Newtonian ships or not?.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Good point Baron, and I am not criticizing but I want to point out for those that may not know, the moon is not outside of the earth�s magnetic field. With that in mind what you [Baron] say is very important. If this was the effect on humans that where under the influence of the moons, sun�s, and the earth�s magnetic field what would happen when the only influence is that of the sun? A little confused by what I just asked? Think of migratory birds and many other creatures (insects, mammals, reptiles, etc) and what happens to them when scientists have tinkered with their heads.

I should also point out that even though we are under the influence of the moons gravity I was speaking specifically of the reverse: More moon, less earth.

[ March 27, 2004, 20:38: Message edited by: President Elect Shang ]

[Baron Munchausen]

The Moon is well outside the normal reach of the Earth's magnetic field. There is a 'tail' extending away from the sun, because of the solar wind, which the Moon might enter at certain times when it is on the far side of the earth from the sun, but normally it is well outside the field.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetosphere

On the sun's side of Earth, the magnetopause distance is approximately 10 Earth-radii. Abreast of the earth the distance grows to about 15 earth radii (distances change with solar wind pressure and density; The magnetosphere is made to flap and compress by the solar wind) while on the night side it extends into a long cylindrical magnetotail at least several hundred radii long, gradually turning into a wake.

Since the earth's radius is about 4,000 miles that makes the magnetosphere about 40,000 miles on the sun side and about 60,000 on the trailing/leading sides. The outward side is obviously highly variable but the Moon doesn't orbit exactly on the earth's equatorial plane so it won't necessarily contact this tail even when out the outward side of its orbit.

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...tosphere.shtml

William Gilbert hypothesized that the Earth was a giant magnet in 1600. Thomas Gold proposed the name "magnetosphere" in 1959. The Earth's magnetosphere extends far into space and is influenced by the solar wind (ions and electrons emitted from the sun). It extends into space from 60 to 37,280 miles (100 to 60,000 km) towards the Sun, and over 186,500 miles (300,000 km) away from the Sun (nightward), forming the Earth's magnetotail.

The Moon orbits just about 220,000 to 250,000 miles from earth so it would only rarely enter this 'tail' when it was at its most extended.

[ March 27, 2004, 21:15: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[JurijD]

acutally as I�ve said before... FTL travel doesn�t need to happen for us to clonize the galaxy. I�d say in a couple hundred years MAX technology will be developed enough to enable us to build giant ship that can travel at sub-light speeds and carry a couple 10-thousand people to the nearest solar systems. And if you give those people there say 100 years and then have them send out more ships... you could colonize the entire galaxy in a couple 100-thousand years... if we never develop FTL travel.

so the real question is: why hasn�t anyone done it yet) how come I don�t have a weird little green man for my neighbour... no wait I do.. at least the weird part

[ March 27, 2004, 12:22: Message edited by: JurijD ]

[President_Elect_Shang]

ACK! Now how did I transpose the meanings of gravity and magnet? Gravity field of the earth holds the moon, but you are refering to the magnetic field that the eath generates. Shame on me!

[geoschmo]

I suspect that it's less a problem with being outside of the reach of earth's magnetosphere and more of a problem of being exposed to those nasty things that the magnetosphere normally protects us from. There are types of radiation out there that our little aluminium foil space ships don't protect us from very well. We will probably find ways to shield agaisnt it, but it's not easy.

As far as the Lunar astronauts medical records being classified, I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe it to conspiracy theories. Medical records are personal information afterall. It's bad enough those guys couldn't take a pee for years without filling out a report in triplicate listing the quantity, temperature and color. Would you want all that info turned over to the kooks and curiosity seekers if you were an astonaut or one of his family members?

[Baron Munchausen]

It's not that their medical records are private, it's that the reason we stopped going to the moon is classified. Don't misattribute my reasoning.

It's true that we don't have to be dependent on the magnetic field of the earth in a 'positive' sense. It could indeed be what it shields us from, but the effect is the same. We are dependent on the earth until (and unless) we can understand what happens to people who leave. It might not be as simple as putting shielding on starships. The current concept of 'shielding' is to keep the radiation levels down below what would be considered 'dangerous' but NOT on duplicating the ambient level of radiation at the surface of the earth. Is it really certain that high(er) levels of radiation for weeks or years won't have serious effects on people? Just because people who live at high altitudes get marginally higher radiation than those of us at sea level, or people who work at nuclear facilities get occasionally higher doses, don't immediately crack up and get put in the loony bin doesn't mean that the completely different radiation outside the earth's magnetic field -- or possibly the lack of the usual types of radiation that we experience here on earth -- might do very surprising things to our biology that could higher mental functions. Especially over the weeks and months and years of interplanetary travel. People at high altitude or working at nuclear facilities are still within the earth's normal environment, they just get some 'extra' radiaton on top of the usual ambient stuff.

[ March 28, 2004, 02:29: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
It's not that their medical records are private, it's that the reason we stopped going to the moon is classified. Don't misattribute my reasoning.

Didn't mean to offend you. However, even though you did not say specifically their medical records were classified, you do seem to be trying to make a point that somehow the lack of access to their records is a sign that some goverment coverup is going on. Instead of it merely being standard privacy concerns. Your medical records aren't public record Baron, but we don't try to make that evidence of some nefarious plot on your part.

As far as the reason for later Moon missons being cancled actually being classified instead of the budgetary issues that are well known and easily confirmable, the only evidence we have is your assertion that someone you believe to work for NASA made comments to this effect on a forum somewhere. We have no way of knowing these people even work for Nasa, or that if they do work for Nasa they would neccesarily be privy to such information.

So we have a conspiracy. One large enough to be at least partially known to your mysterious Nasa buddies, but that has otherwise been succesfully kept secret all these years.

Sure, it's possible. It's also possible that we never really went to the moon and it was all faked to begin with.

Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
It's true that we don't have to be dependent on the magnetic field of the earth in a 'positive' sense. It could indeed be what it shields us from, but the effect is the same.

The effect is the same, but the solutions are much, much different. Obviously I don't know which it is. I was just hypothesising that it's more likely that the damage is attributable to an excess of the wrong kinds or radiation then it is a lack of the right kinds. If I am wrong and it's a need for "Gaia rays" then it will probably be much more difficult to leave our planet then if it's just a matter of shielding us from "Zeta rays", that is true.

[ March 28, 2004, 03:35: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

[Baron Munchausen]

Again you misattribute my reasoning. I 'seem to be making the point' that the reason for the missions ending is classified. It is in fact known that most of the astronauts had psychiatric problems after their missions. There was even some speculation that John Glenn would have had his past problems used against him if he had been successful in his run for the presidential nomination. No need for 'conspiracy theories' about this when it's public information. No need for access to their medical records. And the fact that the reason for the end of the Moon missions is classified might not be all that difficult to verify. Often times the government will admit that something is classified. I have not done any research on it. I am simply speculating with fragmentary known information. Making the connection that the (possibly) 'classified' reason is or is not in fact some medical effect from space travel will have to wait until the reason is declassified or space travel beyond orbit becomes routine enough to show that there are no serious side-effects.

[ March 28, 2004, 04:16: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[PvK]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
... Actually there's not much difference in this case. If is his basic assumtion is correct, that a new colony could send a new colony ship in 100 years, and additionally we assume that it takes an average of 100 years for the each colony ship to reach it's new home, we could colonize the entire galaxy in less then 4000 years.

Huh? Reversing your math, 4000 years, with 100 year stops at each system, and 100 years between systems, is 200 years per system expansion. 4000 / 200 = 20 systems wide, the galaxy. Sounds more like an SE4 quadrant than a galaxy, to me.

That's about the length of recorded human history. But even if he meant it would take 100,000 years, considering the age of the galaxy we should be seeing someone out there. So either we are alone, or they don't want us to know they are there, or it's a lot harder then we think to get around out there.
...

Or they aren't doing anything that we have been able to observe, not necessarily because they care if we know about it, or not. The EM broadcasts we scan for may be obsolete, muffled, or undiscovered for all other intelligent life that we are in the correct time/space position to observe.

PvK

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
It is in fact known that most of the astronauts had psychiatric problems after their missions. There was even some speculation that John Glenn would have had his past problems used against him if he had been successful in his run for the presidential nomination. No need for 'conspiracy theories' about this when it's public information.

Ok, so does this psychiatric issue now affect all astronauts, and not merely the lunar astronauts as you said before? Because John Glenn was not part of the Appolo program. He never left low earth orbit and the saftey of the magnetosphere.

Except for that secret mission that I'm not allowed to say anything about.

How is speculation that John Glenn had a speculative mental condition that a speculative political operative might have speculativly used to damage him politically realate to anything? And we aren't talking conspiracy theories? Riiiigght.

It is NOT in fact "known" that "most" astronauts have had psyciatric problems upon returning to earth. It IS of course rumored to be true by people that have no way of knowing one way or the other. And that rumor takes on life over the internet becasue otherwise intelligent people such as yourself give it more weight that it deserves.

Buzz Aldrin had some well publicized isssues. By his account it was a sudden lack of any goals to work towards in his life. It's a common malady suffered by may people who reach retiement age and no longer feel a purpose. After all, when your life long goal as a pilot and astronaut has been to push the envelope farther and faster, what do you do when you've walked on the moon? There is litereally nowhere to go but down from there.

Who else? Can you name one, give a link, anything? If it's well known you should be able to very easily. Shouldn't take much research at all.

There were less then 27 astronauts that ever orbited or landed on the moon. Maybe a couple hundred that have ever made it as far as orbit. So if only a few had mental problems it would be a significant percentage of the overall total. But the numbers would be too small to have any real meaning as a statistical sample. And considering the intense nature of their occupation it's highly explainable for other reasons.

All that said, there is definetly stuff out there that's bad for us. Recent studies of radiation levels on Mars have put the possibility of any manned missions to mars in doubt for the near term, even if we decided to do it. I don't disagree with you there at all.

But it's not neccesary to buy into any conspiracy theories about it. Nasa will tell you all about it if you ask. What possible reason would they have for classifying the end of the Moon missions? Is there some reason they need to keep us in the dark about what they know and understand about the dangers of long term and deep space travel? If so they have a funny way of keeping secrets, cause they admit that stuff all the time.

They are always telling us that they don't stuff. Their whole reason for exsistance is to find out stuff, so telling us they don't know stuff is job security.

The kind of stuff Nasa covers up is engineering screw ups. If it will get someone fired, I could see them trying to cover it up. I see no incentive to them in covering up the fact that there are things about space they don't quite understand yet.

[ March 28, 2004, 13:31: Message edited by: geoschmo ]