🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4581@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us>, snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes...
> 
>   snarfy charges,
> 
>>>  NASA  physicists.....  YOU  ARE  withholding  the truth from the American
>>>  People...
> 
>    In message-ID: <Bx2JuJ.1A@zoo.toronto.edu> (Henry Spencer) responds:
> 
>>Oh, come now.  A conspiracy that large, held together for that long?  In
>>a government that couldn't suppress Watergate or Iranscam?  Come now.
>>This is laughable.
> 
>   You  must  think  that  what  you  see on TV news is the entirety of what
>   really is going on in the world .  Now  some  might  find  such  naivete'
>   laughable, but I actually feel sorry for you.
> 
>   Watergate  and Iranscam are the tips of some very large icebergs. Some of
>   us have a difficult time figuring out why ,now that the "cold  war  "  is
>   supposedly  over, we need to have a National Security Agency in charge of
>   keeping an estimated 8 million secrets from the American public. What ,in
>   principle ,is to be gained by keeping the JFK Assasination  files  closed
>   until  well  into  the  next century, when all the likely participants in
>   this disgusting political takeover will have died of old age?  I  am  not
>   the  first  to  make  such  allegations  about  the moon landing charade,
>   therefore , suppression is attempted but fails.
> 
>>I also note that the conspiracy must extend to Japan, since their first
>>near-Moon navigation efforts, for Hiten, worked flawlessly.
> 
>   The issue is not necessarily whether we landed on the moon , but  how  we
>   did it. The Japanese have this knack for doing anything we can do  ,  and
>   with better quality and precision.
> 
>>>If you want  to  argue  about  the  merits  of  my  calculations...
> 
>>What merits?  Just for starters, your calculations assume that the Earth
>>and Moon are motionless with respect to each other.
> 
>   No  they  don't  .  Abell's lunar gravity figure of 1/6 assumes the earth
>   and moon rotate around a common barycenter. The neutral point  figure  is
>   a direct derivation of that result.
> 
>   My  calculations  assume the neutral point to be motionless with respect
>   to the earth and moon . What do your calculations assume?
> 
> snarfy
> 
A very easy way to blow this one up is to look at the weight of the Apollo
LM and the thrust of the engine. The rocket equation says that there must be
at least a 1.141 thrust to weight ratio. Remember the LM only had one
Ascent stage. Henry can probably provide the numbers. Also remember that the
Astronauts suits and baggage were set up for 1/6 g and not .6 gee. If any of
you out there know Buzz Aldrin, there is no way he would keep something like
this covered up.

So there snarfy.

Dennis, University of Alabama in Huntsville

Also the pertubations of Lunar orbits by the Earth and Sun become significant
at altitudes above 800 km and dominate above 22,000. Look at Bill Sjogrens
papers on Lunar Gravity mapping and Browns Lunar Gravitational theory. Ask
the folks at JPL about Ranger, After Jim Burke got ahold of the program it 
worked right.