Did Man really landed on MOON ?

India
November 28, 2008 7:16am CST
Did man really land on moon? I want to believe it bu then ... there is something called the radition belt just after you cross the orbit between moon and the earth, no man can live in that environmental situation. I have seen a video named man landed on moon conspiracy theory where Russian CCCP says that NASA lied to fool rest of the world to make US the best in space race in those days, during the cold war time there was something called space race, where countries were sending space crafts to show their own power. US lied about man landed on moon! What do you people say ?
1 person likes this
8 responses
29 Nov 08
Going through the Van Allen belts, the Apollo astronauts picked up a radiation dosage roughly equivalent to a dental X-ray. How many dental X-rays have you had in your life and survived? I've had at least one and I'm still here. It's a complete non-issue, one of those things that conspiracy theorists like to throw around to confuse people, because they haven't got a real argument that can be backed up with facts. Incidentally, one of the Soviet Zond missions (I don't remember the mission number, although I can look it up if you want) carried a live payload including a couple of turtles around the Moon and back. Naturally they passed through the Van Allen belts too, also without any problems. Also the Zond missions carried film cameras - the film wasn't fogged, as it would have been if it had been exposed to dangerous amounts of radiation. The Apollo astronauts went to the Moon and back. That's a fact to be proud of.
@pierone (1894)
• Italy
29 Nov 08
btw here you can see the video of the lunar landing in 1969 ;) enjoy it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgG5s28fvM8
2 people like this
@cheongyc (5072)
• Malaysia
29 Nov 08
I have been convinced about the Apollo project since childhood. All the photos and report look real and I didn't suspect that they might be fake. But after reading those conspiracy that point out the suspicious points, I start pondering about the possibilities of falsification of the moon landing project. The motive is valid, because America might be eager to show their superiority over its opponents in the cold war. But, some claims seems like invalid. There is one photo showing that the flags hold by the astronauts are waving in the air. It seems like a fake because most of us believe that it's totally vacuum on the moon surface. However, I remembered I have read about the existence of thin atmosphere on the moon surface. Therefore, it's not impossible for the flags waving in the moon atmosphere.
@cheongyc (5072)
• Malaysia
1 Dec 08
The flag doesn't show that they were in the moon. But, it doesn't prove that the photo were taken on Earth too. Because both Earth and Moon have atmosphere. As long as there is atmosphere, there is flowing air or we called it 'breeze' or 'wind' on Earth. So, the waving flags doesn't suggest that it's a fake photo because 'wind' might exist on Moon surface.
@coolseeds (3919)
• United States
30 Nov 08
The flag theory has been analyzed recreated on Earth. There is nothing suspicious about the flag. The flag doesn't prove that they were there either unless it is visible on Earth. But there is nothing funny about the flag.
2 people like this
@coolseeds (3919)
• United States
29 Nov 08
What do you know about the Van Allen belts? It sounds like you are just casting stones. It is possible to pass through the belts. This was achieved by the shape of the space craft as well as the speed. If you have questions feel free to ask. But you should read about the belts before you go casting stones and calling people liars.
• India
29 Nov 08
This is what I know about Van Allen belts: The Van Allen radiation belt is a torus of energetic charged particles (plasma) around Earth, held in place by Earth's magnetic field. Earth's geomagnetic field is not uniformly distributed around its surface. On the sun side, it is compressed because of the solar wind and on the other side, it is elongated to around three earth radii. This creates a cavity called the Chapman Ferraro Cavity, in which the Van Allen radiation belts reside. The Van Allen belts are closely related to the polar aurora where particles strike the upper atmosphere and fluoresce. The possibility of trapped charged particles had previously been investigated by Kristian Birkeland, Carl Størmer, and Nicholas Christofilos prior to the Space Age. The existence of the belt was confirmed by the Explorer 1 and Explorer 3 missions in early 1958, under Dr. James Van Allen at the University of Iowa. The trapped radiation was first mapped out by Sputnik 3, Explorer 4, Pioneer 3 and Luna 1. Energetic electrons form two distinct radiation belts, while protons form a single belt. Within these belts are particles capable of penetrating about 1 g/cm2 of shielding (e.g., 1 millimetre of lead). The term Van Allen belts refers specifically to the radiation belts surrounding Earth; however, similar radiation belts have been discovered around other planets. The Sun does not support long-term radiation belts. The Earth's atmosphere limits the belts' particles to regions above 200-1,000 km, while the belts do not extend past 7 Earth radii RE. The belts are confined to an area which extends about 65° from the celestial equator. An upcoming NASA mission, Radiation Belt Storm Probes will go further and gain scientific understanding (to the point of predictability) of how populations of relativistic electrons and ions in space form or change in response to changes in solar activity and the solar wind. Several NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts-funded studies are exploring whether it might be possible to use magnetic scoops to collect the antimatter that occurs naturally in the Van Allen belts of Earth, and ultimately, the belts of gas giants like Jupiter, hopefully at a lower cost per gram than laboratory production of antimatter. Outer belt Laboratory simulation of the Van Allen belts' influence on the Solar Wind; these auroral-like Birkeland currents were created by the scientist Kristian Birkeland in his terrella, a magnetized anode globe in an evacuated chamber. The large outer radiation belt extends from an altitude of about three to ten Earth radii (RE) above the Earth's surface, and its greatest intensity is usually around 4-5 RE. The outer electron radiation belt is mostly produced by the inward radial diffusion [e.g. Elkinkington et al., 2001; Shprits and Thorne, 2004] and local acceleration [Horne et al., 2005; Shprits et al., 2006] due to transfer of energy from whistler mode plasma waves to radiation belt electrons. Radiation belt electrons are also constantly removed by collisions with atmospheric neutrals[Thorne et al., 2005], losses to magnetopause, and the outward radial diffusion[Shprits et al., 2006]. The outer belt consists mainly of high energy(0.1–10 MeV) electrons trapped by the Earth's magnetosphere. The gyroradii for energetic protons would be large enough to bring them into contact with the Earth's atmosphere. The electrons here have a high flux and at the outer edge (close to the magnetopause), where geomagnetic field lines open into the geomagnetic "tail", fluxes of energetic electrons can drop to the low interplanetary levels within about 100 km (a decrease by a factor of 1,000). The trapped particle population of the outer belt is varied, containing electrons and various ions. Most of the ions are in the form of energetic protons, but a certain percentage are alpha particles and O+ oxygen ions, similar to those in the ionosphere but much more energetic. This mixture of ions suggests that ring current particles probably come from more than one source. The outer belt is larger than the inner belt, and its particle population fluctuates widely. Energetic (radiation) particle fluxes can increase and decrease dramatically as a consequence of geomagnetic storms, which are themselves triggered by magnetic field and plasma disturbances produced by the Sun. The increases are due to storm-related injections and acceleration of particles from the tail of the magnetosphere. There is debate as to whether the outer belt was discovered by the US Explorer 4 or the USSR Sputnik 2/3. Inner belt The inner Van Allen Belt extends from an altitude of 700–10,000 km (0.1 to 1.5 Earth radii) above the Earth's surface, and contains high concentrations of energetic protons with energies exceeding 100 MeV and electrons in the range of hundreds of kiloelectronvolts, trapped by the strong (relative to the outer belts) magnetic fields in the region. It is believed that protons of energies exceeding 50 MeV in the lower belts at lower altitudes are the result of the beta decay of neutrons created by cosmic ray collisions with nuclei of the upper atmosphere. The source of lower energy protons is believed to be proton diffusion due to changes in the magnetic field during geomagnetic storms. Due to the slight offset of the belts from Earth's geometric center, the inner Van Allen belt makes its closest approach to the surface at the South Atlantic Anomaly.. Impact on space travel Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors can be damaged by radiation. In 1962, the Van Allen belts were temporarily amplified by a high-altitude nuclear explosion (the Starfish Prime test) and several satellites ceased operation. Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation, as incoming ions may be as large as the circuit's charge. Electronics on satellites must be hardened against radiation to operate reliably. The Hubble Space Telescope, among other satellites, often has its sensors turned off when passing through regions of intense radiation. Missions beyond low earth orbit leave the protection of the geomagnetic field, and transit the Van Allen belts. Thus they may need to be shielded against exposure to cosmic rays, Van Allen radiation, or solar flares. An object satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit passing through the radiation belt will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Causes Simulated Van Allen Belts generated by a plasma thruster in tank #5 Electric Propulsion Laboratory at the then-called Lewis Research Center, Cleveland Ohio, It is generally understood that the inner and outer Van Allen belts result from different processes. The inner belt, consisting mainly of energetic protons, is the product of the decay of albedo neutrons which are themselves the result of cosmic ray collisions in the upper atmosphere. The outer belt consists mainly of electrons. They are injected from the geomagnetic tail following geomagnetic storms, and are subsequently energized though wave-particle interactions. Particles are trapped in the Earth's magnetic field because it is basically a magnetic mirror. Particles gyrate around field lines and also move along field lines. As particles encounter regions of stronger magnetic field where field lines converge, their "longitudinal" velocity is slowed and can be reversed, reflecting the particle. This causes the particle to bounce back and forth between the earth's poles, where the magnetic field increases. A gap between the inner and outer Van Allen belts, sometimes called safe zone or safe slot, is caused by the very low frequency (VLF) waves which scatter particles in pitch angle which results in the loss of particles to the atmosphere. Solar outbursts can pump particles into the gap but they drain again in a matter of days. The radio waves were originally thought to be generated by turbulence in the radiation belts, but recent work by James Green of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center comparing maps of lightning activity collected by the Micro Lab 1 spacecraft with data on radio waves in the radiation-belt gap from the IMAGE spacecraft suggests that they're actually generated by lightning within Earth's atmosphere. The radio waves they generate strike the ionosphere at the right angle to pass through it only at high latitudes, where the lower ends of the gap approach the upper atmosphere. These results are still under scientific debate. There have been nuclear tests in space that have caused artificial radiation belts. Starfish Prime, a high altitude nuclear test, created an artificial radiation belt that damaged or destroyed as many as one third of the satellites in low earth orbit at the time. Thomas Gold has argued that the outer belt is left over from the aurora while Alex Dessler has argued that the belt is a result of volcanic activity. In another view, the belts could be considered a flow of electric current that is fed by the solar wind. With the protons being positive and the electrons being negative, the area between the belts is sometimes subjected to a current flow, which "drains" away. The belts are also thought to drive auroras, lightning and many other electrical effects. Removal The belts are a hazard for artificial satellites and moderately dangerous for human beings, difficult and expensive to shield against. There is a proposal by the late Robert L. Forward called HiVolt which may be a way to drain at least the inner belt to 1% of its natural level within a year. The proposal involves deploying highly electrically charged tethers in orbit. The idea is that the electrons would be deflected by the large electrostatic fields and intersect the atmosphere and harmlessly dissipate. That wasn't hard to find out. I am not calling anybo
@coolseeds (3919)
• United States
30 Nov 08
So you know that the belts fluctuate in radiation. Did you know that some radiation can not penetrate human skin? Most of the radiation wouldn't have passed through the exterior of the ship. Next you should learn about "legal" doses of radiation that employers are allowed to expose to employees. Then compare it to the amount that the astronauts may have encountered. Then figure the duration of their exposure. It takes around 4 hours to travel through the belts, less than a work day to travel through the Van Allen belts. Therefore astronauts would have received less radiation than some people who are exposed to radiation on a daily basis. You mentioned flux above. If you do not know exactly what it is study it. Then study the speed and design of the ship. What is the reason that you do not believe they could make it through the belts, other than because or you don't believe it is possible? Why?
1 person likes this
• India
30 Nov 08
Hats off to all the knowledge you have in this field. I wasn't trying to call anybody a liar and if you felt hurt by anything I stated I am sorry for that. I was just a bit confused about who is telling the truth and hence wanted to ask everybody else here. As far as knowing about all those legal doses and stuff, that won't be that hard to know on the net I guess, is it? Thanks for you response.
@bumba1988 (1220)
• India
30 Nov 08
Hi coolmailraj Did men really land on moon?It was asked by some of the Scientists after NASA claimed to have sent people to moon.They had some specific reasons that is why they were saying It was not true what those people from NASA were claiming.There was also a video which said that all these were false.You already mentioned about these. As per as my belief is concerned though what proofs the video gave cannot be overlooked at all,still I think that is it possible for NASA to carry such a big Lie on their shoulders for so long!
1 person likes this
@neozero (171)
• Malaysia
29 Nov 08
Just watched a the show MythBuster a couple of days ago on Discover channel. Thats the show where they try to prove all the myth that out there. In this last episode they manage to prove that human actually manage to go to the moon. hopefully they are true
1 person likes this
@coolseeds (3919)
• United States
30 Nov 08
They are not the 1st people to prove that we could have went to the moon. The evidence that points to us being there can all be recreated on Earth so there is really no way to tell. LOL
1 person likes this
• India
4 Dec 08
yes the man landing on the moon not only the time sir .already he has gone on the moon in 1950 approxymately /. while they are working on this chapter.so no question is be to goes on the moon .but in the modern time the man is working good i think this is the bettr e way to keep ur answer in the mind ....good day sir ji
@pierone (1894)
• Italy
29 Nov 08
Sure they landed on the moon... in lot of movies ;) The best one was the movie made by NASA, obviously ;)
1 person likes this