• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

I get so caught up in all the turmoil we create ourselves...

At the risk of being pulled into a big prank, astronauts feel about 3g's. Some roller coasters pull more than 4. Jet fighter pilots can pull up to 9. So, what's your point again?

They only pull 3g because they don’t actually go to space. Your proving his point.
 
They only pull 3g because they don’t actually go to space. Your proving his point.
16826857.jpg
 
Only because you will lose this debate, bear. I spoke with a actual Astronaut about the stars and he wasn't a d like you're being.

I provided an explanation for the lack of stars from a photographer's standpoint above. Also, it would actually have been quite easy to insert a beautiful star filled background including the Milky Way in any photos from the moon. Most widefield landscape astrophotos are actually two seperate exposures, one for the foreground (landscape) and one for the sky. As I mentioned above, exposure times used differ because of the difference in surface brightness between land and sky (even in the dark the land is brighter). Taking all this into account, the only celestial object (besides the sun) visible from the moon that matches its surface brightness in a landscape photo is Earth, hence the multiple Apollo photographs of Earth from the surface of the moon.
 
I provided an explanation for the lack of stars from a photographer's standpoint above. Also, it would actually have been quite easy to insert a beautiful star filled background including the Milky Way in any photos from the moon. Most widefield landscape astrophotos are actually two seperate exposures, one for the foreground (landscape) and one for the sky. As I mentioned above, exposure times used differ because of the difference in surface brightness between land and sky (even in the dark the land is brighter). Taking all this into account, the only celestial object (besides the sun) visible from the moon that matches its surface brightness in a landscape photo is Earth, hence the multiple Apollo photographs of Earth from the surface of the moon.
Thank you for your explanation. I already know this and is why I didn't mention photos or anything that was "shot" from the lunar surface.
I bring up the stars and galaxy because it's never mentioned by anyone to the degree I assume it would be. I asked a friend and his expression didn't change either and he witnessed it first hand. It was brushed aside as if it wasn't much to look at. Personally, I'm amazed looking over the mountains and the stars every morning. I would have to write a book about what I witnessed in space but no, nada from anyone who has been.
 
Thank you for your explanation. I already know this and is why I didn't mention photos or anything that was "shot" from the lunar surface.
I bring up the stars and galaxy because it's never mentioned by anyone to the degree I assume it would be. I asked a friend and his expression didn't change either and he witnessed it first hand. It was brushed aside as if it wasn't much to look at. Personally, I'm amazed looking over the mountains and the stars every morning. I would have to write a book about what I witnessed in space but no, nada from anyone who has been.
Wrong again.
https://www.phactual.com/14-awe-filled-quotes-about-the-overview-effect-from-outer-space/
https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/pe...tense-awe-astronauts-feel-viewing-earth-space
https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Towards_a_Non-reductionist_Cognitive_Science
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/50-astronauts-life-in-space/


BTW, this is a pic taken from the ISS when there was no other object reflecting the Sun's light, thus the stars show up.
main-qimg-228c0d7d534e5bfc9a074799573ada9b
 
No sh. They made a comment and there's a psychological report also. With the money they waste, I would hope so.
You post a pretty picture that is absolutely incredible and beautiful and I'm supposed to believe it's real.
While you die on the star issue. I'm gonna blast into orbit at 25kmph in my "designer" space suit with admittedly zero g force protection.

By all means, keep it coming. By the time it's over, you might have some questions about reality also.
 
No. I don't mean like that.
I'm talking about a camera from lift off to docking, Full flight. Plus the return.
Short clips showing something happening is Hollywood. Did we see anyone get out of the capsule to know it's real.

The fisheye video is just another production.

Though, some want to chastise me yet you can't come up with what would seem to be a logical request.

Take away Hollywood and you are left with a rocket blasting into orbit only for a fact.

The shuttles are gone for months. Do you really think NASA is going to upload an unedited video that long? lol, you would STILL say it's fake. Just because you choose to ignore evidence, doesn't mean it's not evidence. You can't prove it's NOT real. And yes, there are videos of shuttles reentering the atmosphere, splashing down and then the crew getting out.

According to your logic, any video or live tv that has multiple angles must be fake. Radio must all be fake too. It's all a hollywood production and you are the star of The Truman Show.

You must not believe in satellites then, or military rockets that can travel across continents. Hollywood is soooo smart that they created zero gravity movie sets, software so advanced you can't tell it's fake 50 years later, 8k cameras and all this wild technology.... just so they could pretend to send a robot to a planet to take pictures? lmfao. With all the technology right in your face that proves it, you'll still claim it's fake without any evidence.
 
Speaking of a Space Shuttle launch. My former neighbor and classmate piloted the second to last shuttle launch. I saw it in person so showing a video that wasn't what I requested is just silly.
Good Grief!

Wait, so you watched it in person but still believe it's all made up in Hollywood? lol.
 

How many Gs does a astronaut pull on liftoff. Doesn't seem to matter to the SpaceX design team. Do we have any pilots around to talk about g force. Straight line g force is huge but making a arch has to be incredible.

What?? Do you have any concept of what g-force is?

The highest recorded G-force experienced by a human who survived was at Texas Motor Speedway on October 12, 2003. Kenny Brack impacted a fence at 214 Gs.

Astronauts experience a maximum g-force of around 3gs during a rocket launch. This is equivalent to three times the force of gravity humans are normally exposed to when on Earth but is survivable. A slap in the face exerts hundreds of Gs but it won't cause lasting damage.

And there's a HUGE difference between NEGATIVE g-force and positive G-force. A car accelerating is positive G-force. That car slamming into a brick wall is negative g-force. Negative G force is what kills.
 
They only pull 3g because they don’t actually go to space. Your proving his point.

Uh... you don't know how Gs works huh? lol. G means the rate of acceleration relative to gravity. A car accelerates faster than rockets due to the mass of the rocket. A bus accelerates slower than a sports car. An aircraft carrier accelerates slower than a speed boat.

And the further you get from the earth's surface, the less gravity there is to slow the acceleration. It only takes 1.1 Gs to defeat gravity. When you pick something up you are exerting more Gs than gravity. When you walk you are exerting more than 1g. If you weren't then you wouldn't be able to walk or pick anything up.
 
Back
Top Bottom