Fakery in Orbit: THE I$$

[pov603]

This just popped into my head [and i haven't even had my drink yet, which reminds me...].
Anyway, I have no idea how feasible this would be but regarding an 'anti-grav' device/environment for D-ASA to do their filming in, would it be possible to have an internal drum [housing the 'ISS'] rotating at high speed, let's say clockwise, whilst housed within an outer shell rotating at high speed going anti-clockwise?
Would this avoid any coriolis effects, or inertia, or centrifugal forces?

[Jonathan]

My 2 cents

Since the construct would be on earth, it would be under the influence of the same forces, regardless of the construction.
You cannot de-couple anything from this reference-frame and still have it on earth.

If the room you are in is spinning, you get centrifugal forces - regardless whether that room is in another which spins as well.
If it is spinning fast, you get large forces - if you are not exactly in the center.
Inertia cannot be avoided, ever. Only things without mass would have no inertia.
Gravity still pulls you down inside the thing - which will get you nailed to the wall as soon as you leave the center or touch anything except the center.
The whole thing is pulled down by gravity as well.

That was just a Gedankenexperiment, although consistent with my recent experience visiting a childrens playground with my two little nieces

Thanks for reminding me of the drink

[john gault]

Need to create weightlessness?

Just build a large scale one of these:http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~khh6430/gravity/clinostats.html

Image:

“The most thorough elimination gravitational effects is achieved with a 3-D clinostat, which is built around a Cartesian suspension. The three independent axes of rotation provide complete randomization of the gravity vector and achieve the best micro-gravity simulation for ground-based experiments.”
“the 3-D clinostat is a valuable device for simulating weightlessness.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9299798

Take your protein pills and put your helmet on...

-JG

[Jonathan]

would be nice.

This goes way back - way more than i.e. this one.

Such things are used to simulate the effects of constantly changing the direction of gravitational pull on plants
- effectively - and figuratively speaking - making it not know where up and down is anymore.
The gravity is still there of course - the plant isn't weightless - just confused

[Jonathan]

This was before my time here ...

I was back-reading...

...reading Simons post from June 6th 2011, 3.21 pm here in this thread, which was interesting...
the first link in that webcached post he linked to was mindblowing

No - I'll not make gif's.
I'll just link to the same YT-clip the post inside the post linked to.

I thought we where supposed to think that the thing was fairly bright white.

Here you see it resembling a mirror - although one with degrading reflectiveness during the course of the clip.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brzojao2rPo

even the black parts reflect...

But, even if it would be reflecting...

- watch the camera position - and then the angle in which it points to the (right) wing
- even more rediculous when watching the "reflection" from the open cargo bay in top left corner

If you look from behind on the almost flat (and here: reflecting) surface of the wing, what would you expect to get reflected back at you?

At these angles they would reflect the blackness of space, no? With or without stars

...not that I have ever seen anything reflected off the shuttles surface before...

It goes on in the second link (of the webcached post he linked to) - where they sip liquid sticking straws through their helmets - starting at 3:38 - 3:52 and more fun after that.
I just wonder how that's gonna work if that suit actually needs to be air-tight just in case.

hmm

please, prove me wrong!

[Unleashed]

This was before my time here ...

I was back-reading...

...reading Simons post from June 6th 2011, 3.21 pm here in this thread, which was interesting...
the first link in that webcached post he linked to was mindblowing

Yea!! Warhol = Punisher! He's the inspiration I was talking about on the satellite thread.
Punisher rocks, imho!

I should point out that I am not onboard with his "flat earth" views. But, otherwise I think he does a good job of pointing out NASA fakery.

[Jonathan]

...uhmm - those "flat eath views" where just another concept I mentioned in response to ... I don't know which view or post now, at this time, anymore. I suppose you refer to some remark along the lines of: "... no gravity required then ..." I remember to have made somewhere, but don't know where now

really!

It's just a thing how things could be viewed from a different standpoint - it does not mean that I hold that to be true.
There is some (complex and probably not easily understandable) context to it.

If you are interested, I'll PM you - I don't think it belongs here...

To be perfectly clear: I don't think the earth is flat - we are on common ground

[Unleashed]

...uhmm - those "flat eath views" where just another concept I mentioned in response to ... I don't know which view or post now, at this time, anymore.
I suppose you refer to some remark along the lines of: "... no gravity required then ..." I remember to have made somewhere, but don't know where now
really!

It's just a thing how things could be viewed from a different standpoint - it does not mean that I hold that to be true.
There is some (complex and probably not easily understandable) context to it.

If you are interested, I'll PM you - I don't think it belongs here...

To be perfectly clear: I don't think the earth is flat - we are on common ground

I understand. You can appreciate someone's research and be 100% in agreement with it and yet not draw the same conclusions they do from it. Although, I actually understand why he might be led to
draw them. That's not where it took me.

But, it's everywhere. Somewhere last night I was looking at a story about the 'dark side of the Moon'.
And our synchronous revolutions. Well, try as I might, I can't seem to reconcile that explanation with a side of Moon that no one ever sees. It would seem to me that if we were rotating around as explained in the article that somewhere, sooner or later that some part of Earth would be exposed to that side of the Moon, yet they aren't.

I was laboring under the impression that the Moon simply leans toward and away from the Earth in a circular pattern, always maintaining that side towards Earth as it cycles around. Because otherwise lunar eclipses would be a monthly occurance, amiright?

[Jonathan]

That seems quite easy to explain from my viewpoint, but strangely coincidential nonetheless
( I accept it as a fact, though):


- sun is the center (not really, but for our purposes ...)
- earth (while rotating on itself) is moving around sun - it takes one year to complete one revolution around sun
- the earth spins, as mentioned above

(axis is roughly North-pole - South-pole
- axis is tilted about 23° compared to that of its journey around the sun
( / | / ) - a try to depict it from a side-view ... sun in middle, earth at left in spring, in fall at right - northern hemisphere being up, southern being down; it's winter here when its summer in australia...)
- a little simplified, that is what produces the seasons here on earth - the different angle the sunlight reaches us over the course of a year)

- it takes ~24 hours for one revolution and it will have made 365 such revolutions (one year) to complete a full circle around the sun
- moon spins around earth - (while earth is going around sun)
- moon takes about 28 days for one full circle around the earth
- moon spins around the earth while it itself is rotating

- it's rotation takes the same 28 days it is taking it to circle the earth

That would be why we only ever see one side - and NEVER the other - from earth.
... that would be the coincidence

HTH

[edit...]
eclipses: the plane(s) of rotation differ
here is the current boundary of my knowledge

earth around sun - one plane
moon around earth - another plane - do not know which ...
earths axis - tilted against the first (sun)

regardless which plane moon circles the earth, an eclipse (lunar or solar) will be a seldom occurence

lunar eclipse: earth is between moon and sun - the earths shadow casting on the moon, so it gets dark to us
solar eclipse: the moon gets between sun and earth, casting its shadow on us and blocking the sun

[Maat]

ArcAngel4Myke
http://www.youtube.com/user/ArcAngel4Myke

I'm with Jonathan on this guy, he throws too many 'turds in the punchbowl' to be considered as a contributor to any serious analyses of NASA fakery. I'm afraid rabid ideologues like that only serve to turn intelligent doubters away (like the "no planer" kooks did for 9-11 media fakery ).

Just lumps it in with silly jokes like this:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoDkVYgs0h0

[reel.deal]

...i like it ! ...sorry !

Sure, still like his vids though, personal taste. 'walt disney bullshit' started as a verbatim Apollo 'spaceman' quote.
Bret, Jarrah, Jack White, etc, i still like some of their stuff too, even if no-one can be 100% right,
all the time...

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxBqUCW33j4

[Maat]

Yeah, the Family Guy joke was funny (except it is really taking the piss out of us moon hoax believers ). Of course I appreciate the "Walt Disney Bullshit" tag too, just not when beaten to death

I know, it's a shame Jarrah White can't apply some sequential logic and critical thinking to the source of the Moon landing hoax propaganda he rails against. Unfortunately, tunnel vision and 2 dimensional thinking are not conducive to making the paradigm shift necessary to see the whole picture.

As we all know, the principle of inertia is not confined to the field of physical phenomena but also represents a fundamental law of human thought. As such it is an even more powerful factor in the world of history than stupidity.
— Carl G. Jung

[reel.deal]

cant have everything...

LONDON & PARIS AT NIGHT


Well, dunno what the '17,000mph orbiting' ISS & Shuttle's NIKONS exposure times are, but they sure dont
seem to have too much trouble picking out the occasional sharp clear image of London & Paris at night.
I guessing that if it isnt London Rioters enjoying a spot of arson, then obviously Londons' late night
neon kebab shop signs blaze & dazzle far brighter than any milky way galaxy, planets or stars...

[Unleashed]

Hey Guys!

NASA has some new ISS footage they'd like to show you. And guess what? They has stars!
(sometimes! )
See, they can learn. Of course, they don't seem all that convincing to me, but do you think
Mom will buy it?

http://www.katu.com/blogs/weather/130331828.html

[reel.deal]

NASA has some new ISS footage they'd like to show you. And guess what? They has stars! (sometimes! )
See, they can learn.

http://www.katu.com/blogs/weather/130331828.html

I CAN HAS STARS !!! (NOW!) ?!?

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogtKe7N05F0

I CANNOT HAS STARS !!! (NOW!) ?!?

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6C9mnHq4FA

NASA, ITS MAKE YR MIND UP TIME !!!
SO WHATS IT TO BE ?!?
YOU TELL ME !


I'M TIRED OF GUESSIN' !

BUT YEAH, THANKS NASA ! THATS GREAT ! LOADS BETTER... S.T.A.R.S. !!!
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO NOW IS GO BACK OVER THE OTHER 1,3 MILLION ISS & SHUTTLE PICS,
AND THEN JUST RE-DO EVERY SINGLE LAST OTHER SPACE PICTURE & VIDEO - EVER !
APOLLO, SOYEUZ, ETC... I'M STOKED ! THIS IS GONNA BE SO GREAT !!!
WICKED !


THIS IS GONNA BE WAY COOLER EVEN THAN THAT NEW "FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT" DISCOVERY
THAT MAKES TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE AND TEARS UP EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY...