Did we land on the moon?

[paradise]

Yes man made the apple computer.
That is correct, just becasue you don't understand the moon landing is not possible doesn't make it possible. Go down to you local observatory and tell them to point that thing at the flag on the moon. Should be possible.

No, we can't resolve items that small on the moon from earth. What would make you think that should be possible?

 

[hallett21]

No, we can't resolve items that small on the moon from earth. What would make you think that should be possible?

I’ll take a stab at it lol. I believe the world is round and the moon exists to clarify for the 1,000th time lol.

We’ve supposedly retired the SR71 because satellite imagery is superior. So we have satellites that can scan the earth(I realize google earth is usually photos taken by planes) and we have telescopes that can see into deep space.

How can we not have technology that can scan the moon surface? Seems like it would be much more cost effective to have a telescope/satellite that surveyed the moon. VS sending people or probes back to the moon.

At the end of the day NASA is using the same argument all of our parents did. “Because I said so”.

Showing the evidence of arguably the greatest space achievement by man seems like something NASA would want to confirm.

I’m not sure if the Joe Rogan guy is on the money or a total quack. But he makes a decent point that blackmailing “our” lie has much more value than exposing it.

I think today’s technology has started to unravel so many “truths”. Whether it’s the Catholic Church, the USA or the Egyptians. I think the powers of the world are scrambling lol.

Edit. We can see a truck carrying missiles by an unfriendly country. But we cannot see the flag on the moon in the vacuum of space?

 

[paradise]

I’ll take a stab at it lol. I believe the world is round and the moon exists to clarify for the 1,000th time lol.

We’ve supposedly retired the SR71 because satellite imagery is superior. So we have satellites that can scan the earth(I realize google earth is usually photos taken by planes) and we have telescopes that can see into deep space.

How can we not have technology that can scan the moon surface? Seems like it would be much more cost effective to have a telescope/satellite that surveyed the moon. VS sending people or probes back to the moon.

At the end of the day NASA is using the same argument all of our parents did. “Because I said so”.

Showing the evidence of arguably the greatest space achievement by man seems like something NASA would want to confirm.

I’m not sure if the Joe Rogan guy is on the money or a total quack. But he makes a decent point that blackmailing “our” lie has much more value than exposing it.

I think today’s technology has started to unravel so many “truths”. Whether it’s the Catholic Church, the USA or the Egyptians. I think the powers of the world are scrambling lol.

So again the issue here is (like often in space issues) scale. Low earth orbits for observation satellites can be as low as 200KM but let's use 1000KM for a more realistic altitude. That satellite (if you are agreeing there are satellite's, because I would guess some of these guys do not agree) are orbiting around 600 miles above the surface of the earth. The best satellite imaging has a resolution of about 9" x 9". At that size, the entire flag, seen broadside would be 9 pixels x 6 pixels (roughly). You wouldn't see stripes or anything.

Now, let's take that and scale it out to the moon distance (we'll use 240k miles as a rough estimation). That would theoretically put the same ultra high resolution satellite at a pixel size of 300'x300'. Based on these numbers, you can see why we can't see a 6' flag from even an earth orbit. As an aside, Hubble's max resolution is able to pick up 600' objects and features on the moon.

Talking about seeing a galaxy sized item in deep space is not in the same realm. Space scales are very hard for us to wrap our heads around.

 

[hallett21]

So again the issue here is (like often in space issues) scale. Low earth orbits for observation satellites can be as low as 200KM but let's use 1000KM for a more realistic altitude. That satellite (if you are agreeing there are satellite's, because I would guess some of these guys do not agree) are orbiting around 600 miles above the surface of the earth. The best satellite imaging has a resolution of about 9" x 9". At that size, the entire flag, seen broadside would be 9 pixels x 6 pixels (roughly). You wouldn't see stripes or anything.

Now, let's take that and scale it out to the moon distance (we'll use 240k miles as a rough estimation). That would theoretically put the same ultra high resolution satellite at a pixel size of 300'x300'. Based on these numbers, you can see why we can't see a 6' flag from even an earth orbit. As an aside, Hubble's max resolution is able to pick up 600' objects and features on the moon.

Talking about seeing a galaxy sized item in deep space is not in the same realm. Space scales are very hard for us to wrap our heads around.

I agree with what you’re saying. But it’s a pretty bold claim by NASA to say we can see very close and very far but nothing in between. Especially today lol.

So then we circle back to men landing on moon using effectively hand written math 60 years ago. But today we can’t prove we went there, other than telling stories.

This is the same species that learned to fly and dropped a nuclear bomb from a plane inside of 50-60 years.

We’ve either been really lucky, got some help or are lying lol.

 

[bentprops]

But exactly how long does that process take?

View attachment 1373611

If the human body could heal that quickly, cancer and other diseases would not exist!

Right?

At some point with continued poisoning/ damaging the cell becomes corrupted. All disease can be healed, you just have to know the right people. Ask Magic Johnson.

 

[rivermobster]

At some point with continued poisoning/ damaging the cell becomes corrupted. All disease can be healed, you just have to know the right people. Ask Magic Johnson.

Your sidestepping the topic like a pro.

 

[bentprops]

Your sidestepping the topic like a pro.

Maybe i should be a politican. Id save us a crap ton of $$$ by 86 nasa and most of the other 3 letter departments.

At some point with continued poisoning/ damaging the cell becomes corrupted. At that point it stops functioning properly. kinda like a computer.

 

[rivermobster]

Maybe i should be a politican. Id save us a crap ton of $$$ by 86 nasa and most of the other 3 letter departments.

You FINALLY said something most everyone can agree with.

 

[bentprops]

You FINALLY said something most everyone can agree with.

only people that like the gov get paid by them.

 

[ElectroNautical]

There was a great documentary debunking the "tin foil folks" and the main takeaway for me was the parallel shadows. There was no way to replicate the parallel shadows in the images with the stage lighting of the day. A single point light source will always give divergent shadows. The moon photos are completely parallel like as if cast from a wall of LED lights that had yet to be invented, or a sun really far away so the divergence (or even convergence) is negligible.

Good call. And that's really all anyone should need to put this question to bed, even though it takes some thought to understand.

One thing for the 'critical thinkers' here, and it applies to most conspiracy theories. Ask yourself "Who stands to gain from seeding doubts about the USA getting to the moon first?"

For me, it would be the country that lost the moon race, and especially the former KGB disinformation specialist currently running the country and the Russian troll farms there.

That would be...Putin?

 

[ElectroNautical]

So again the issue here is (like often in space issues) scale. Low earth orbits for observation satellites can be as low as 200KM but let's use 1000KM for a more realistic altitude. That satellite (if you are agreeing there are satellite's, because I would guess some of these guys do not agree) are orbiting around 600 miles above the surface of the earth. The best satellite imaging has a resolution of about 9" x 9". At that size, the entire flag, seen broadside would be 9 pixels x 6 pixels (roughly). You wouldn't see stripes or anything.

Now, let's take that and scale it out to the moon distance (we'll use 240k miles as a rough estimation). That would theoretically put the same ultra high resolution satellite at a pixel size of 300'x300'. Based on these numbers, you can see why we can't see a 6' flag from even an earth orbit. As an aside, Hubble's max resolution is able to pick up 600' objects and features on the moon.

Talking about seeing a galaxy sized item in deep space is not in the same realm. Space scales are very hard for us to wrap our heads around.

Well said...

 

[rmarion]

American Patriot 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

We interrupt this program for the filming of the moon landing- 🎬 ACTION 🎬 https://t.me/NEWSFORCE 🌎

t.me

practice makes perfect

 

[hallett21]

Good call. And that's really all anyone should need to put this question to bed, even though it takes some thought to understand.

One thing for the 'critical thinkers' here, and it applies to most conspiracy theories. Ask yourself "Who stands to gain from seeding doubts about the USA getting to the moon first?"

For me, it would be the country that lost the moon race, and especially the former KGB disinformation specialist currently running the country and the Russian troll farms there.

That would be...Putin?

So if they lost why wouldn’t they want to have multiple missions to explore the moon?

Even if they were late, I assume they’d want to do their own due diligence.

 

[rmarion]

 

[ElectroNautical]

We landed 5 times. Apollo 13 would have been 6. Wouldn’t we have figured out it was a waste of time by trip 3 or 4?

Answer: Roughly 95% of the costs related to the Apollo missions were regarded as 'sunk costs', the costs of the Research and Development, plus the test flights (Mercury, Gemini & Apollo 1-10) that were needed to get there the first time. Once all that money was spent, the costs of going again and again were trivial in comparison. So NOT going again would have been a monumentally STUPID waste of everything that was invested -- both time and money.

Now think about your boat. Once the R&D was done to build the first hull, typically they'd go on to build hundreds or thousands on the same hull using the same molds.

Molds used to build your boat were probably used for 10-20 years to build more of them, each year getting better with newer technology motors, electronics, etc. In some cases the molds were sold to new boat builders like @Racey 's father because there was 'residual value' in the design and engineering work.

Does this answer your question?

 

[ElectroNautical]

So if they lost why wouldn’t they want to have multiple missions to explore the moon?

Even if they were late, I assume they’d want to do their own due diligence.

Because (a) rockets exploding on lift off killed nearly 200 of USSR's rocket engineers and technicians in 1960 and 1969, setting them back more than 10 years, (2) all of the best eastern European rocket engineers (Werner Von Braun, etc) escaped and came to the USA to help our program, (c) Communist leaders of USSR were humiliated at losing the Moon Race and decided to spend money instead on nuclear ICBMs they could parade for their citizens (they don't need to actually WORK to look impressive on trucks surrounded by goose-stepping morons) and (4) Ronald Reagan humiliated and bankrupted them AGAIN as they tried to compete with U.S. "Star Wars" development, leading to the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Vladimir Putin.

I hope you are asking because you want to hear alternative viewpoints, but from your other posts here I'm not optimistic. How 'bout you @rmarion ?

 

[hallett21]

Because (a) rockets exploding on lift off killed nearly 200 of USSR's rocket engineers and technicians in 1960 and 1969, setting them back more than 10 years, (2) all of the best eastern European rocket engineers (Werner Von Braun, etc) escaped and came to the USA to help our program, (c) Communist leaders of USSR were humiliated at losing the Moon Race and decided to spend money instead on nuclear ICBMs they could parade for their citizens (they don't need to actually WORK to look impressive on trucks surrounded by goose-stepping morons) and (4) Ronald Reagan humiliated and bankrupted them AGAIN as they tried to compete with U.S. "Star Wars" development, leading to the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Vladimir Putin.

I hope you are asking because you want to hear alternative viewpoints, but from your other posts here I'm not optimistic. How 'bout you @rmarion ?

I am legitimately asking. Driving home. So give me an hour to respond.

 

[ElectroNautical]

I am legitimately asking. Driving home. So give me an hour to respond.

Thanks...I'll be away for a couple of days but I will AGF and edit my post above accordingly, and look forward to further discussion with you. Forgive me if my presumption was off-base.

 

[rmarion]

Because (a) rockets exploding on lift off killed nearly 200 of USSR's rocket engineers and technicians in 1960 and 1969, setting them back more than 10 years, (2) all of the best eastern European rocket engineers (Werner Von Braun, etc) escaped and came to the USA to help our program, (c) Communist leaders of USSR were humiliated at losing the Moon Race and decided to spend money instead on nuclear ICBMs they could parade for their citizens (they don't need to actually WORK to look impressive on trucks surrounded by goose-stepping morons) and (4) Ronald Reagan humiliated and bankrupted them AGAIN as they tried to compete with U.S. "Star Wars" development, leading to the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Vladimir Putin.

I hope you are asking because you want to hear alternative viewpoints, but from your other posts here I'm not optimistic. How 'bout you @rmarion ?

GMAC welcome back... you must be getting READY for the STEEL OF THE CENTURY AGAIN..

our tax dollars are heavily invested into aerospace technology.

I see Rockets launched many times from Vanderberg AFB. Site to see.
Last October while playing in a Golf Tournament at La Purisma, they launched a rocket, it was absolutely AMAZING!!!

It's pretty amazing these rockets are ALWAYS launched horizontally... HHHMMM

With that said...

IMO.. No one has been on the Moon..

#1 reason.... Every Nasa image taken from the moon ""allegedly"" with the earth image.. SHOWS INCORRECT SIZE OF THE EARTH.

I can list the other 10 reasons... but it falls on deaf ears.. and the locals start SCREAMING...

Until A1.. corrects this fault (I'm sure they will evidently) but then I've saved all the prior data history.

I hope your family is well and safe.


Cheers


KEEP THE DREAM ALIVE

 

[ElectroNautical]

View attachment 1374538

If you actually want to talk to people about stuff like this, I would suggest not posting a giant insulting low-effort 'meme'. I make it a practice to 'ignore' the meme re-posters, they typically have nothing original to say.

If you want to know why this meme is bullshit, and if you have the patience to understand (or tolerate) a little about physics, optics and photons, feel free to ask.

 

[ElectroNautical]

IMO.. No one has been on the Moon..

#1 reason.... Every Nasa image taken from the moon ""allegedly"" with the earth image.. SHOWS INCORRECT SIZE OF THE EARTH.

Actually the "INCORRECT SIZE OF THE EARTH" question is easily explained and will make sense if you ever saw a "harvest moon" or if you ever used a camera with a "wide angle lens". Happy to explain it if you are willing to listen.

 

[rmarion]

If you actually want to talk to people about stuff like this, I would suggest not posting a giant insulting low-effort 'meme'. I make it a practice to 'ignore' the meme re-posters, they typically have nothing original to say.

If you want to know why this meme is bullshit, and if you have the patience to understand (or tolerate) a little about physics, optics and photons, feel free to ask.

insulting memes = I actually believe in them...

so, there was no I'll intentions with posting them..

it's very amazing that we are able to view the "MOON" with clarity that is (we were taught) 243k miles away...

but then again, on clear days in Huntington Beach I could see Catalina island like it's next door... even more amazing, San Clemente island (63miles away) is in sight.... (I now wonder what happen to the curvature on those CLEAR DAYS..LOL)

 

[rmarion]

Actually the "INCORRECT SIZE OF THE EARTH" question is easily explained and will make sense if you ever saw a "harvest moon" or if you ever used a camera with a "wide angle lens". Happy to explain it if you are willing to listen.

no explanation needed.

 

[Roosky01]

View attachment 1373406

while checking out RDP sitting in my jacuzzi... just snapped this moon image from my Galaxy S24 phone.. (60 seconds ago)

professionals say this so-called object is "243,000 miles" away..

everyone is entitled to their own opinions..

If only you had an iPhone…

 

[hallett21]

Because (a) rockets exploding on lift off killed nearly 200 of USSR's rocket engineers and technicians in 1960 and 1969, setting them back more than 10 years, (2) all of the best eastern European rocket engineers (Werner Von Braun, etc) escaped and came to the USA to help our program, (c) Communist leaders of USSR were humiliated at losing the Moon Race and decided to spend money instead on nuclear ICBMs they could parade for their citizens (they don't need to actually WORK to look impressive on trucks surrounded by goose-stepping morons) and (4) Ronald Reagan humiliated and bankrupted them AGAIN as they tried to compete with U.S. "Star Wars" development, leading to the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of Vladimir Putin.

I hope you are asking because you want to hear alternative viewpoints, but from your other posts here I'm not optimistic. How 'bout you @rmarion ?

1. It’s terrible that lives were lost. USA lives were lost as well. Unfortunately it included a guy who hung a lemon over the rocket that was Apollo 1.


2. No argument there.

3. I see your point and agree with you for the most part. Except for the “working” part. If they don’t work then why have we spent decades worrying about them?

4. I think the Reagan administration was some of the best propaganda we’ve seen. I don’t mean to be “anti Reagan” as far as policies go. But when you dive into foreign and domestic policies under that administration it’s too picturesque. In my option.

 

[paradise]

GMAC welcome back... you must be getting READY for the STEEL OF THE CENTURY AGAIN..

our tax dollars are heavily invested into aerospace technology.

I see Rockets launched many times from Vanderberg AFB. Site to see.
Last October while playing in a Golf Tournament at La Purisma, they launched a rocket, it was absolutely AMAZING!!!

It's pretty amazing these rockets are ALWAYS launched horizontally... HHHMMM

With that said...

IMO.. No one has been on the Moon..

#1 reason.... Every Nasa image taken from the moon ""allegedly"" with the earth image.. SHOWS INCORRECT SIZE OF THE EARTH.

I can list the other 10 reasons... but it falls on deaf ears.. and the locals start SCREAMING...

Until A1.. corrects this fault (I'm sure they will evidently) but then I've saved all the prior data history.

I hope your family is well and safe.


Cheers


KEEP THE DREAM ALIVE

What direction would you expect to see rockets that are going to orbit to be traveling? They start vertical but almost immediately start to turn East to use the angular velocity they already have and build enough to escape the earth’s gravity.

If you launched a rocket “straight up” in relation the earth (ignoring that it’s not the most efficient option) to anything less than a geosynchronous orbit (22k miles) it would just come falling back down to earth.

The only way we have low earth orbits (Starlink, satellite imagery, weather satellites,etc) is by having satellites go ‘really fast‘. The lower they are, the faster they have to go to maintain orbit.

 

[rmarion]

I'll give everyone a GOOD laugh for the evening...

(OP, out of respect, just tell me to stop and I'll delete all my posts in this thread)

allegedly Moon distance = 243,000 miles from earth.

moon diameter 2,159.1 mile

estimated USA @ 2,600 miles West-East (rounded down)

Google earth accuracy = USA, Europe, Japan within 1 meter...

attached Google Earth images


Google Earth Eye alt measurements - lower right corner on screen


10,377 miles = 2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)

39,631 miles = 1/2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)

so 6x reduction off 39,631 miles = 1/12" size = DOT measurement.

I've order my 243,000 mile lasar tape measure... should arrive next week..

take it for what it's worth.

maybe there's a reason Google earth does not pan out 243,000 miles ...LOL

enjoy..

Flame away..

 

[paradise]

I'll give everyone a GOOD laugh for the evening...

(OP, out of respect, just tell me to stop and I'll delete all my posts in this thread)

allegedly Moon distance = 243,000 miles from earth.

moon diameter 2,159.1 mile

estimated USA @ 2,600 miles West-East (rounded down)

Google earth accuracy = USA, Europe, Japan within 1 meter...

attached Google Earth images


Google Earth Eye alt measurements - lower right corner on screen


10,377 miles = 2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)

39,631 miles = 1/2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)

so 6x reduction off 39,631 miles = 1/12" size = DOT measurement.

I've order my 243,000 mile lasar tape measure... should arrive next week..

take it for what it's worth.

maybe there's a reason Google earth does not pan out 243,000 miles ...LOL

enjoy..

Flame away..

View attachment 1374664
View attachment 1374665
View attachment 1374666
View attachment 1374667

Ok, I’m legit curious what you’re trying to say here? Are you trying to say that that is the size of the moon at that distance? Are you trying to say the size of the earth on your monitor is the true size of the object?

 

[rmarion]

Ok, I’m legit curious what you’re trying to say here? Are you trying to say that that is the size of the moon at that distance? Are you trying to say the size of the earth on your monitor is the true size of the object?

saying the size of the moon at 243,000 miles will look the size of a star in the sky...... spot, dot in the sky.

but then.. that's just based off measurements taken from Google earth....

 

[paradise]

saying the size of the moon at 243,000 miles will look the size of a star in the sky...... spot, dot in the sky.

but then.. that's just based off measurements taken from Google earth....

You're killing me smalls...

You're dealing with a FOV issue there, just like your issue with the size of the earth (or moon) in pictures.

Here are a google earth image and three google earth studio (let's you control FOV) images, all four at "9999 KM" (6260 Miles)

Google earth:

Here is the Studio image at 22* FOV which matches Earth

But looks what happens if we change the FOV to what would look like a telephoto lens:

And now a wide angle:

You can see how the Focal length or Field of View will make items look dramatically closer or farther away. Someone posted an awesome GIF earlier in the thread that showed that effect in a very dramatic way with the guy in front of the building.

 

[4Waters]

no explanation needed.

View attachment 1374625

He's a Jill of all trades, master of none

 

[rmarion]

P

check out my screen shots lower right hand corner...

Google earth Alt miles...

my last screen shot must be zoom out 6x to equal 243,000 mile distance..

6x off 1/2" image = less than 1/8" = DOT in the sky..

all good... like I said.. enjoy some humor...

Have a great evening

 

[paradise]

P

check out my screen shots lower right hand corner...

Google earth Alt miles...

my last screen shot must be zoom out 6x to equal 243,000 mile distance..

6x off 1/2" image = less than 1/8" = DOT in the sky..

all good... like I said.. enjoy some humor...

Have a great evening

You too man.

You’re looking at a picture on a screen. That same image on a bigger screen would be a totally different size. That with a different focal length (look at my last two images that have the same eye altitude) would look totally different. You can’t make that comparison from your screen to ‘real life’ directly unfortunately.

 

[paradise]

P

check out my screen shots lower right hand corner...

Google earth Alt miles...

my last screen shot must be zoom out 6x to equal 243,000 mile distance..

6x off 1/2" image = less than 1/8" = DOT in the sky..

all good... like I said.. enjoy some humor...

Have a great evening

Not sure if you looked close at the last 3 images but the eye alt is the same on all three, only the FOV is changed. fyi

 

[rmarion]

You too man.

You’re looking at a picture on a screen. That same image on a bigger screen would be a totally different size. That with a different focal length (look at my last two images that have the same eye altitude) would look totally different. You can’t make that comparison from your screen to ‘real life’ directly unfortunately.

P

max zoom out ... what's the image of USA reveal... also.. what's the eye alt mile..

just wondering if it's different..

 

[paradise]

P

max zoom out ... what's the image of USA reveal... also.. what's the eye alt mile..

just wondering if it's different..

Go mess with it yourself. It’s all free

 

[rmarion]

Go mess with it yourself. It’s all free

P

images I took were at 10k and 39k miles..

calculations were reviewed..

zoom out to 243,000 miles is not available... which the needed 6x zoom required...

makes the Moon a DOT..

 

[ElectroNautical]

I'll give everyone a GOOD laugh for the evening...

allegedly Moon distance = 243,000 miles from earth.
moon diameter 2,159.1 mile
estimated USA @ 2,600 miles West-East (rounded down)
Google earth accuracy = USA, Europe, Japan within 1 meter...
attached Google Earth images
Google Earth Eye alt measurements - lower right corner on screen
10,377 miles = 2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)
39,631 miles = 1/2" USA "screen" measurements (taken off screen)
so 6x reduction off 39,631 miles = 1/12" size = DOT measurement.

Not gonna flame you, I'm impressed with the work here and I completely understand how you arrived at your conclusion. Also, I've not seen this analysis before and AFAIK your experiment is your own original work. NOT laughing!!!

However...re: "the size of the moon at 243,000 miles will look the size of a star in the sky...... spot, dot in the sky."

Here is why the conclusion you reached is incorrect, and a super simple way to prove it to yourself with your own eyes, your phone camera, and a simple $15 180 degree fisheye lens from Amazon (actually can do it without, but more fun and simpler math with it).

Using your numbers (and ignoring apogee and perogee variations) we can calculate the right triangle that has a hypotenuse of 243,010 miles and a base of 2159.1 miles. The 'observer' is at angle 'alpha' (greek letter a).

So from Pythagoras the moon's diameter is 0.51 degrees of a 360 degree spherical sky (but we can't see spherically, so we have to improvise).

So....put your 180 degree fisheye lens on your cameraphone, snap a shot of the moon and transfer it to your computer. Pull it up on your computer screen and measure the width of the frame (long side) then measure the width of the moon and compare the numbers. If your screen is displaying the 180 degree photo as 10 inches wide you will find that the moon is 0.51/180 = 0.283% of your 10 inch photo.

The moon will be slightly larger than 1/4 of an inch.

If you don't want to buy the 180 degree lens, post the exact make and model of your cameraphone and we'll do the math over based on whatever field-of-view your camera shoots natively (I'll look it up).

Hope you enjoy and let me know what you think.

 

[paradise]

P

images I took were at 10k and 39k miles..

calculations were reviewed..

zoom out to 243,000 miles is not available... which the needed 6x zoom required...

makes the Moon a DOT..

You're missing the point, did I magically make the earth bigger in the second picture? That’s what you’re saying must be the case since the both have the same eye altitude right? Because that is the definitive measurement? No, the reality is only the FOV changed.

You can do the same thing right now. Go outside and take a picture of the moon with your phone zoomed out. Then take another picture with it zoomed in. They will be different sizes even though your distance from the moon didn’t change. Not sure how to make that more simple.

Edit-EN has a great practical test

 

[Kachina26]

Not gonna flame you, I'm impressed with the work here and I completely understand how you arrived at your conclusion. Also, I've not seen this analysis before and AFAIK your experiment is your own original work. NOT laughing!!!

However...re: "the size of the moon at 243,000 miles will look the size of a star in the sky...... spot, dot in the sky."

Here is why the conclusion you reached is incorrect, and a super simple way to prove it to yourself with your own eyes, your phone camera, and a simple $15 180 degree fisheye lens from Amazon (actually can do it without, but more fun and simpler math with it).

Using your numbers (and ignoring apogee and perogee variations) we can calculate the right triangle that has a hypotenuse of 243,010 miles and a base of 2159.1 miles. The 'observer' is at angle 'alpha' (greek letter a).

So from Pythagoras the moon's diameter is 0.51 degrees of a 360 degree spherical sky (but we can't see spherically, so we have to improvise).

So....put your 180 degree fisheye lens on your cameraphone, snap a shot of the moon and transfer it to your computer. Pull it up on your computer screen and measure the width of the frame (long side) then measure the width of the moon and compare the numbers. If your screen is displaying the 180 degree photo as 10 inches wide you will find that the moon is 0.51/180 = 0.283% of your 10 inch photo.

The moon will be slightly larger than 1/4 of an inch.

If you don't want to buy the 180 degree lens, post the exact make and model of your cameraphone and we'll do the math over based on whatever field-of-view your camera shoots natively (I'll look it up).

Hope you enjoy and let me know what you think.


View attachment 1374692

You'll need to post in the form of a meme if you want to be taken seriously.

 

[ElectroNautical]

You're missing the point, did I magically make the earth bigger in the second picture? That’s what you’re saying must be the case since the both have the same eye altitude right? Because that is the definitive measurement? No, the reality is only the FOV changed.

View attachment 1374702
View attachment 1374701

You can do the same thing right now. Go outside and take a picture of the moon with your phone zoomed out. Then take another picture with it zoomed in. They will be different sizes even though your distance from the moon didn’t change. Not sure how to make that more simple.

Edit-EN has a great practical test

Thanks @paradise

LoL...great minds think alike? Right after I finished that post and after seeing yours I happened to trip over my new 'used' Olympus Binoculars (best optics in the world -- for the money) just delivered from Amazon, my third pair at least. Those binocs have a 3.4 degree FoV at 16x zoom, and looking at the moon the other night it filled up about 1/7th of the FoV, very close to 0.51 degrees which is dead-nuts-on the trigonometry for a quarter-million miles.

 

[ElectroNautical]

You'll need to post in the form of a meme if you want to be taken seriously.

Holy shit...I literally can NOT stop laughing. One day I hope to learn how to do that kind of deadpan humor...only 17 words and you literally made my night!

 

[bentprops]

You'll need to post in the form of a meme if you want to be taken seriously.

Memes are definitely fun

 

[Bigbore500r]

Answer: Roughly 95% of the costs related to the Apollo missions were regarded as 'sunk costs', the costs of the Research and Development, plus the test flights (Mercury, Gemini & Apollo 1-10) that were needed to get there the first time. Once all that money was spent, the costs of going again and again were trivial in comparison. So NOT going again would have been a monumentally STUPID waste of everything that was invested -- both time and money.

Now think about your boat. Once the R&D was done to build the first hull, typically they'd go on to build hundreds or thousands on the same hull using the same molds.

Molds used to build your boat were probably used for 10-20 years to build more of them, each year getting better with newer technology motors, electronics, etc. In some cases the molds were sold to new boat builders like @Racey 's father because there was 'residual value' in the design and engineering work.

Does this answer your question?

What’s the deal with you constantly mentioning Raceys father all over RDP? Pretty wierd shit….

Holy shit...I literally can NOT stop laughing. One day I hope to learn how to do that kind of deadpan humor...only 17 words and you literally made my night!

it’s a human thing, bots just can’t understand

 

[ElectroNautical]

P

images I took were at 10k and 39k miles..

calculations were reviewed..

zoom out to 243,000 miles is not available... which the needed 6x zoom required...

makes the Moon a DOT..

You might want to go back to whomever reviewed those calculations and discuss further. I'm not crawling through all your math and assumptions, but one problem I see is here:

"zoom out to 243,000 miles is not available... which the needed 6x zoom required..."

I don't think Google Earth was intended to be used the way you did (which I'll say again...was quite clever). GE is an amazing (and intellectually addictive stimulating) tool, but Google takes a lot of 'shortcuts' to create a fun user experience at the expense of mathematical/physical realism. Also, looks like you substituted flat pixel multiplication for trigonometry. You can't get there with arithmetic alone. I would encourage you to get on Google's Earth development forum & wiki and talk to the developers about your use case. I am 100% certain they didn't design the tool to support a theory that the moon landings were a hoax, and I promise you they will enjoy your contributions and perhaps make changes based on your input.

Cheers!

 

[rmarion]

sorry can't play ATM..working for the man...

found a FAKE you tube... NASA employee says.. used parallax measurement on the Sun distance from earth...

very interesting... he came up with 6000 miles.. I can't wait to here his Moon distance...

RDPERS = FAKE NEWS!!


LOL have a great day

should add a few more pages

 

[rmarion]

on lunch break... incase the MAN is lurking...

some interesting video....

"parallex measurement" (I still dont understand, hopefully learn soon, to the Moon a shot)

just watch, before spewing out your knowledge....

Enjoy

 

[ElectroNautical]

on lunch break... incase the MAN is lurking...

some interesting video....

"parallex measurement" (I still dont understand, hopefully learn soon, to the Moon a shot)

just watch, before spewing out your knowledge....

Enjoy

DDDUUUUDDDDEEEE!!!!!

I thought you said you don't believe the Earth is flat? Did you watch the WHOLE video? From the first frame to the last, ALL of it is based on Flat Earth geometry! Then he even exposes himself as a flat earther and shows you how he fooled you at the end.

1) Look at the comments and sort by most recent. Total fraud, totally exposed by HUNDREDS of people.e And for everyone else here, you don't have to bother wasting time watching (like I did...for almost two minutes)...reading the transcript and the MOST RECENT comments is all you need.

2) FYI, did you know that this fucking clown ALSO believes the Earth is Flat and that ALL his bullshit measurements in this video are based on a FLAT FUCKING EARTH????

3) Grab the clown's email "[email protected]", then google it (WITH the quotation marks) and you'll find links to his "Flat Earth" videos that have been DELETED FROM YOUTUBE (like this one)

4) In fact, the ONLY reason this shit-4-brains posted this video with the Flat Earth shit buried at the end) was so he could slip it in under the radar and so it wouldn't get DELETED or tagged as BULLSHIT. Scroll through the transcript toward the end and that is where you'll see the Flat Earth.

5) You simply can NOT understand this until you understand parallax FIRST. Why would you be watching a video where somebody supposedly uses "parallax" to prove the earth is flat and then post it HERE before checking it out?

Are you sure you are not a 'closet' Flat Earther? Don't lie now...

 

[ElectroNautical]

Not gonna flame you, I'm impressed with the work here and I completely understand how you arrived at your conclusion. Also, I've not seen this analysis before and AFAIK your experiment is your own original work. NOT laughing!!!

However...re: "the size of the moon at 243,000 miles will look the size of a star in the sky...... spot, dot in the sky."

Here is why the conclusion you reached is incorrect, and a super simple way to prove it to yourself with your own eyes, your phone camera, and a simple $15 180 degree fisheye lens from Amazon (actually can do it without, but more fun and simpler math with it).

Using your numbers (and ignoring apogee and perogee variations) we can calculate the right triangle that has a hypotenuse of 243,010 miles and a base of 2159.1 miles. The 'observer' is at angle 'alpha' (greek letter a).

So from Pythagoras the moon's diameter is 0.51 degrees of a 360 degree spherical sky (but we can't see spherically, so we have to improvise).

So....put your 180 degree fisheye lens on your cameraphone, snap a shot of the moon and transfer it to your computer. Pull it up on your computer screen and measure the width of the frame (long side) then measure the width of the moon and compare the numbers. If your screen is displaying the 180 degree photo as 10 inches wide you will find that the moon is 0.51/180 = 0.283% of your 10 inch photo.

The moon will be slightly larger than 1/4 of an inch.

If you don't want to buy the 180 degree lens, post the exact make and model of your cameraphone and we'll do the math over based on whatever field-of-view your camera shoots natively (I'll look it up).

Hope you enjoy and let me know what you think.


View attachment 1374692

@rmarion ???

 

[ElectroNautical]

You might want to go back to whomever reviewed those calculations and discuss further. I'm not crawling through all your math and assumptions, but one problem I see is here:

"zoom out to 243,000 miles is not available... which the needed 6x zoom required..."

I don't think Google Earth was intended to be used the way you did (which I'll say again...was quite clever). GE is an amazing (and intellectually addictive stimulating) tool, but Google takes a lot of 'shortcuts' to create a fun user experience at the expense of mathematical/physical realism. Also, looks like you substituted flat pixel multiplication for trigonometry. You can't get there with arithmetic alone. I would encourage you to get on Google's Earth development forum & wiki and talk to the developers about your use case. I am 100% certain they didn't design the tool to support a theory that the moon landings were a hoax, and I promise you they will enjoy your contributions and perhaps make changes based on your input.

Cheers!

@rmarion ???