It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The cabin has five windows, made of 0.25-inch (6.35mm) double-paned tempered glass on the inside, and 0.7-inch (1.778cm) amorphous-fused silicon on the outside. UV-ray blocking coating is applied in these outer surfaces, and non-reflective coating to the inside. The outer glass can stand up to a maximum temperature of about 1540 degrees Celsius (2800 Fahrenheit). A covering shield made of aluminum is installed inside all of the windows
Originally posted by Yandros
I do not have a definite position,
which leaves only your first option there.
Either that or it was taken in strips by an unmanned module then constructed onto a sphere/globe and shot on a black backdrop.
It is also possible, now that you have confirmed it was shot from within the module, that a thin layer of air (or the construction of the window) could create this effect; although I feel this is unlikely.
The windows each consist of inner and outer panes. The inner windows are made of tempered silica glass with 1/4-inch thick double panes, separated by a tenth of an inch. The outer windows are made of amorphous-fused silicon with a single pane of seven-tenths of an inch thick. Each pane has an anti-reflective coating on the external surface and a blue-red reflective coating on the inner surface to filter out most infrared and all ultraviolet rays
There is nothing particularly scientific about digital photo analysis
Regardless, it doesn’t matter what I did provided I did the same thing to both photos
– which were high quality, high resolution images void of any compression artifacts.
their intensity diminishes by the inverse of the square of the distance – which is a good indication that it is due to refraction.
Originally posted by Yandros
P.S: My Photoshop application does not take numeric adjustments for brightness and contrast, that I know of.
Nor are there scientific units for either in digital photograph - that I know of.
Please direct me to a photo editing suite which does provide these scientific measurements
Alternatively you could just open Photoshop and turn contrast and brightness up to the max they will go
Originally posted by Yandros
Don't tell me what I think. How can you possibly claim to know what I think.
I am under the impression that the solar radiation would have simply killed any men sent to and from the moon. Considering that the maximum protection they had was about a cm of Aluminum they would have been hit with the full force of solar radiation.
Which I might add is probably more than 1000 times worse than the hottest part of Chernobyl.
My thoughts are that it is plausible they faked all the publicized trips, in particular Apollo 16, whereby the astronauts were actually doing a surface walk when the largest solar storm in the 20th century rotated to face them. Completely uninjured?
While I am not decidedly made up over this I still feel that an inch of glass would not create this effect, after all the glass on the Hubble lenses, and soviet unmanned craft makes absolutely none of this effect. And its not a small effect either. In addition it is typical of photographing something on a black background with a spotlight on it, or something with a large amount of atmosphere, in space – which essentially is the same setup but bigger.
However I do not rule out that this photo is legitimate, I just question it – as I do all the man lunar missions because of the vast array of inexplicable anomalies in the photographs, film and overall science.
Finally I’ll say this. The Russians still haven’t put a man on the moon. What’s their reason? Radiation.