We Probably Never Made it to the Moon

im no math guy.......but 4.6 million edits.......someone tell me how that is possible in a humans lifetime....along with creating 33 thousand articles.............anyone?

a reply to: Akaspeedy

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
a reply to: cooperton

while it's definitely interesting, you lost me at "MHz of RAM".

you have NO F..CKING CLUE what you're even talking about.

I know enough to know 32kb is extremely small. They make terabyte sized memory sticks that fit in a USB drive now...30,000x larger than the entire memory of the Apollo computer.

originally posted by: chr0naut

When I was at University, we bounced a beam off one of the retroreflectors using the Universities' old 0.6m reflector telescope.

The retroreflectors must be there.

Any reason why it couldn't just be the surface of the moon? Do you remember any more details?

I remember that the laser was a gas laser and the beam was greenish. It had a honking great power supply, but the laser tube was quite small (about 7 inches long and only a bit bigger than 1/4" on diameter), in comparison.

The beam of a laser does spread out, even though it is roughly parallel, and the retroreflectors have numerous spherical internal reflector units that return any incident light in exactly the same direction it came from, a bit like the cats-eye reflectors used for road marking.

If the laser had hit the surface of the moon, it would have diffused the beam, reflecting it back in almost random directions, and we would not have been able to detect the reflection, even with the telescope, because the magnitude of the reflection would have been too low.

We could use the path of the atmospherically reflected beam in the telescope to get the initial aim of the laser, in a relatively empty bit of sky, so that it was very closely on-center to the axis of the telescope. Then, because the laser was scope mounted, we could just swing the whole scope around to target the approximate landing site.

Because the rotation of the moon is tidally locked to the Earth, there is little apparent movement of the surface features facing the Earth at any time, and so we could set up the telescope to track the moon's orbit across the sky, and then spend some time scanning back and forward across the 'site' until we hit upon the retroreflector, and it gave us a reading (we used a CCD detector which is more sensitive than the human eye, even down to the resolution of a single photon). Once we had made a 'lock', we could then interrupt the beam and time how long the round trip took for the interruption and resumption of the beam.

I have kept all my notes from when I was at uni, but they are locked away and have been, pretty much since I moved to New Zealand, decades ago. I could give you some direct readings that I took, but I don't want to spend ages going through everything, just for an ATS post.

originally posted by: chr0naut

When I was at University, we bounced a beam off one of the retroreflectors using the Universities' old 0.6m reflector telescope.

The retroreflectors must be there.

The natural surface of the moon is reflective enough without the need for mirrors. That's why we can see so well at night sometimes in the sunlight it reflects.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: cooperton

Its about the same memory a pocket calculator from the 80s would have comparatively speaking.

That memory is too small to fake a landing so convincingly.

But more than enough to do the real thing.

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: chr0naut

When I was at University, we bounced a beam off one of the retroreflectors using the Universities' old 0.6m reflector telescope.

The retroreflectors must be there.

The natural surface of the moon is reflective enough without the need for mirrors. That's why we can see so well at night sometimes in the sunlight it reflects.

We had to hunt around for ages to find the retroreflector, so, no, it isn't reflective enough.

a reply to: [post=26436819]cooperton[/post

In the photo with the flag and the astronaut, if you look at the shadows of the lander and the astronaut, they are at different angles. It just doesn’t look right at all. Maybe there is an explanation for it idk.

I dont know either way. I did watch it with my folks. Got mad at my mom about something, and stormed out of the house, saying "watch it yourself". Then I went outside and watched by peeking in the family room window. There have been several questions over the years. Good questions. Like the clean landing pod feet stayed real clean. One of the moon walkers became a full on drunk. He also became overly defensive

Its not like our government never lies to us.... In fact, it appears they mostly do, about everything you can think of.
There is nothing in scripture that say if we made it there or not, and if you look closely at wording, Earth appears to be described as a globe.

15 years ago I was in a terrible high speed dirt bike wreck on my KZ500. I wasn't expected to live through the night. All of a sudden I flew out of my body and high above the Earth. I was allowed exactly 1 hour. I believe I saw the world was a globe. I was in space far above it. I checked to see if I could see my body, but I couldn't. I was in spirit. What confused and surprised me, was how dark it was out there. I thought it would be real bright out there from the SUN. It wasn't. That was actually my favorite experience in my life. I said at the time, it was worth the wreck, and $70,000 bill.

Don't we have any powerful telescopes that can spot the moon car they left behind? That would settle it, as long as it wasn't the government that show us. Keep in mind, these are the same people who demand you get toxic injections, and want to give your toddlers sex changes, because they are so damn evil. They really cant be trusted without confirmation from elsewhere.

a reply to: cooperton

I know enough to know 32kb is extremely small. They make terabyte sized memory sticks that fit in a USB drive now...30,000x larger than the entire memory of the Apollo computer.

Another one that doesn't know computer systems .
A USB device is definitely NOT memory .
That is the way newbs define it .
USB "sticks" are pure storage and never used for memory .

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: chr0naut

When I was at University, we bounced a beam off one of the retroreflectors using the Universities' old 0.6m reflector telescope.

The retroreflectors must be there.

The natural surface of the moon is reflective enough without the need for mirrors. That's why we can see so well at night sometimes in the sunlight it reflects.

No it's not. The lunar surface is a diffuse reflecting surface with an albedo of about 0.12. It reflects only about 12% of the light that hits it and it scatters that reflected light in all directions. The laser targets are corner cube reflectors with an effective albedo of 1 and a beam divergence of about 8 arc seconds. They are designed to be much brighter than the lunar surface when illuminated from the Earth if you can arrange to be observing from within that 8 arc second cone..

The reason you can see at night by reflected sunlight is because the Sun is dumping an average of about 340 Watts of optical power per square meter on to the lunar surface and there are about 16 trillion square meters of lunar surface visible from the Earth.

a reply to: cooperton

I know enough to know 32kb is extremely small. They make terabyte sized memory sticks that fit in a USB drive now..

Not enough in the knowledge department , evidently .
USB drives are NEVER used as memory .
That is a newb designation .
They are STORAGE .
The USB (serial) bus is WAAAYYYY too slow to use as memory .

Back then , 32kb would have been enough memory as it is random access and volatile .(meaning the ability to change rapidly as opposed to non-volatile

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: cooperton

How did we (and the Russians) leave stuff there, then?

Stuff like the five laser retroreflectors that we can now shine lasers off, and get very accurate distance measurements with?

Lunar Laser Ranging experiment From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a reply to: cooperton
There is so much wrong in the OP that I just don't know where to begin .
Where would you like me to start ?

originally posted by: Akaspeedy
probably by this guy 'editing' it constantly en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: cooperton

How did we (and the Russians) leave stuff there, then?

Stuff like the five laser retroreflectors that we can now shine lasers off, and get very accurate distance measurements with?

Lunar Laser Ranging experiment From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

probal

You left out the references to scientific articles below .
Purposely ?

a reply to: cooperton

What is your agenda with the claim the US didn't go to the moon. What are you really trying to say with all that work you put into your thread?

The astro-NOTS with green screens, cables, and the anti gravity ✈️.

There is also a clip talking about the van Allen belt something we must solve before we can go.


Or, lost the tech..!!.. noone can calculate anymore!!
I'll bet we couldn't even restore a 1963 Chevy.. dont have that tech anymore!!

Or the moon walks played at REAL SPEED.. it's all so hard to grasp the conjob.

a reply to: chr0naut

I would say those measurements are based on a single photon return out of 10000000000000000000000 fired, with some crazy calculations and factors to account for.

"To compute the lunar distance precisely, many factors must be considered in addition to the round-trip time of about 2.5 seconds. These factors include the location of the Moon in the sky, the relative motion of Earth and the Moon, Earth's rotation, lunar libration, polar motion, weather, speed of light in various parts of air, propagation delay through Earth's atmosphere, the location of the observing station and its motion due to crustal motion and tides, and relativistic effects.[17][18] The distance continually changes for a number of reasons, but averages 385,000.6 km (239,228.3 mi) between the center of the Earth and the center of the Moon.[19] The orbits of the Moon and planets are integrated numerically along with the orientation of the Moon called physical Libration.[20]

At the Moon's surface, the beam is about 6.5 kilometers (4.0 mi) wide[21] and scientists liken the task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime 3 kilometers (1.9 mi) away. The reflected light is too weak to see with the human eye. Out of 10 to the power of 21 photons aimed at the reflector, only one is received back on Earth, even under good conditions.[22] They can be identified as originating from the laser because the laser is highly monochromatic."