Re: ATTN: Scott Grissom - four specific questions

From: Brad Guth (bradguth_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 01/28/05 

Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 05:44:47 +0000 (UTC)

You're correct about my mistake on the 15 days being in error; so what's
the difference?

The reported Apollo-13 mission was still nearly twice the dosage
reported by Apollo-11, and even the worst of those two simply isn't all
that believable if including a TBI naked stroll upon the lunar surface.

Actually, having a tonne/m2 between yourself and what our sun is capable
of tossing at you (such as Earth L5 or anything related to the moon
that's fully solar illuminated, isn't going to be sufficient.

There's also the secondary IR energy coming off the dark basalt moon,
not to mention all those the secondary rads of hard-X-Rays to boot. Of
course you're insisting that the 3+ g/cm of lunar basalt isn't nearly as
reactive as aluminum. So, how slightly reactive per m2 is the lunar
basalt?

I have managed to create a few other related topics, some of which are
not specifically about our moon, though in more than a few ways offering
everything about future space exploration and just plain old space
travel itself that's at least indirectly related to utilizing our moon
as a rather necessary gravitational booster shot, of such missions
passing as close to the moon as possible hasn't been a new idea, it just
so happens to coincide with the logic of what the LSE-CM/ISS is good
for.

The Moon, LSE-CM/ISS, Venus and beyond, with He3 to burn

Lunar/Moon Space Elevator, plus another ISS within the CM

Life on Venus is absolute hell, but doable

Ice Ages directly regulated by Sirius

Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus

Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm

"Jay Windley" <webmaster@clavius.org> wrote in message
news:bhra5o$jo6$1@terabinaries.xmission.com

>
> "Brad Guth" <bradguth@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:5d28ff28.0308181037.7cb6c41c@posting.google.com...
> | One specific question: SPACE RADIATION ?
> |
> | Others like yourself have been stipulating that those Apollo
> | missions alluded
> ^^^^^^^
>
> The word you want is "eluded".
>
> | then while nearly raw exposed on the lunar surface for 36 hours
> | took on immeasurably small dosages of primary (solar maximum)
> | cosmic as well as secondary (lunar surface) radiation and,
> | subsequently their 15+ day mission somehow averaged a pathetic
> | 20 mrem/day.
>
> 1. No Apollo mission lasted 15 days, let alone longer.
>
> 2. No one except you is quoting average daily exposures. As I have
> explained at length to you, such a metric does not convey an accurate
> picture of the astronauts' exposure.
>
> | If all that's supposedly true and the absolute gospel, then what's all
> | the fuss over surviving the Mars mission, or of those subjected at
> | Earth L5 in need of as much as 1000 g/cm2 ?
>
> This was explained at length to you. Please read and comment on the answer
> before simply asking the question again. 

-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Relevant Pages

  • NASA Selects Scientists and Investigations for Robotic Moon Mission (LRO)
    ... NASA SELECTS SCIENTISTS AND INVESTIGATIONS FOR ROBOTIC MOON MISSION ... administrator, NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington. ...
    (sci.space.news)
  • Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05
    ... >on the moon. ... Such a mission could probably be done with two launches. ... Not having Saturn V's has cost us a /lot/ of money and missed ... >> What does seem strange to me is that they've chosen to launch the crew ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: the un-economics of space travel
    ... Apollo/Soyuz was supposed to have happened 10 years previously, under JFK ... : and his cooperative moon mission with the Soviets(re: NSAM 271) and not ... SE Asia at the same time you're planning on landing on the moon with Soviet ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Space travel by humans is not possible now
    ... There is no reason for humans themselves to go beyond the ... As a result, I´m an advocate of going back to the Moon, ... mission to Mars doesn't make sense, then there is no reason for the moon ... If we can establish a manufacturing capability in space Earth will be ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Discovery Films Strikes Deal for Apollo Missions Documentary IN THESHADOW OF THE MOON (Forwarded
    ... accomplishing the moon itself, perhaps instead we or perhaps China ... cells in order to survive the mission gauntlet. ... What if anything is stopping or in any way diverting the very same solar ... that's one hell of a solar/cosmic plus unavoidably secondary/recoil ...
    (sci.space.history)