Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #371911 > unrolled thread

Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung

Started byPlexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org>
First post2015-12-12 20:24 +0000
Last post2015-12-14 16:27 +0000
Articles 6 on this page of 46 — 12 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity


Contents

  Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-12 20:24 +0000
    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-12 20:54 +0000
      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-13 16:27 +0000
      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-13 08:38 -0800
        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-13 17:58 +0000
          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-13 13:59 -0800
            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 22:51 +0000
              Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-13 14:56 -0800
                Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 23:05 +0000
                  Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-13 15:15 -0800
                    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 23:23 +0000
          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 16:50 -0800
            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-15 15:31 +0000
              Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 13:03 -0800
                Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-15 22:24 +0000
                  Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 15:07 -0800
                    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-15 23:56 +0000
                  Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 16:08 -0800
                    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-16 00:27 +0000
                      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 19:49 -0800
                        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Ezra Farrow <ezrafa@dubtechno.org> - 2015-12-18 10:20 +0000
                        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Ezra Farrow <ezrafa@dubtechno.org> - 2015-12-18 10:21 +0000
                          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2015-12-18 03:45 -0800
                            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Ezra Farrow <ezrafa@dubtechno.org> - 2015-12-18 17:51 +0000
      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-13 15:10 -0800
        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 23:26 +0000
          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-13 15:32 -0800
            Re: Chinese Rover finds no evidence for the moon-landing Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-14 06:47 +0100
              Re: Chinese Rover finds no evidence for the moon-landing pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-13 22:07 -0800
                Re: Chinese Rover finds no evidence for the moon-landing Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 16:42 +0000
            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 16:35 +0000
        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 10:40 -0600
          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 16:48 +0000
            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-14 10:11 -0800
              Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 18:32 +0000
                Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-14 12:02 -0800
                  Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 20:39 +0000
                    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-14 13:08 -0800
                      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 21:22 +0000
                        Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-14 13:40 -0800
                          Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 22:06 +0000
                            Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-14 15:25 -0800
                              Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-15 15:43 +0000
                              Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-12-16 14:19 +0100
    Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-12-14 13:17 +1100
      Re: Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 16:27 +0000

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]


#372037

FromJason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org>
Date2015-12-14 22:06 +0000
Message-ID<n4nehm$d33$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#372033
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) pnalsing wrote:

>> A free-body diagram equating forces shows that a crater formation
>> should take place. Disregard how small or soil particularity and
>> directions. I see no any.
> 
> Show your work, your word has no authority.

This sentence contradicts itself. No authority and still want to see my 
work. Sir, you act like a moron and therefore likely severely uneducated, 
not knowing what a *free-body* diagram stands for. 

Approximate the exhaust and direction necessary to prevent 1/6 of the many 
tones not brake into pieces assuming landing on hard rocks. The legs of 
that lander are not even covered by dust, which indicates the lander was 
kept suspended before touchdown. You don't need work. What you need is 
education.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#372043

Frompnalsing@gmail.com
Date2015-12-14 15:25 -0800
Message-ID<a3d784ea-085f-4556-af1f-2a2dc40c3640@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#372037
On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 2:06:52 PM UTC-8, Jason Wyome wrote:
> ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) pnalsing wrote:
> 
> >> A free-body diagram equating forces shows that a crater formation
> >> should take place. Disregard how small or soil particularity and
> >> directions. I see no any.
> > 
> > Show your work, your word has no authority.
> 
> This sentence contradicts itself. No authority and still want to see my 
> work. Sir, you act like a moron and therefore likely severely uneducated, 
> not knowing what a *free-body* diagram stands for. 
> 
> Approximate the exhaust and direction necessary to prevent 1/6 of the many 
> tones not brake into pieces assuming landing on hard rocks. The legs of 
> that lander are not even covered by dust, which indicates the lander was 
> kept suspended before touchdown. You don't need work. What you need is 
> education.

You didn't actually read the paper, did you. Either that, or you don't comprehend what you read. The words are not mine, they are the words of NASA.

You obviously did't read any of the other links, either, or watch the video. Here, try again, and this time learn something...

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#crater

"... the engine nozzle was about 54 inches across (from the Encyclopaedia Astronautica), which means it had an area of 2300 square inches. That in turn means that the thrust generated a pressure of only about 1.5 pounds per square inch! That's not a lot of pressure. Moreover, in a vacuum, the exhaust from a rocket spreads out very rapidly. On Earth, the air in our atmosphere constrains the thrust of a rocket into a narrow column, which is why you get long flames and columns of smoke from the back of a rocket. In a vacuum, no air means the exhaust spreads out even more, lowering the pressure. That's why there's no blast crater! Three thousand pounds of thrust sounds like a lot, but it was so spread out it was actually rather gentle."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#372078

FromJürgen Großenbach <jurgengb@adenauer.org>
Date2015-12-15 15:43 +0000
Message-ID<n4pcf1$ore$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#372043
pnalsing wrote:

> "That's why there's no blast crater! Three thousand pounds of thrust
> sounds like a lot, but it was so spread out it was actually rather
> gentle."

That's why no dust on legs, but a spacesuit needs  $700.000 crowd funding 
to clean the dust out.

Reboot the lie: Neil Armstrong's suit 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEfNT685WVI

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#372137

From"Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Date2015-12-16 14:19 +0100
Message-ID<n4rodm$27b$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#372043
On 15.12.2015 00:25, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 2:06:52 PM UTC-8, Jason Wyome wrote:
>> ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) pnalsing wrote:
>>
>>>> A free-body diagram equating forces shows that a crater formation
>>>> should take place. Disregard how small or soil particularity and
>>>> directions. I see no any.
>>>
>>> Show your work, your word has no authority.
>>
>> This sentence contradicts itself. No authority and still want to see my
>> work. Sir, you act like a moron and therefore likely severely uneducated,
>> not knowing what a *free-body* diagram stands for.
>>
>> Approximate the exhaust and direction necessary to prevent 1/6 of the many
>> tones not brake into pieces assuming landing on hard rocks. The legs of
>> that lander are not even covered by dust, which indicates the lander was
>> kept suspended before touchdown. You don't need work. What you need is
>> education.
>
> You didn't actually read the paper, did you. Either that, or you don't comprehend what you read. The words are not mine, they are the words of NASA.
>
> You obviously did't read any of the other links, either, or watch the video. Here, try again, and this time learn something...
>
> http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#crater
>
> "... the engine nozzle was about 54 inches across (from the Encyclopaedia Astronautica), which means it had an area of 2300 square inches. That in turn means that the thrust generated a pressure of only about 1.5 pounds per square inch! That's not a lot of pressure. Moreover, in a vacuum, the exhaust from a rocket spreads out very rapidly. On Earth, the air in our atmosphere constrains the thrust of a rocket into a narrow column, which is why you get long flames and columns of smoke from the back of a rocket. In a vacuum, no air means the exhaust spreads out even more, lowering the pressure. That's why there's no blast crater! Three thousand pounds of thrust sounds like a lot, but it was so spread out it was actually rather gentle."
>

You are discussing with a nymshifting troll.
He doesn't try to make sense, he is only writing what he
think will provoke you.
With success.

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#371975

FromSylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date2015-12-14 13:17 +1100
Message-ID<dd6n67FnlilU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#371911
On 13/12/2015 7:24 AM, Plexippus Kritikos wrote:
> I don't understand. Where are they?
> Stealing aliens on Moon from other planets?
>
> Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung
> http://www.oe24.at/welt/Rover-findet-keine-Beweise-fuer-Mondlandung/158854028
>

Even if this were news, and no a satirical work of fiction, it would be 
old news.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#372000

FromJason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org>
Date2015-12-14 16:27 +0000
Message-ID<n4mql4$tab$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#371975
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Sylvia Else wrote:

> On 13/12/2015 7:24 AM, Plexippus Kritikos wrote:
>> I don't understand. Where are they?
>> Stealing aliens on Moon from other planets?
>> Chinese Rover findet keine Beweise für Mondlandung
>> http://www.oe24.at/welt/Rover-findet-keine-Beweise-fuer-
Mondlandung/158854028
> 
> Even if this were news, and no a satirical work of fiction, it would be
> old news.

You just need to learn to read the news, lady. There can be more news in 
the satiricals than it is in your allegedlycal proper "news". 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity


csiph-web