At a certain distance from Earth in space no living being can not survive ,even in a spaceship.

Interesting conclusion, especially considering the likely occurring of some forms of life surviving in meteors that travel the cosmos and eventually pollinate other worlds. It would, in some respect, explain our seeming determination NOT to explore with manned missions but... then again, we don't have much character, vision or courage in our leadership anymore.

On a side note... and no, I don't generally make it a practice of critiquing writing etiquette but...
"... no living being can not survive ,even in a spaceship."

The double negative implies a positive as they do cancel each other out.

'Nuff said on that.

Take a few plants with on the ship problem solved... Well then the brings along another dilemna, if the plants die too.

How much of the planet will you have to take with you to survive, and will the rest of the planet die?

Originally posted by diamondsmith
At a certain distance from Earth no living being cannot survive... After that limit is exceeded every living being will die because all biological and energy ties are broken... It's something that they cannot explain,why we can not travel in space only up to a certain distance.

I think it's a well kept secret.

Not such a secret. Yours is not a new idea, by any means.

The celebrated Russian mathematician, P.D. Ouspensky, pondered this very subject about a hundred years ago. You can read up Ouspensky's theories in his two best known works, Tertium Organum and In Search of the Miraculous.

In essence, Ouspensky determined that Mankind would NEVER travel in deep space for a few very simple reasons.

According to Ouspensky, a number of natural parameters govern our evolution and physical existence — for Humans, we are governed by Gravity, a Nitrogen/Oxygen atmosphere at a narrow range of atmospheric pressures, a fairly narrow range of surface temperature, the availability of proteins, carbohydrates, etc, and fresh water, along with the electromagnetic field of the Earth protecting us from hard solar radiation.

Those are just a FEW of the natural parameters that define our living environment, okay?

According to Ouspensky, WE CANNOT SURVIVE outside of these parameters. I mean, you can't just pack a lunchbox and jump in a spaceship bound for Mars, because the farther away from your home environment you travel, the FASTER you die.

Ouspensky maintained that we are held together by the environmental forces of our home world. When we step OUTSIDE of those forces, we begin to physically disintegrate.

Lo and behold, what did we discover when we started launching Humans into microgravity?

Well, we discovered that Humans physically disintegrate in microgravity, beyond the Gravity of Earth. Our muscles atrophy, our cardiovascular systems fail, our bodies start leeching calcium out of our bones, which destroys our various filtering organs, the liver collapses, the kidneys fail.

Not to mention that cosmic rays and hard solar radiation positively wreck Human DNA. If I was an astronaut, I'd have to seriously think about having children after a lengthy space mission, okay? Because my DNA would be compromised, to put it nicely.

So, basically, we discovered that Ouspensky's theories were CORRECT. When you take a Human Being out of the Earthly environment, that Human Being will experience accelerated disintegration.

This is what I call The WALL, the hard reality of the toxicity of Space travel. It's not just a matter of shielding out the radiation and pumping in an Oxygen-Nitrogen atmosphere and creating a rotating artificial gravity drum...

See, the Earth is a living organism. The creatures upon the Earth are COMPONENTS of the Earth. When you take a living organism from the Earth and send it out into Space, it's like taking a living organ out of your body and transporting it to another destination.

Get it?

Transplant organs start to die as soon as they are removed from the donor body. All we can do is cool them down and try to slow the deterioration until they are transplanted into the recipient body.

This is the same thing that happens to Humans when we shoot them into microgravity in low Earth orbit. We immediately start dying when we're taken away from the Earth.

No, we can't compensate with synthetic systems, any more than we can indefinitely keep a human heart alive outside the body. Can't be done. Once the heart is removed, it's just a countdown to death.

Same thing with astronauts. Once they leave the Earth, the clock starts ticking, and nothing can sustain them indefinitely. Those astronauts who have spent many months in orbit have returned DEBILITATED.

Let me repeat, they return DEBILITATED. Their bodies deteriorate so terribly that they must spend months and even years in physical therapy after extended Space travel.

I mean, this is a serious obstacle to extended manned Space travel. It means that a Mars mission will probably never happen — see, the weak Mars environment will not serve to rejuvenate the Human organism. So, whoever we send to Mars will be DYING from the moment they leave Earth until the moment they return to Earth.

I'm betting that they'll never live through it, even under optimum conditions.

Originally posted by Phenomium

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by Lapislazuli

 

I stated that above,but more then that many proofs are that a mission to the Moon never took place,first I think they should send a dog,to see the effects for a long journey to the moon,and after that a manned spaceship.

The Russians already did that in 1957. A dog named Laika or (Russian for 'Barker') was sent into space. Sadly, it died because of a failure of the central R-7 sustainer to separate from the payload. Possibly in part, because a dog cannot fly a space craft.

I know about that mission Laika,he was send in space to a very close distance from Earth,to send another being beyond a certain barrier in space never happened.

reply to post by TiM3LoRd

So can someone give me a summary of all the points the OP has proved please??

Nada.
Nothing.
A big goose egg.
Null set.
Zero.

Ok that about covers what he has proven so far.

reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

In essence, Ouspensky determined that Mankind would NEVER travel in deep space

Not even to the Moon and + many other reasons then he has presented.

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
Nada. Nothing. A big goose egg. Null set. Zero.

Ok that about covers what he has proven so far.

Um, pardon, but the OP's point about Human life withering and dying when taken away from the Earth HAS BEEN PROVEN, it's a major obstacle to manned Space travel.

Hate to bust your cherries, but you're not gonna be flying around the solar system in little x-wing fighters or space pods or whatever... The further away from the Earth you travel, the faster you die.

reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

According to Ouspensky, WE CANNOT SURVIVE outside of these parameters

Obviously; that's why there are no human beings living in the Himalayas or Andes, and the Arctic is devoid of Inuit and Lapp... oh, wait...

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

 

In essence, Ouspensky determined that Mankind would NEVER travel in deep space

Not even to the Moon and + many other reasons then he has presented.

Ouspensky had a lot of respect for the Moon, okay? He got that from G.I. Gurdjieff, who believed the Moon was a protoplanet drawing Life energy off of the Earth. Which may be right. We may be food for the Moon, you know.

reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

life withering and dying when taken away from the Earth HAS BEEN PROVEN,

Care to share with the rest of the class?

"HAS BEEN PROVEN" as you say?

The guys on the ISS and the veterans of the moon landings would disagree.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

 

According to Ouspensky, WE CANNOT SURVIVE outside of these parameters

Obviously; that's why there are no human beings living in the Himalayas or Andes, and the Arctic is devoid of Inuit and Lapp... oh, wait...

You DO understand that human survive in a range of environments, but ALL of those environments are terrestrial.

When you take a Human OUT of the terrestrial environment, it deteriorates rapidly..

Click here for more information.

reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

You DO understand that human survive in a range of environments, but ALL of those environments are terrestrial.

When you take a Human OUT of the terrestrial environment, it deteriorates rapidly..

You DO understand that all biological organisms are capable of adapting to their environment, but the unique feature of the human organism is that it is capable of adapting an environment to itself? Human beings can bring a terrestrial environment with them. Problem solved.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You may be interested in the link above. It belonged to the certain cooky fellow who shot Giffords. He had some very interesting ideas about space, although his presentation is a bit cryptic.

For all the nay sayers out there, I don't think OP is trying to PROVE anything, it is skunkworks after all...He/she is just putting an idea out there for us to ponder and discuss. One that I have thought upon many times.

Let me give you an analogy. Last summer I bought some peaches at the farmers market. I bought a case of mason jars, looked up a recipe and canned them. Then I stopped and never canned again. Yeah, right. I canned everything in sight.

It is human nature to overcome an obstacle and then perfect it. How do you think we got so far as a species? I mean, I am typing right now into a virtual space and the whole world may see it if they choose. That is pretty amazing and I am sure if I could get into the technical intricasies of that statemnet it would be evn more amazing.

I always wondered why we never went back, never went further. There has to be another explanation besides funding or vision. I don't think that they can. I don't believe that humans ever stepped foot on the moon. I'm not sure I fully agree with OPs theory though, because I do believe in Ancient Astronauts. I just don't think we have the technology yet, or maybe there are other forces at work stopping us.

If I was NASA and did something as exciting as sending a manned spacecraft to the moon. I would want to keep going back until it got real old. I would try to make it so they could stay longer and do more things there as we learned new things about the moon. Heck, I'd give Mars a shot too. If I was a memeber of the Russian or Chinese space agency I'd be allover it too. If NASA did it, so can we, type of attitude.

I have always wondered why we didn't go back, why noone else attempted to go, why we didn't try to go other places.

reply to post by diamondsmith


cmon there is our trash up there on the moon. Please go see someone about this delusion!

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
Care to share with the rest of the class? "HAS BEEN PROVEN" as you say? The guys on the ISS and the veterans of the moon landings would disagree.

Um, no, they don't disagree at all. They're on the front line of Human disintegration in Space. The Lunarnauts always reported bright flashes in their field of vision — these were cosmic rays striking and destroying cells in the retinas of their eyes. They were bombarded by radiation, and the astronauts were very much aware of the precariousness of their situation.

They're not dummies. Astronauts are very intelligent and educated people who will tell you, if you ask them, that Space is TOXIC to Human life. The astronauts who have been in orbit for several months aboard the ISS will not be able to walk when they return to Earth, okay? They'll be in physical therapy for many months, they'll be on recovery diets to restore calcium and rebuild bone and strengthen cardiovascular tissues.

Don't be ignorant. Space is deadly to Humans.

reply to post by ZeskoWhirligan

Don't be ignorant. Space is deadly to Humans.

Don't be ignorant. Human beings can mitigate environmental hazards.

Originally posted by DJW001
Human beings can bring a terrestrial environment with them. Problem solved.

Wrong.

All we can bring are support systems. Tiny little tin cans full of air and carbon dioxide scrubbers and heaters and air conditioners and junk.

That's not a "terrestrial environment," chum.

A terrestrial environment is Gravity, Oxygen-Nitrogen atmosphere with all its trace gases at one atmosphere of barometric pressure, with an electromagnetic field to shield you from the solar radiation.

No. We're not sending "terrestrial environments" into Space. We don't have the technology.