Were the Americans on the moon?
Dispense with preliminaries and foreplay.Here is the reason why the Americans could not fabricate the video:
In 2009, the fortieth anniversary of the flight of Apollo 11 automatic interplanetary station LRO executed a special assignment — spent surveying the areas of landings of lunar modules earth expeditions.
And here fotochki
Let's discuss the main arguments of the conspiracy theorists.
The pictures are too many inconsistencies, cocok
Here all the arguments: http://www.skeptik.net/conspir/moonhoax.htm
Radiation belt cocok
This belt starts from 400 to 1300 km depending on longitude. There is a second belt at an altitude of 17,000 km, but it is weaker. Astronauts on Gemini 11 went up to 1300 km, but for some reason didn't die. The Soviet Union launched turtles living around the moon, but they also survived, a miracle probably.
And pachimu the booster of the Saturn 5, the most powerful in history, is no longer used? Kok
The launch of a proton - about $ 70 million. Launch Saturn 5 - 1 billion 200 million dollars. I hope it is clear.
Saturn 5 never existed ahahah
Yeah. The station skayleb, which were raised by this booster is also never existed. And the fact that it was visible from Earth with the naked eye it's nothing.
And I Ani balshe militat? kokk
Question section I'm an idiot. First, Voyager 2 flew over Uranus in 1986, but there is no one more puciato fiction. Galileo went to Jupiter in 1995, but pochemuto there no one else was. And so on. Second, the program was closed due to lack of funding. The cost of the program was 22 billion dollars(the money of those times). It is very much clear that more money nobody will give.
And pachimu not litut right now? You can also slitti huh?
No you can not. Too expensive. And it is unnecessary to explore Mars much more effective.
I like the flag developing Ms. there is no wind.
Imagine for a moment that everything was shot in pavilione. From then indoors the wind? Do not you think that you are a young conspiracy theorist, an idiot? And, as for reason, it is many times spend too much time that I'm not even going to mention it.
And one more thing. In one of the expeditions of an astronaut conducted experiments. He dumped simultaneously from the same height, a feather and a stone. They fell at the same time. It turns out that this forge is required in all Studio air pump? Is this too much?
7Rain7
Are you trying to make fun of another country through its own showing of the picture with all sorts of Patriotic fools, passing them off as aliens.
LenivyiBob
why is the station on the moon, if she is well enough studied? But perhaps a flight to Mars will not give pricate technology? Besides Mars from the point of view of colonization is clearly preferable to the moon. By the way excursions into orbit a long time is not a problem. But only a question of money. And whether they you have a question for you, not rocket scientists.
And I don't think what you would like to drop power from these research and flight, important.
LenivyiBob
Out of context certain phrases unprofessional
I just do not snatch them out of context. With the same success it was possible to reply without quoting, but it is best seen on which statement I say.
you apparently do not understand what I wanted to say based on your answers
Actually, Yes. Because you need to clearly articulate their thoughts.
Don't lean on prevalently schedule Pohorje.
What prelevati and why irrelevant?
Alexfor
Besides Mars from the point of view of colonization is clearly preferable to the moon.
Quite a controversial statement. Mars, of course, much more similar to Earth, but that (if we are talking about colonization), I wonder is that in the context of terraforming, but this process requires a fundamentally different technical level which if is reached, probably in the very distant future. With regard to simple research stations (or even entire cities with artificial biospheres), the difference of conditions on the moon and Mars is not very important: in both cases you need to create an artificial environment that protects against everything. But the moon is ten times closer, flying to her is a quite acceptable time. How to build and maintain a lunar base would be much easier.
V-Nine
why I wrote from the point of view of colonization. To the fact 2 times smaller gravity for the body is better than lunar 6I.
doubt why there are in a country that has degenerated to the level of the floor, people are illiterate, education fake
That's where the loot, see there Alexnator. ))) well, the ban has only released.
Very beautiful and modest Asian going. )) in the morning
Alexfor
I don't know about gravity. Out on the ISS in zero gravity generally live for a few months — like anything terrible happens.
V-Nine
And people on the moon or Mars will have several years to live. Every six months to change the composition is expensive.
kile[Natural sick all over the country one such]
Well, if weightlessness is safe to live for at least many months, it is logical to assume that in conditions of noticeable gravity, though at times weaker than on Earth, without consequences to live even longer.
V-Nine
yeah, due to the long exercise. This is how much time and effort have to spend on something that just get bored on the moon.
Alexfor
Colonization of the moon now is in any case "a lot of time and effort to miss."
V-Nine
yeah. Where a person will need 15 minutes, send ka automatic station that won't do half of it and will fail, but will cost half the starting person.
And one more thing. In one of the expeditions of an astronaut conducted experiments. He dumped simultaneously from the same height, a feather and a stone. They fell at the same time. It turns out that this forge is required in all Studio air pump? Is this too much?
And what does the air? Or the weight of the body due to the presence of air?
Hellsign
You'd be shocked, so you better hold on to the window sill or to ensure that, tie yourself to the chair: there is such a thing as air resistance (it's still in some way connected with the aerodynamics, but this is for you, probably an empty phrase).
The weight of the body is P=m*g*h, de m - mass, g - acceleration of free fall, constant, numerically equal to 9.81 something there (like meters per second squared) and h is the height of the body above the surface of the earth. But that's not the point! The point, in fact, that in free fall each and every body regardless of its weight and dimensions served an acceleration of g. The same, remember, for any body. Well, the physical meaning is roughly the following: whether in space the force of air resistance, any body, the objects or items dropped from same height reach the surface of the earth at the same time. Well, or something like that.
Alexfor
am, where a person will need 15 minutes, send ka automatic station that won't do half of it and will fail, but will cost half the starting person.
Nothing of the sort. The planetary Rovers and AMS are able to work for years and decades, and are much cheaper. For example, one of the most expensive and fancy stations — "Cassini" already 11 years works on the orbit of Saturn (and 7 years of flying to it) and will run until 2017 and it Costs — $3,26 billion, "the Voyager" in flight already 38 (!) years, the first will be active until 2040, the second — to 2034, the Total mission cost — $3.7 billion (in 2012). And now back to my picture above and compare with the how much cost six manned missions to the moon. For comparison: apparatus for study of the lunar ectosphere LADEE, which successfully completed its mission last spring, cost only $280 million he Collected data scientists are still processed and make discoveries. This is the question of performance studies. The machine can long time to collect data, but their treatment of people will still run much longer.
V-Nine
Just Google those models that refused. And then think about how much it would cost construction of the apparatus for what did on the moon at least Armstrong and Aldrin. And Yes, until now - because no new data. From which would not refuse.
Alexfor
Just Google those models that refused.
What, for example? Well, offhand I can say the cost of the infamous device "Phobos-Grunt" — to 5 billion rubles.
And then think about how much it would cost construction of the apparatus for what did on the moon at least Armstrong and Aldrin.
One ship is not enough, we need more super-heavy rocket, which also needs to be created from scratch. Now, the lunar program will not be cheaper than in the 60's.