Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
This is the only proof ever that any astro nots landed on the moon, from 2008.
I just can't
- Thread starter ProPheT 216
- Start date
This is the only proof ever that any astro nots landed on the moon, from 2008.
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
NASA Might Put a Huge Telescope on the Far Side of the Moon
Observing the secrets of the universe’s “Dark Ages” will require capturing ultra-long radio wavelengths—and we can’t do that on Earth.
weedstoner420
Well-Known Member
Sometimes some interesting factoids pop up in this thread. This is actually true, but it's not as crazy as I originally thought when I read it.The most powerful telescopes on earth can't see the flag, rover tracks, the plaque, or any evidence of a lunar landing site btw. Tell me again how you can see everything through a scope?
So when it comes to high-resolution imagery from long distances, of course spy satellites are what comes to my mind. From what I can gather doing a quick google search, the "best" spy satellites (which are essentially telescopes pointed at earth from space) can resolve things down to a couple of inches wide, from an altitude of a few hundred miles (low earth orbit). That seems quite a bit better than the highest-resolution satellite images the public can access on something like google maps...
Take that same technology, and now point it at the moon. So the moon is ~240,000 miles from earth, roughly 1,000 times as far away as the spy satellites. So given the same super sophisticated imaging technology, the resolution would be something like a few thousand inches, or maybe a hundred feet. That's the smallest sized object it can distinguish. And that's with the best technology that the public is aware of, no way you're getting that on an ordinary HD camera. Even if it were ten times better than I'm suggesting, it still wouldn't be enough to see the flag. There is a reason we sent orbiting satellites to the moon to observe it in detail. I bet a satellite orbiting the moon could make out those details, but from earth it seems unlikely.
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Telescope resolution javascript calculator
Telescope resolution javascript calculator - Calcolatore javascript risoluzione telescopio
win98.altervista.org
Calculated data:
Required Earth telescope diameter for 10m resolution on Moon: 22.4 m
Required Earth telescope diameter for 1m resolution on Moon: 224 m
Required Earth telescope diameter for 1cm resolution on Moon: 22 km
Hubble arcsec/pixel: 0.08 and 0.04
weedstoner420
Well-Known Member
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Billy the Mountain
Well-Known Member
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
If there was a pendulum that could prove the earth was spinning, that also means that they could tune a gyro to stay completely stationary, and harness the spin directly from the earth using magnets and coils. I don't care how big of a vacuum tube or space needed either, they should be able to do it. They could power everything with the spin of the earth, while using barely any of that energy to keep the gyro spinning, if the revolving earth theory were actually true. The Foucalt pendulum would be part of the mechanisms that keeps it stabilized, basically reverse engineered.. Imagine a giant gear connected to the earth, as big as you want, held in place by super magnets. The soviets had top secret programs in the 70s to harness earths spinning energy, and failed though. Or did they? Either they are already doing it secretly (with underground gyro generators the size of CERN, etc).. and lying to us... or, the fact no one seems to be able to do it yet proves the earth doesn't spin, and they are still lying to us either way.
Seriously though, your gonna believe some experiment from the 1850s that needed to be cranked up by hand, that they say any high school kid can perform, yet no one ever really can? You try to buy an expensive gyro or any parts to build one, and all the manufacturers of the parts state it isn't sensitive enough to detect the earths spin, yet some guy could do it in the 1800s from scratch?
Seriously though, your gonna believe some experiment from the 1850s that needed to be cranked up by hand, that they say any high school kid can perform, yet no one ever really can? You try to buy an expensive gyro or any parts to build one, and all the manufacturers of the parts state it isn't sensitive enough to detect the earths spin, yet some guy could do it in the 1800s from scratch?
buckaclark
Well-Known Member
In detecting this spin,aren't they actually tapping that energy a tiny bit.wouldnt that have an affect ,albeit tiny,on that spin.Would lots of the machines you are proposing actually change our centrifugal position.Or possibly our orbit?
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Now they say the inside is spinning at a different rate. So how could you perform the same test anyway?
www.sciencefocus.com
Earth’s inner core is slowing down its spin. Should we be worried?
The planet’s solid iron inner core has stopped spinning faster than the surface, a new study suggests.
buckaclark
Well-Known Member
I would assume the pendulum test would be surface related. Why does the moon not spin at all?Now they say the inside is spinning at a different rate. So how could you perform the same test anyway?
Earth’s inner core is slowing down its spin. Should we be worried?
The planet’s solid iron inner core has stopped spinning faster than the surface, a new study suggests.
weedstoner420
Well-Known Member
Perhaps we could build a Dyson sphere while we're at it...
ooof-da
Well-Known Member
If we all used Dyson vacuum cleaners would they all be just a little bit stronger from the grandiosity?
Billy the Mountain
Well-Known Member
Drop That Sound
Well-Known Member
Probably because the moon IS the generator I speak of, and is fixed with a massive gyro to keep it from spinning. So perfect, only god could have designed it.
