might even provide the substance as to where and/or how our moon was derived.

Space isn't a vacuum? Venus is from Sirius? Do you have any way to back up these statements? Or are you merely believing this is true because...well you think it is?

 

Okay you want answers:

===
1) How much "moon-rock" in tonnes has landed on the planet?
A: A search for "Lunar Meteorites" turned up this URL:
http://epsc.wustl.edu/admin/resources/moon_meteorites.html

Suggested answer is, the amount of Lunar Meteorite found on this planet is not measured in Tonnes. 28-31 rocks (not fragments) at no more than 4lbs each, in total 124lbs or 56.24Kg's, so your answer would be 0.05624 Metric Tonnes in relationship to "Known" rocks.

As for unknown rocks, well that would be difficult to speculate since a majority I would guess fall at the magnetic polar locations (Currently magnetic North is situated Just above Canada/Newfoundland [source: http://www.geolab.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/northpole_e.shtml] and would suggest a number of Canadian/North American UFO's could just be meteorites).

=====
2a) How fast can a deep space probe travel at current technology levels?
A: I can't answer you with what I would writeup here purely because it's alot of homework and if I was going to do that homework then obviously I wouldn't be posting it here as I would be building a probe.

However my suggestion is this first you have to identify "how something moves in space", Velocity is caused through the combustion of fuels that create a mixture of exhaust gases and Thermal dynamic excitement. (Namely thermodynamics attempts to excite the molecules within close proximity to push the probe/craft off from)

Thermodynamics is used due to the lack of atmospheric pressure (Which airplanes, boats and submarinal vessels use) however it doesn't ruleout that turbines could be used it's just the size they would have to be would be enormous, again they would suffer the problems of having a speed at which they would no longer work.

Due to Thermodynamics being used it means there is in fact a limit to the Force that heat generates, and also the limit to the temperature that can be generated. Even super heating a plasma to be jettisoned isn't necessarily going to increase the speed any.

You could suggest perhaps Electromagnetics is the answer, however for electromagnetics to work it requires to generate a magnetic alignment of superpositioned states with surrounding molecules. This both requires energy and even with a Attraction from the front and repulsion from the rear would reach a critical speed where the motion couldn't be any faster.

So the suggestion is there is an upper limit to the speed any type of propulsion offered can do.

You also have to note that although space allows ertia, occasional thruster firings are still needed to maintain velocity, which would suggest the need of fuel, otherwise the speed would degrade or path would degrade or perhaps even an obstacle previously not catered for enters the path causing the need to adjust the path.

Then there is the aspect of the Probes communication with earth, the further it travels away from the earth the longer the signal from the probe would take to reach us. Also the further it travels either an increase in energy is needed to increase the output signal strength of the probe or even larger listening systems (Not just ears but Computerised brains to "filter out the noise) have to be developed by us to hear it since it would be like listening to a pin drop in a rock concert.

A method to understand how fast translation of force could occur, is to look more at the experiment of a Disc that was span by being shot by a lazer. The disc's rotation was either only span at the speed at which a lazer could be turned on and off (When on creates motion of force, when turned off removes drag factor friction), or at what angle the lazer was in relationship to the disc's surface to apply enough friction to turn it.

Also there is the point that even if we reached a speed that you "Wish" was achievable, how much force would be necessary to "Stop" or even "slow down" when the probe nears its destination, It could overshoot.

2b) Of how much SOA can that sort of probe sustain as it heads itself (via ION or whatever alternative thruster power) for the Sirius nullification zone (roughly 0.7 LY) towards Sirius?

This is something that would only be worked out if Sirius was a destination for a probe, however I'm sure there are hundreds if not thousands of more interesting and scientifically commendable destinations for a probe, for instance the current interest in Cygnus X-I.

 

Didn't bother to check his numbers, but there is a negligable amount of 'stuff' floating out there. It would result in the velocity of probes changing slightly... but you can't predict in what direction because all this 'stuff' is going in different directions.

 

Sirius is over 8 light years away. I don't know why you believe there is a sort of nullification zone between us and our solar system or that Venus came from Sirius or even HOW it got here from Sirius?

Answer me THOSE questions without resorting to your own fantasy physics bullshit and maybe I'll listen.

 

Not to mention that is would be detectable because of its interaction with light along the way just in the same way large nubuli block certain wavelengths of light as it passes through these clouds.

 

I suppose in defense of myself I should respond with total disbelief in the limitations of sub-light speeds. It seems that once in motion and with applied thrust something increases speed light speed is just another mile stone in going faster and faster.

Like the sound barrier.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No big deal after all.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

ya except that whole time slow down, infinite energy needed thing. The only way to out run light speed would require bizarrely different forms of propulsion such a hyperspace, anti-gravity warping, worm holes, ect.

 

ya, that is a THEORY Fetus, not a proven fact. Kind of like crater chains just happening naturally and such. They said all that about faster than sound too.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No its a proven fact, we can accelerate matter but we can't get it to go at the speed of light, we tried mind you but we can keep adding energy to it but it won't go faster. Look up some of fabulous work with particle accelerators.

 

Huh? No one ever said we couldn't pass the sound barrier; just that it might be hard...else they wouldn't have even tried to break it to begin with.

You just love to hear your own typing don't you Norval even if that means making crap up.

 

Hey Norval - what is the speed of sound in space?

 

uhmmm I think BHS could answer that better than I Q. (winkey)

 

Are you trying to be clever or just a smartass? Because right now you're coming across as just plain annoying instead Norval.

 

I guess BHS dosn't want to play either Q, but I doubt anyone would hear you scream in space?