Not necessarily.Originally Posted by Laguna2
Yes
No
Not proven
Honored Member
Not necessarily.
Member
Is it possible the lander was in orbit around the earth and that the telemetric data was relayed via a satelite to and from the moon?
Established Member
OK. You can find moon rocks on earth. But you can identify such, that where brought from the moon from such that lay around quite some time on earth.
BTW, from that article: "She and a team of geologists picked up a chunk of the moon - one of only about 30 ever found on Earth."
Established Member
Imagine:
You stand in the backyard of your house pointing your dish in direction of the moon. If someone wants to fake you data, he has to place a satellite between you and the moon. The problem is, that satellite has to revolve around the earth, so it will move away from the place in the sky it should be to trick you.
To make it more complicated, you would need to do that for everyone watching...
Established Member
You can tell from moon rocks (I'm presuming your source was referring to meteorites which have come from the moon) that they have both been through the Earth's atmosphere and been exposed to the air here. Rocks returned from the moon haven't been through our atmosphere unprotected at high speed, nor have they been exposed to our air. Simple chemical analysis shows this.
So I'm afraid that being able to collect Moon rock from the Antarctic is not quite what you've been lead to believe.
Honored Member
Ain't gonna work, since there were no satellites whose orbital periods and locations matched those of the Moon. If this period and location isn't matched, the drift of the signal location would have indicated that it was non-lunar.
Plus if the lander were in orbit around the Earth, for good part of its orbit it would have been out of radio contact with the relay satellite.
Re a lunar relay, what would have the transceiver been like? In 1969, close to the size of the LM. Landing a big enough transceiver would have indicated that we had the capability to land a man on the Moon. If we did, why bother with a transceiver?
Established Member
Well, with a bit of research Enquiringman, you will swiftly move from 'Not Proven' to 'Proven to be true without a shadow of doubt' within an hour or so.
Honored Member
BTW, enquiringman's contributions to this thread have evolved into wild speculation and an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Shocking!
Member
Why would the transceiver have to be the size of the LM. There weren't a couple of blokes on board for a start. You say "there were no satelites" who says? Would it not be possible for the LM to stay in an orbit around the earth whilst keeping sight of the moon? If say for example the moon was directly above the north pole you would only have to orbit around the equator to keep it in sight at all times? I might not be a scientist but I ain't exactly devoid of common sense - come on guys - play fair.
Member
Jake, ain't this fun!
Bill.
Member
The moon rock thing; pretty compelling guys. When did we prove the samples had not entered through earths atmosphere - no bull please, I am interested.
Established Member
IF the moon was stationary above the North Pole, you may have a point.
But it's not.
The Moon moves, the earth moves.
Established Member
We play fair!
Even assuming that the moon could be directly above the north pole, I could easily spot the LM revolving around the earth, as I can easily spot the ISS.
BTW. The moon was not directly above the north pole.
Again:
You stand in the backyard of your house pointing your dish in direction of the moon. If someone wants to fake you data, he has to place a satellite between you and the moon. The problem is, that satellite has to revolve around the earth, so it will move away from the place in the sky it should be to trick you.
To make it more complicated, you would need to do that for everyone watching...
Established Member
When? After they brought it back and send samples to scientist all around the world.
Established Member
Oh. Another thing. If the moon would have been directly over the noth pole, the stations in Australia would have recived no telemetric data, but they did...
Member
The satellite would have been orbiting the moon so would therefor have continually sent "telemetry" signals to my backyard. To make it even more easy this would apply to everyone elses backyard.
I am well aware the moon moves. Funnily enough the orbiting LM also has the capability to alter it's orbit does it not? I mean the moon doesn't exactly move across the sky at lightning speed so maintaining it in sight shouldn't be too difficult.
Yes I asked the daft question about being able to see evidence today (2006) of the machinery we left up there. But back in 1969 you would have seen the LM orbiting the earth - how convenient.
Established Member
Not continually, it's orbiting the moon, don't forget, so like the CSM it has to go behind it.
Member
Laguna, you really need to keep up here. I only used the North Pole as an example for people to picture that by maintaining an orbit around the equator I would be able to see the moon (to send my telemetry to) at all times and not disappear around the back of the earth on my orbit and lose site of the moon which was cited as a spoiler for the theory.
Member
hplasm, I thought that the North Pole example was one a child could understand. We don't have to disappear around the back of the moon to orbit it.......or do we hplasm?
Member
Yes Laguna, I want to know when? This usually is indicated by a year perhaps? When they were brought back and when they were proven not to have entered the earths atmosphere are not necessarily the same year.
Member
Where are all the "senior" knowledge holders. As a non scientist I would have thought you experts would be able to retort with aplomb.......
Established Member
yes, unless you take a Saturn 5 -ish motor with you to change to a polar orbit, you do.
As any child could tell you...
Member
Maksutov, help please, before it's too late. I think I'm turning into a CT......
Established Member
So, we could have placed the LM in an alternating orbit around earth, so no one could spot it, then we could have placed an satellite in an orbit around the moon so it does not get behind it. Then we could have send the telemetric data from the LM to the satellite relaying it back to earth.
The same with the TV-Signal and the Audio-Signal.
The problem is. It takes time for those signals to get to the mon and back.
If Houston would have asked someone in the LM something and waited for the response, in your szenario, the signal would have been send to the moon, relayed back to the LM, and earth, producing a double time lag according to the double earth-moon distance. Then the LM would answer sending its signal to the moon satellite relaying it back to earth and producing another double time lag.
EDIT: In this scenario the LM could not alter its course. It has to stay in a polar orbit around earth. Otherwise it would get behind earth as seen from the moon. On that polar orbit, everybody could see it.
Member
Why change into a polar orbit if the satellite is already in one?
Honored Member
Re the transceiver, I wrote "close to". To provide the power of the transmissions there would have been electronic equipment equivalent to what the LM actually carried.
No. Only a polar orbit would have had this capability, and then only for a short while. Polar orbit launches from Cape Canaveral aren't feasible, that's why we use Vandenberg. Study a basic space science or astronomy text.
At no time is the Moon directly above the Earth's north pole. Therefore you can scratch that scenario. You might not be devoid of "common sense", but it appears that you're devoid of basic training in astronomy.
Now that I know the knowledge base and exerience of the person who's keeping this thread alive, I'm done with it.
Isn't there a term for a poster who comes onto a board, starts asking the same old tired questions and offering the same old idle speculations over and over, gets satisfaction out of ignoring the replies, and keeps repeating the questions?
I thought so.
Established Member
? You do know what a polar orbit is, don't you?
How did the sat get into a polar orbit around the moon in the first place?
Established Member
The satellite has to change in a polar orbit around the moon. This takes a lot of energy. The LM has to change in a polar orbit around earth, which takes a lot of energy too.
Both craft had to be in a polar orbit to avoid an interuption of the signals.
Member
Laguna, your off into a great deal of speculation here (sure to get a reaction). I'm merely trying to establish why this man on the moon thing shouldn't be "not proven". So far I need someone who can convince me otherwise.
Established Member
I am not speculating. You are!
I just assumed what you were asking.
The satelites around the moon, the polar orbits and all that other stuff was your idea.
Now, would you accept, that your theory does not work?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote