Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 157

Thread: [Astronauts] cannot find stars

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Tensor View Post
    I beg to differ. I can find Sirius, Polaris, Vega, and several others, without finding the constellations. As a matter of fact, I have to. I live in an area that washes out almost all but the brightest of the stars. If you know the night sky, the time of year, and the time of night, you should be able to find the brighter stars without the constellations. Especially if you are qualified in the use of a sextant.
    but you know the horizon and have a compass so it is not the same as being in space

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    my sister showed me where michael collins wrote that he found menkent and could not see the constellation.
    So show us where he wrote it instead of making vague statements.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by captain swoop View Post
    The Sextant on the Apollo Craft is notthe same as the hand held device used by Sailors. It was used to re allign the Navigation Platform rather than to 'fix' stars at precise times and then compare angles to figures in Almanacs. It was already pointing more or less directly at the star that was being sighted by the Computer. Or rather it was pointing at the position the computer thought the star would be at. What the operator did was to adjust the reticule so that the target star was directly under the crosshairs and thereby correct any errors that were creeping into the position estimated by the INS.
    but my sister and i read that just like with sailors if the electronics broke they would use the stars and guiding machine had to have the star to know how it was pointing and if you are in space what if the space ship floats around and points wrong and the computer gets confused. i don't think that the computer could work like they say because it is hard to do even with the computers we have now. i do it sometimes and i am better than the computer most of the time and the hard ones

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by LaurelHS View Post
    So show us where he wrote it instead of making vague statements.
    he wrote it in the book he wrote about going to the moon i can call my sister up and she can bring me the book

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Do you ever actually cite sources instead of just saying that you read something?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    he wrote it in the book he wrote about going to the moon i can call my sister up and she can bring me the book
    He's written more than one book about going to the Moon. Did you even know that?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,305
    Dasterdly, I refer you to this post:

    http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....55#post1976455

    where I posted an astronaut's transcript that directly contradicts a claim you made. Please review and answer the question there.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Tensor View Post
    I beg to differ. I can find Sirius, Polaris, Vega, and several others, without finding the constellations. As a matter of fact, I have to. I live in an area that washes out almost all but the brightest of the stars. If you know the night sky, the time of year, and the time of night, you should be able to find the brighter stars without the constellations. Especially if you are qualified in the use of a sextant.
    I was going to say almost exactly the same thing, and that's easy to pick up from a bit of star watching.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    I was going to say almost exactly the same thing, and that's easy to pick up from a bit of star watching.

    But the book said michael collins did not see the other stars you cannot tell polaris without the other stars and must know north

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by LaurelHS View Post
    He's written more than one book about going to the Moon. Did you even know that?
    my sister says the book we read was carrying the fire where he wrote about menkent by itself we don't believe that is true me and my sister too

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Good. I have that book. Chapter and page number, please?

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,034
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    my sister showed me that but it also said the guiding machine needed to know the stars for knowing the pointing direction and you also have to be sure where you are if you are in space from the stars that is the only way to be sure because the electronics might break that is why sailors still use the sextant because the electronics might break
    I note that you still fail to directly answer the points put to you, that the sextant on Apollo is a quite different instrument from that used by sailors. Also that it is perfectly possible to recognize and align with stars even if whole constellations can't be seen, and this doesn't even address the overwhelming physical evidence for the reality of Apollo. At what point are you planning to engage with these points and provide evidence to back up your claims other than 'my sister says'?

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    27,428
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    you can ask a sailor and they will tell you that you can not find the star without the whole constellation ask any sailor that knows how to use the sextant
    No, that doesn't answer my question. The correct assumption is "I don't know how they did X, but since that doesn't outweigh all the other evidence, there must be something I don't know." Until you can explain all the Apollo evidence away, all you have is something you don't understand. Why haven't you done more research instead of blindly assuming that it all has to be faked? And don't cite your sister, your girlfriend, or some book the name of which you haven't bothered to mention. What research have you done into Apollo?
    _____________________________________________
    Gillian

    "Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

    "You can't erase icing."

    "I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Dasterdly, I refer you to this post:

    http://www.bautforum.com/showthread....55#post1976455

    where I posted an astronaut's transcript that directly contradicts a claim you made. Please review and answer the question there.
    but that is not right because they are talking there about when they are just looking. in the carrying the fire book there are no stars around menkent when he says he finds menkent so i think they are trying to fool people you have to see the constellation when you find the star your thing says they see the constellations but that does not matter there because they are not trying to fix the star like we say sometimes i don't think you do this we should get some other sailors here and they will agree with me and my sister i think they probably will i think so anyway

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Where does he say this in the book, Dastardly?

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
    I note that you still fail to directly answer the points put to you, that the sextant on Apollo is a quite different instrument from that used by sailors. Also that it is perfectly possible to recognize and align with stars even if whole constellations can't be seen, and this doesn't even address the overwhelming physical evidence for the reality of Apollo. At what point are you planning to engage with these points and provide evidence to back up your claims other than 'my sister says'?
    i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right

  17. #47
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    yes but the scientists have computers and study the stars and know the horizon but sailors and astronauts don't have all of the astronomy equipment they have to tell on their ow.
    You really should try doing some research.
    They did have computers and the 'astronomy equipment'. Not that they needed them.

    The LM used an inertial guidance system so that they would always know in which direction the star[s] they were looking for would be.
    The 'sextant' had a wide field telescope and a high magnification telescope to take the sightings.

    It is perfectly possible to find named stars through a telescope without seeing the entire constellation at once. Even I can manage that, without even a computer!
    Why exactly do you think it is so hard?

    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    ... they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost ...
    This is false.
    The 'sextant' was a backup to the navigation systems.

    Incidentally please try to use some punctuation because that was almost totally illegible.

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right
    So... you say it's true, but you're not sure?

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    9,644
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    but you know the horizon and have a compass so it is not the same as being in space
    Don't forget that in space they used our Sun, the Earth and the Moon as three of their reference points.

    Do you claim that those three references could not be seen?

    (I'd expect that given these good references and the star charts on board, the crews wouldn't have to scan all of space looking for a star, as they'd have a good idea of where a star might be expected to be.)
    I don't see any Ice Giants.

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right
    Does your sister have better English skills and a functioning period key? Perhaps she should come here and post. You said in another thread that you're in the Navy and teach people how to use the sextant. Where are you stationed?

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,305
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    but that is not right because they are talking there about when they are just looking.
    What is that supposed to mean? Your claim was:

    astronomy is real but the space ships are pretending when they go to the moon because they do not see constellations
    And I showed a transcript making it clear that an astronaut DID see constellations when going to the moon.

    Do you concede Armstrong saw constellations?

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,034
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    i say it is true. i am better than my sister it does not matter that the sextant is not the same because the problem is about finding the star it does not matter what they use they have to find the star no matter what or they will get lost i don't know much about the other things but if they can not find the star then they cannot go to the moon so the movies must be made up i guess but i am not sure i only know about the sextant i am pooitive about that because i am good at it ask a sailor if i am right
    No I am asking you to provide proper evidence, not simply your opinion that is flatly contradicted by other posters who seem to have rather more relevant experience than you possess. It has been repeatedly pointed out that the sextant on the Apollo missions was a very different instrument to that commonly used by sailors, you still haven't accepted that simple, verifiable, fact. There is a mountain of evidence in support of Apollo, your unsupported say so means nothing weighed against that.

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    3,166
    Just because you say it's truth, doesn't mean it's a fact supported by evidence. History is full of people, usually bad, that thought things were true and ignored the facts nipping at thier heels.

    Truth may hold weight in some circles, but in science it's facts that are important. There is no place for truths in science at all.

    So as many others have asked before where is your evidence?

    Specificly the page number and paragraph number and the title of that of that book you cited. LaurelHS has asked for that twice, and you haven't haven't replied yet. Please do so.

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    10,635
    Here in the UK, in the evening in the summer, it's pleasant to sit outside and watch the clear sky slowly darken. After a while you'll recognise Vega, Deneb and Altair, although it will be quite a while before you are able to see the other stars in their respective constellations.

    In the winter, it's often possible to recognise Sirius when you see it on its own (for instance, if you see it in a gap between houses) because it is so bright. Keen astronomers (and even fairly lazy ones) can make good guesses about quite a few stars based on their brightness and colour.

    dastardly's repeated assertion that he's good with a sextant (mentioned several times in two threads now, for some reason) can probably be taken on trust, but it's not evidence that there was ever an issue with navigation during the Moon missions. In fact his is the weakest argument for a conspiracy I have ever seen.

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,305
    I have a copy of Carrying the Fire so I thought I'd try to look up the claims made here. I hadn't gotten around to reading it yet, there's no index, and there's not, as far as I could find, an online version, so I had to do a bit of reading. But that's okay: This is really an interesting book! I'm glad I had an excuse to get into it.

    Anyway, to the point. Starting on page 285, Collins describes how he learned to identify certain stars. Specific stars (typically brighter, easier to see stars) were programmed into the Apollo computer, and were used to refine navigation calibration. For calibration, an astronaut would sight on two stars and push a button when each was centered. Collins says:

    "We learned them [identifying stars on the list] in the Morehead Planetarium in Chapel Hill, North Caroline, and [darned] carefully at that - a star sighting using the wrong star would be embarising at best, and could easily be disastrous."


    It's clear they put a lot of effort into learning star identification, and that it was considered very important. This is the setup of the Menkent issue: It was one of the stars on the list that astronauts were trained to identify.

    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    but that is not right because they are talking there about when they are just looking. in the carrying the fire book there are no stars around menkent when he says he finds menkent so i think they are trying to fool people you have to see the constellation when you find the star
    Well, here's what Collins actually says about Menkent, starting on page 368:

    "I unstow and install two eyepieces, one for the sextent and one for the telescope [... I] peer out through the telescope. What I see is disappointing, for only the brightest stars are visible through the telescope and it is difficult to recognize them when they are not accompanied by the dimmer stars, which give each constellation its distinctive visual pattern. The situation is not helped by the fact that I am looking for Menkent and Nunki, two of the more nondescript Apollo navigation stars. [...] however, Apollo has a fancy computer tied to the optics, and now I call on it for help; it responds by swinging the sextant around until it points where it thinks Menkent is. Aha! There it is, in plain view, and it's a simple task now for me to align cross hairs precisely on it and push a button at the instant of alignment."

    So, dasterdly, I see nowhere that he says "there are no stars around menkent." He only says that dim stars could not be seen in the telescope. Also, he himself points out the difficulty of visual identification (clearly he isn't trying to downplay the issue), and explains how he used the computer to resolve it.

    Do you accept that your statements are wrong on this issue?

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,305
    Quote Originally Posted by dastardly View Post
    astronomy is real but the space ships are pretending when they go to the moon because they do not see constellations
    Along with the transcript I earlier quoted that shows your error here, there is also this from Carrying the Fire, starting on page 378:


    Out from behind the shadow of the earth, we are into the constant sunlight. [...] Toward the sun, nothing can be seen but its blinding disk, whereas down-sun there is simply a black void. The stars are there, but they cannot be seen because, with sunlight flooding the spacecraft, the pupil of the eye involuntarily contracts [...] in practical terms, that means putting metal plates over all five windows, and then pointing the telescope at exactly the right angle [...] Under these conditions, the eye slowly "dark adapts" itself and the brighter stars gradually emerge from the void. After a few minutes the familiar patterns of constellations become recognizable (assuming you are fortunate enough to have familiar constellations in the part of the sky you've been forced to use to escape the sunlight), now the navigator can continue with his work.


    So, he's pointing out here that it is possible for the navigator to find constellations, within limits, even when they aren't in shadow. Do you agree that this fully resolves the issues you put forward in this thread, and they are without merit?

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    272
    dastardly, is your sister called Patrick? By the way, the individual in question stopped being active in that thread some time ago and suddenly you get active here. An interesting coincidence, isn't it? Got bored or something?
    (English is not my first language, so please excuse any mistakes and unintended ambiguities.)

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    9,644
    Quote Originally Posted by Daggerstab View Post
    dastardly, is your sister called Patrick? By the way, the individual in question stopped being active in that thread some time ago and suddenly you get active here. An interesting coincidence, isn't it? Got bored or something?
    No more of that kind of thing, from anyone please. Speculation like this on other members is impolite and verges on breaking the "no moderation" rule. It is also off-topic and disruptive. Posts like this have earned enough warnings in the past, that a member since 2007 should be aware not to do it. If somebody suspects a sock, please report it; do not act in-thread; and note that membership on other forums is not our concern.
    I don't see any Ice Giants.

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    810
    I have some questions for you, das..

    Let's assume that the astronaut is unsure about the star he is looking at. Can YOU name all the ways he could resolve his confusion? I know/can think of some that have been unmentioned here, but I'd like to hear *you* elaborate so we can be clear about your level of knowledge. By all means get your sister and/or girlfriend to help, although see below..

    I'll even give a hint.. you have been alluding that the poor astronaut will be somehow disoriented by not having a horizon. Are there other things that might help 're-orient' him?

    And for the record, I have lived at quite a range of latitudes in the southern hemisphere. I wouldn't call myself a 'real' amateur astronomer, but I do like looking at the stars. And I can easily identify the brightest stars very quickly on any given night at any time of year and at any of those latitudes (I trust you know why that matters..?). And yet some of them don't have particularly memorable constellations around them. Indeed I pride myself on being able to quickly pick out which stars are the first to appear (which by definition means I have absolutely no assistance from constellations...)

    And, extraordinarily, my life doesn't depend on it..!

    I would be very confident that if I suddenly relocated to northern latitudes, I'd quickly orient myself and add the brightest stars to my repertoire. It's really not that difficult, especially if you are actually interested in the sky. (It helps to keep a bit of an eye on where the 'big four' planets are..)

    Anyway, I'm sorry that you and your sister (what happened to the girlfriend?) don't know your skies that well - perhaps you should join an astronomy club.

    BTW, what sextant are you using and what contest did you win with it?

    If your girlfriend's opinion (or now sister?) is so crucial to this, why don't you get them to post? If you are so unsure, why not enlist some real experts, or provide some actual references to back up your claims? I'm afraid we've heard many people in the past simply make up 'experts' that (funnily enough) completely support them and agree with everything they said...

    And finally, is this your best evidence for Apollo fakery?

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    40
    I know there are a lot of people here with far more knowledge than myself, so I might be wrong. If so please let me know.

    My reaction to the OP is: So what?

    As I understand it the navigation on the Apollo missions was accomplished through inertial meaurement units, radar tracking of the spacecraft, tracking of Doppler shift and probably other methods I don't know about. The use of stars was for minor corrections, was found to be virtually useless and was only done pretty much for the heck of it.

    So even if the OP was correct (and it appears not to be) there's no reason the Apollo missions could not have sucessfully navigated to the moon and back.

Similar Threads

  1. Astronauts and the stars
    By Skybear in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2012-Apr-30, 01:24 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2011-Oct-06, 08:40 PM
  3. Astronauts Find the Source of the Leak
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2005-Sep-22, 08:08 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2005-Sep-07, 04:10 PM
  5. Discussion: Astronauts Find the Source of the ...
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2004-Feb-02, 08:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: