PDA

View Full Version : Now here's something interesting...



Johnno
2002-May-02, 05:45 AM
Brought up by someone at a different forum.

Notice anything different on the seismometer in these two pictures?

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5942a.jpg

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5943.jpg

Ive checked the series and the seismometer looks like the one in 5942a in all of the pictures, except 5943.

I havent dug deep down for a reason, but figured Id ask you folks if anyone knows anything about this.

Johnno

Moonman
2002-May-02, 08:42 AM
Notice anything different on the seismometer in these two pictures?

No, do you want to help me?

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 09:14 AM
Well, that gave me pause.

But I dug out the transcript (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.clsout.html) from those links, and looked at a few more of the pictures. It's pretty obvious that your 5943 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5943.jpg) is taken just from the side, so that the "octagonality" of the base is not evident.

Here's the transcript (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11.clsout.html) passage:

[Buzz is coming into view past the right edge of the LM. Neil's pictures of Buzz carrying the EASEP past this crater are AS11-40-5942a (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5942a.jpg) and 5943 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5943.jpg) (scans by Kipp Teague). After taking 5943, Neil steps to his left to get a stereo companion, which is 5944 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/20130787.jpg).]

Notice the comparison shot of 5944 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/20130787.jpg). And this one of the thing laying on the ground: 5946 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5946.jpg).

<font size=-1>[Fixed urls and quotes]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: GrapesOfWrath on 2002-05-02 05:17 ]</font>

Johnno
2002-May-02, 10:00 AM
Looking at this picture

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/20130788.jpg

I see that the bottom of the seismometer is angled, however you cant see that in 5942a, which I would expect since it's taken far enough from the side to show the angle.

Hmm, the mystery thickens. But I reckon a bit more research will solve the puzzle.

Johnno

Moonman
2002-May-02, 11:04 AM
Still can't see the difference!

But THERE IS a half buried body in the first picture just the the left of the cross-hair.

Do we need anymore proof?

Johnno
2002-May-02, 11:30 AM
Look at the bottom of the seismometer. In one of the picture the 'pipe' running vertically on the seismometer is straight, on the other it's angled at the bottom.

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 11:34 AM
On 2002-05-02 06:00, Johnno wrote:
Hmm, the mystery thickens. But I reckon a bit more research will solve the puzzle.

I don't know anything about seismometers (wait a minute, I'm supposed to be a geophysicist...), but that particular instrument appears--just from the few photos I've seen--to have a thick base that extends out, and has truncated corners so that it is sorta octagonal.

Once you realize that, there doesn't seem to be any mystery to me. When I first looked at the photos from your two links, I thought that one had a different configuration on the side--but now I know that it was just hidden by the extended side of the base. I'm beginning to doubt that you actually checked the whole series of photos, and have a good understanding of what the thing looks like in three dimensions.

Johnno
2002-May-02, 11:56 AM
"to have a thick base that extends out, and has truncated corners so that it is sorta octagonal."

True for the series, but not for the one Im so puzzled about. Let me demostrate (link further down).


"I'm beginning to doubt that you actually checked the whole series of photos"

No I did that, perhaps Im just easily confused.

"and have a good understanding of what the thing looks like in three dimensions."

I do understand what the thing looks like, it's just one picture that puzzles me because I cannot figure out the corner on it.

http://hinux.hin.no/~joonasjh/stuff/TEMP/Apollo/seismo%20comp.gif

Understand my point now?

Two of the pictures are taken very close to each other, even so I thought what if Aldrin had turned the thing for one reason or another. But cant find any mention of that in the transcript.

Any suggestions?

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 11:59 AM
On 2002-05-02 07:30, Johnno wrote:
Look at the bottom of the seismometer. In one of the picture the 'pipe' running vertically on the seismometer is straight, on the other it's angled at the bottom.


Oops, simulpost. What pipe? Here's a little graphic to orient ourselves:

<center>http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/seismo.jpg</center>

Let the lower left hand corner be (0,0) and the upper right be(4,4). Does the pipe run from, say, (2.8, 0.7) to (2.3, 3.3) (the red squares, in my picture)?

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 12:08 PM
On 2002-05-02 07:56, Johnno wrote:
I do understand what the thing looks like, it's just one picture that puzzles me because I cannot figure out the corner on it.

http://hinux.hin.no/~joonasjh/stuff/TEMP/Apollo/seismo%20comp.gif

Understand my point now?

I apologize, and fully understand that I'm probably about to step on another of your posts. Maybe we should go to IM? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

Your three pictures don't include the part of 5943, which is the one you are having trouble with, right? It's the one that I took my graphic from. The bend that you are looking for seems to be at (2.5, 1.3), but you are seeing it "edge-on". Is that a possible explanation for your puzzle?

2002-May-02, 12:58 PM
<a name="20020502.4:51"> page 20020502.4:51 aka ASR-7
On 2002-05-02 05:14, GrapesOfWrath wrote: To: ASR-7
Well, that gave me pause.
Anyway: 4:52 A.M.
the US navy ship I was aboard was named
the U.S.S CHANTICLEER ASR-7
-----------------------------
ot that this has any thing to do with that
============================================
Probable not
:::::::::::::::
I did not download both .jpgs completely
?????????????????????????????????????????
what I did see was rather long shadows
Much MUCH longer than the ones of the book

2002-May-02, 01:11 PM
<a name="20020502.5:03"> page 20020502.5:03 aka Math Hour Moon ShadowS
On 2002-05-02 07:04, Moonman wrote: To: 5:04 A.M. Moon
Still can't see the difference!
5:04 A.M.HUb' well i never downloaded the
200k (2nd) Jpg completely. But i could see
Long shadows in the one and a half i looked2
Do we need anymore proof?
Shirley: I would like the Data that's being sent back
Corrected Transcript and Commentary Copyright 1995
All rights reserved. Last revised 20 April 2002.

2002-May-02, 01:33 PM
<a name="20020502.5:27"> page 20020502.5:27 aka sTILL mATH HOUr
On 2002-05-02 09:11, HUb' wrote: To: HUb'
[INLINE]

et the lower left hand corner be (0,0) and the upper right be(4,4).
Does the pipe run from, say, (2.8, 0.7) to (2.3, 3.3) (the red
squares, in my picture)?
Your three pictures don't include the part of 5943, which is the one
you are having trouble with, right? It's the one that I took my
graphic from. The bend that you are looking for seems to be at (2.5,
1.3), but you are seeing it "edge-on". Is that a possible explanation
for your puzzle?
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |

Moonman
2002-May-02, 01:43 PM
It's definitely edge-on.

But what about the half buried body in the second picture?

(Apologies I said first picture in my first posting, I meant second.)

It looks like a relative of the Face on Mars.

Could it be?

There is blood too!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Moonman on 2002-05-02 09:44 ]</font>

jrkeller
2002-May-02, 01:47 PM
I'm clueless. Tell me what the problem is here.

It just looks like that while Buzz Aldrin was walking, Armstrong who was also walking was taking pictures of Buzz Aldrin.

Johnno
2002-May-02, 02:10 PM
"Your three pictures don't include the part of 5943, which is the one you are having trouble with, right?"

Well, not really, because Ive now understood that the bottom of the seismometer is angled, I first thought it was the 'pipe'.

However my real problem is with 5942a, you can see the corner very well, you can see the pipe bending, but the corner itself is cubical, and not hexagonal like in the other pictures. That's what Im so confused about.

And yes, the 'pipe' Im talking about is the one you marked off with red squares.

"but you are seeing it "edge-on". Is that a possible explanation for your puzzle?"

It would have been, if 5942a had been showing a hexagonal bottom edge, which it isnt as far as I can see.

Look at the composite I made, Ive boxed in the corners, see the difference?

And sure, if you want to use IM my icq is 9374692 /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Johnno

JayUtah
2002-May-02, 02:21 PM
Gee, all the analysis has been done. If Jack White is claiming this as evidence that "they" switched siesmometers, he's typically insane and ignorant. Diagrams and photographs of the seismometer are not hard to come by and clearly show the shape of the frame. Anyone with spatial reasoning skills above, say, the 8-year-old's level, can understand the photos in which Aldrin is holding the seismometer with its frame edge-on to the camera.

As far as I'm concerned, Jack White has no credible photo interpretation skills whatsoever. Anything he says is a "smoking gun" is likely only to net a few hardy laughs at his expense.

Johnno
2002-May-02, 02:48 PM
Perhaps you could be kind enough to explain 5942a to me then Jay, because I must be really stupid since I still cant see why the corner looks like it does.

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 03:24 PM
On 2002-05-02 10:48, Johnno wrote:
Perhaps you could be kind enough to explain 5942a to me then Jay, because I must be really stupid since I still cant see why the corner looks like it does.


Are you confusing the pics? 5942a (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5942a.jpg) has an angled corner just like the three photos you drew red boxes around (http://hinux.hin.no/~joonasjh/stuff/TEMP/Apollo/seismo%20comp.gif).

<font size=-1>[Added 5942a link]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: GrapesOfWrath on 2002-05-02 11:25 ]</font>

Johnno
2002-May-02, 03:35 PM
"5942a has an angled corner just like the three photos you drew red boxes around"

5942a is the one to the left, and I added it into the composite because I didnt think it looked like it had a angled corner, like in the other two pictures. But sure, whatever you say, I dont see it.

DaveC
2002-May-02, 03:47 PM
Johnno, I don't see what you see either. Without actually doing the research to determine the shape of the seismometer, I have no difficulty visualizing the shape it must have for the pipe to appear to be at a different angle depending on whether the device is viewed face on, from the side, or obliquely.
Other than the half buried body of the Martian that Moonman spotted, I don't see anything odd about any of the photos, nor any inconsistency between them. Of course, if the seismometer has a different shape than I postulate, then there may well be an anomaly - but I'll be really surprised if this is anything more than an artefact of 2-D photos failing to accurately portray a 3-D scene unless some spatial anlysis is brought to bear.

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 03:52 PM
On 2002-05-02 11:35, Johnno wrote:
5942a is the one to the left, and I added it into the composite because I didnt think it looked like it had a angled corner, like in the other two pictures. But sure, whatever you say, I dont see it.

You don't think that the leftmost one has an angled corner? Look closely, and line up other markings in the photos. I think you might be mistaking another shadow for the corner in 5942a.

Johnno
2002-May-02, 03:55 PM
"You don't think that the leftmost one has an angled corner? "

Nope.

"I think you might be mistaking another shadow for the corner in 5942a."

AAAAH!!! THERE!!! No, I must be blind. I see it now, thanks.

The trick was actually to get really close to the screen, and tilt your head 90 degrees left... and there it was. How awsome. Thanks man.

Ok, lets close down this topic then /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

JayUtah
2002-May-02, 04:11 PM
You have no doubt realized that Aldrin is carrying the seismometer sideways. The base is the surface facing his hip. It is composed of three metal plates of similar outline, in parallel planes, offset about two inches in the case of the upper and middle plates (leftmost in photo) and perhaps five inches in the case of the middle and lower plates (rightmost in photo).

The "pipe" is simply the gap between the upper and middle plates, likely populated with cables. The middle and lower plates are joined with edge panels inset from the baseplate outline by a fraction of an inch. The middle plate casts a shadow onto the full length of the edge panel in 5943, but only in the neighborhood of the miter in 5942A.

The baseplates extend beyond the seismometer side panel (the blue-green surface facing the camera) by a few inches. The lower corner is mitered. Normally that is done to reduce the puncture and injury potential of the 90° corner that would otherwise appear in the plates. But in this case it was done so that the seismometer would fit in the oddly-shaped EASEP bay in the lunar module.

The edge panels joining the baseplate assembly (vertical when seismometer is correctly placed) follow this miter. The lower corner of the miter ends roughly where the visible side panel (facing camera) ends. The visible side panel will unfold during deployment to become a solar panel.

In 5942A the miter in the lower (rightmost) baseplate cannot be easily seen because it blends with the side panel. Its individual contour is not easily discerned without a priori knowledge of the baseplate geometry or shadow information.

Note the feature centered in the side panel facing us, with three dark features resembling upper-case letter I's. Note its relationship to the "pipe" in 5943 and again in 5942A. In the latter, the "pipe" (i.e., space between the upper and middle baseplate components) is poised to obscure it, indicating it is closer to the camera than the feature.

In 5942A you clearly see the polished underside of the lowest baseplate and the reflection of portions of Aldrin's suit in it. The strut or strap seen extending vertically in the photo from the top edge of the baseplate to the bottom edge would roughly correspond to where the blue-green side panel would emerge from the base if it were extended downward (rightward in photo). The bottom end of the strap corresponds to the edge shared by the miter in the baseplate assembly and the edge the side panels.

White's mistake is assuming the blue-green panel to the left of the "pipe" in 5942A is the same surface as the edge panels in the base assembly to the right of the "pipe" in 5942A. They are most certainly not the same surface.

The peculiar lighting on the side panel in 5943 is the caustic reflection of sunlight from the upper baseplate. A similar reflection is likely being made in 5942A, judging from the apparent phase angle, but is occluded by the baseplate assembly itself. Because the phase angle differs significantly between 5942A and 5943, a different set of caustics and shadows appear. They are not anomalous when the geometry of the seismometer is known a priori and not inferred incorrectly from photographs.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JayUtah on 2002-05-02 12:33 ]</font>

GrapesOfWrath
2002-May-02, 04:18 PM
Jay, you refer to Jack White's analysis--where is this analysis? Do you have a link? Thanks.

JayUtah
2002-May-02, 04:37 PM
I don't have a link to it. I have been informed by a member of White's forum that he considers this irrefutable proof that the photos were falsified: that the different appearance of the seismograph in these photos is explained only by having used two different seismographs.

DaveC
2002-May-02, 05:19 PM
NASA mastered artificial gravity, film editing techniques that can't be duplicated even today, vacuum chambers, faking lunar rock etc etc but they for some reason had two versions of the seismograph on the same set.
Ya - that makes sense to me!

Roy Batty
2002-May-02, 06:09 PM
Whistle blowers DaveC, whistle blowers (gosh they were inventive) /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

DaveC
2002-May-02, 07:17 PM
I considered whistleblowers, but I can't conceive of a reason why these two photos would have been taken in two different sessions between which the "prop" could be secretly switched. Unless everyone on the sound stage was a whistleblower and the replacement seismograph was lowered on a wire to the astronaut after it had pulled the original up out of sight, the whistleblower theory for this sequence is illogical.
There is one set of footprints, and where the footprints appear in both photos they are the same, as nearly as I can tell. This makes it pretty clear that one photo was taken immediately after the other and no-one ran out to replace the prop (and leave Jack White with a clue.)
The lighting and viewing angles account for the different appearances.

Roy Batty
2002-May-02, 08:10 PM
I can't think of a whistleblower 'theory' that IS logical offhand /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

amstrad
2002-May-02, 11:18 PM
okay, this is how my spatial reasoning skills interpreted the photo:

Animation* [147k] (http://zz9pza.dhs.org/~amstrad/seismograph.mpeg)

I have always thought that computer modeling makes spacial problems easier to understand.

*very simplistic model done by me with pov-ray

edit: bad link

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: amstrad on 2002-05-02 19:19 ]</font>

Ian R
2002-May-03, 12:59 AM
Wow! I'm impressed!

Would you be able to do an animation which reproduces the angles seen in the two photographs of Aldrin?

DaveC
2002-May-03, 03:27 PM
Cool animation. Could you slow it down by 50% so it looks like it was done on the moon? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

amstrad
2002-May-03, 04:36 PM
alright Ian, try this one:

http://zz9pza.dhs.org/~amstrad/seismograph2.mpeg [329K]

This animation alternates between the viewpoint shown in 5942a (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5942a.jpg) and that shown in 5943 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5943.jpg)

SpacedOut
2002-May-03, 04:42 PM
FANTASTIC!!!!!

Makes things perfectly clear.

Amstrasd – Just one question – How long did it take you do up the two animations?

SpacedOut
2002-May-03, 04:53 PM
Wait a minute – I just figured out how the moon landings were faked!!!

Forget the anti-gravity machines, giant vacuum chambers, sound stages, etc.

NASA perfected computer animation and is only now releasing it to the public through their conspiracy partner – Pixar!

Amstrad – you had better watch your back – they might try to get you for this whistle blow…

ToSeek
2002-May-03, 05:08 PM
On 2002-05-03 12:53, SpacedOut wrote:
Wait a minute – I just figured out how the moon landings were faked!!!

Forget the anti-gravity machines, giant vacuum chambers, sound stages, etc.

NASA perfected computer animation and is only now releasing it to the public through their conspiracy partner – Pixar!

Amstrad – you had better watch your back – they might try to get you for this whistle blow…


You can't come up with any notion that the conspiracists haven't come up with first. (http://www.fixedearth.com/nasas_hanky-panky.htm)

DaveC
2002-May-03, 05:10 PM
Very helpful piece of work. Someone needs to post a link to that at JFK research (I can't, I've been banned).
Johnno, if you're around, how about getting your friend Kalle to do another post there?

amstrad
2002-May-03, 06:05 PM
On 2002-05-03 12:42, SpacedOut wrote:
Amstrasd – Just one question – How long did it take you do up the two animations?


About an hour for me to model the seismograph. And about 40 minutes for my computer to generate a 120 frame animation. Of course it was only modeled from what I could see in those two photographs. I could make a MUCH better model given schematic. Anyone found any?

Here is the POV-Ray input file if anyone is interested: seismograph.pov (http://zz9pza.dhs.org/~amstrad/seismograph.pov).

SpacedOut
2002-May-03, 06:16 PM
On 2002-05-03 13:08, ToSeek wrote:

You can't come up with any notion that the conspiracists haven't come up with first. (http://www.fixedearth.com/nasas_hanky-panky.htm)



I figured that would be the case as soon as I hit the submit button –from a Geocentric to boot!

I went looking for a schematic yesterday but all I could find was a sketch in the Apollo 11 Press Kit (http://www-lib.ksc.nasa.gov/lib/presskits.html) part 2 – page 146.

infocusinc
2002-May-03, 06:51 PM
Dave,

When did you get banned?

Craig

The Bad Astronomer
2002-May-03, 06:58 PM
Heh. I wasn't exactly banned, but for some reason, even though I registered, I cannot seem to log in. Talk about conspiracies!

The Bad Astronomer
2002-May-03, 07:06 PM
On 2002-05-03 13:08, ToSeek wrote:
You can't come up with any notion that the conspiracists haven't come up with first. (http://www.fixedearth.com/nasas_hanky-panky.htm)


We've seen this before. That guy has something on his page that I wrote describing how some images were taken:

Hubble Starfield Descriptions - "The Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) image was taken [of a little nearby galaxy only one billion times a trillion miles away: Give me a break!] while another of the telescope's instruments, The Faint Object Spectrograph, took long exposures of the ...Tarantula Nebula. The Tarantula, LYING OUTSIDE THE FIELD OF VIEW [i.e., invisible; had to be created] of the WFPC2 photograph, is a tremendous cloud of gas, within which new stars are forming.... The Hubble Heritage Team later COMBINED the WFPC2 images...in order to CREATE the color picture shown here."


Besides his obvious diffculty with believing the Magellanic Clouds are roughly 150,000 light years away, he completely misunderstands what I was talking about. I said that we took images from a separate camera that was turned on while the primary camera was taking observations of a nearby part of the sky. This ain't exactly rocket science, but the FixedEarth folks aren't firing on all thrusters either.





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Bad Astronomer on 2002-05-03 15:06 ]</font>

Johnno
2002-May-03, 09:22 PM
"but for some reason, even though I registered, I cannot seem to log in. Talk about conspiracies!"


That's because you havent either paid them 25 dollars for a year of participation in the forum, or emailed the admin and got an exemption for being unable to pay.

Theyve got this 'pay to post' policy after apollo freaks started joining the forum simply to debunk Jack White, instead of talking about the JFK asassination.

DaveC: Ill see what I can do, but Kalle reports that Jack White has been quiet about it after Kalle's initial refuting post.

Johnno

JayUtah
2002-May-03, 10:15 PM
Wow, impressive models! Impressive animation! You're right on with the angles and shadows.

Check this diagram

http://www.clavius.org/img/seism.jpg

if you want to refine your model. I've labeled the handle with a red label so you'll be able to orient the diagram to the model. That's where Aldrin's carrying it.

Note the configuration of the solar panel support structure. Also, the panel I've colored yellow is only slightly inset from the baseplate edges. The miter is at the far end of the yellow surface. This is how the seismometer would have sat in the EASEP bay.

infocusinc
2002-May-03, 10:39 PM
BA,

You were banned from the start. The admin worte to me that you were denied because you registered under false pretenses, you are not a JFK researcher, which is a requirement ofr joining. It amazes me that in addition to ability to qualify a person based on a few tv shows, he also has the ability to read minds. BTW you can find the comments of this Admin in regards to Apollo further down on this board under the title "A former apollo communications....." In my email to him about his rant on BA (which he deleted about 2 hours after he posted it) I thanked him for showing me the true level of his intelligence. His reply was "I have an IQ of 165" Too bad they didnt issue some common sense to him when they passed out the brains.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: infocusinc on 2002-05-03 18:45 ]</font>

infocusinc
2002-May-03, 10:44 PM
Johnno,

I notice there are a number of replys to Kalle's refuted post. When you talk to him again see what he says they are saying about his analysis. I would be most interested in what Dr. Costella had to say.

Johnno
2002-May-03, 10:56 PM
"I notice there are a number of replys to Kalle's refuted post."

Nothing constructive.

"I would be most interested in what Dr. Costella had to say."

private on Apollohoax

Johnno

johnwitts
2002-May-03, 10:59 PM
Jack posted this a while ago...

http://photos.msn.co.uk/imageserver/image.aspx?Image=*EtEZjHm6coQiDslBu2m29xQQcGLMtbVN ZqRUoe3ijnvVK3gpYDJNR6OPmwW43AZWX*TyPzS6wFPbWDLKfM ewYVBo6wXZA!dE!o1wnfzvrDLeKFG!vjAHb0DTT60uTji

Now we all know (at least those who have followed my ravings at apollohoax.com, in a post that has long since gone) that in the second picture, Armstrong came within a hairs breadth of cutting off Aldrins head from the shot. Therefore, no antenna. It also explains the low centre crosshair.

Johnno
2002-May-03, 11:05 PM
"Now we all know"

Well, personally I dont really feel that case has been settled, Ive decided it's possible, but I never did get a fresh scan from Kipp. Long since forgotten, perhaps I should get back to bothering him about it /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

JayUtah
2002-May-03, 11:08 PM
It seems that if there's a healthy Apollo discussion going on at their forum then it's not just a JFK forum and their criteria for entry is arbitrary. Of course it seems more likely that their criteria are aimed at insulating Jack White from those who disagree with him. Since criticism is a very important part of research, it seems they have foregone any claim to legitimacy.

As for the alleged IQ of the administrator there, I tend to pay little attention to such measurements. It's not sour grapes. My own IQ exceeds my weight; interpret that as you will. It's simply that IQ tends to correlate poorly to certain elements of practical intelligence. Since the measurement of IQ can involved subjective determinations, I rather hold to the Forrest estimate of intelligence: "Stupid is as stupid does."

Johnno
2002-May-03, 11:14 PM
the word 'discussion' is waste on Jack White, he doesnt know what research means. He just wants to look at the pictures and believe that he is a photography expert.

johnwitts
2002-May-03, 11:17 PM
My own IQ exceeds my weight; interpret that as you will.

You weigh a lot? Too many burgers.

If my IQ didn't exceed my weight, I wouldn't be able to use a computer.

Or a spoon.

amstrad
2002-May-03, 11:19 PM
On 2002-05-03 18:15, JayUtah wrote:
Check this diagram

http://www.clavius.org/img/seism.jpg

if you want to refine your model. I've labeled the handle with a red label so you'll be able to orient the diagram to the model. That's where Aldrin's carrying it.

Note the configuration of the solar panel support structure. Also, the panel I've colored yellow is only slightly inset from the baseplate edges. The miter is at the far end of the yellow surface. This is how the seismometer would have sat in the EASEP bay.



I'll update the model this weekend and post a new animation. Is this diagram from the Apollo 11 press kit that SpacedOut linked to? (I had trouble downloading that large PDF)


Here are two images of the unit on the ground with solar panels deployed:
http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS11/10075272.jpg
http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/images/pao/AS11/10075273.jpg

It looks like the solar panel support structure (long pieces with holes in it) unfolds before the panels unfold themselves. Does this seem right?

johnwitts
2002-May-03, 11:19 PM
Johnno, get back onto Kipp for the scan, preferably 100,000x100,000, so that we can see the individual molecules of emulsion.

Johnno
2002-May-03, 11:20 PM
johnwitts: sir yes sir!

johnwitts
2002-May-03, 11:23 PM
That's what I like to hear. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

Johnno
2002-May-04, 12:12 AM
johnwitts:

Got a reply from Kipp, and he says no, the plss wasent cut off in 5903. Also sent me a scan of the print.

http://hinux.hin.no/~joonasjh/stuff/Apollo/5903-print.jpg

johnwitts
2002-May-04, 12:25 AM
Nice pic!

That's only a scan of the print though. It still doesn't prove that the edge of the image was above the edge of the PLSS, as the edge of the image would be hard to find in a darkroom. Only by comparing with frames from the same roll of film, which is what IanR and I did, will show where the edge of the actual image was. We'd need 2 scans of the origional negatives, one of the 'classic' and one with something other than sky at the top of the frame. So there /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif .

Johnno
2002-May-04, 12:34 AM
Hehe, we're running around in circles, reckon we'll just agree to disagree, like last time.

But at least I got Kipp on my side, so there! /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif

johnwitts
2002-May-04, 12:38 AM
What does Kipp know? He's only got access to the entire Lunar Surface photographic record.

JayUtah
2002-May-04, 01:34 AM
Is this diagram from the Apollo 11 press kit that SpacedOut linked to?

The APK for Apollo 11 contains that diagram, and many others of the seismometer. However those diagrams appear in several NASA publications and reports.

It looks like the solar panel support structure (long pieces with holes in it) unfolds before the panels unfold themselves. Does this seem right?

The hinge at the top and bottom of the holed strut would suggest that, but that is not how the deployment works.

See http://www.clavius.org/img/seism-deploy.jpg

This model is incredibly crude compared to yours. Mine is made of foamcore, paper, and Scotch<sup><font size=-1>TM</font></sup> tape, affixed to a CD changer. The pink paper represents the solar panel.

The entire assembly rotates downward until horizontal, along the hinge at the bottom of the holed strut. Then the panel rotates outward on a system of hinged struts that forms a triangular support when fully deployed.

There's actually a name for this type of articulated frame, but I can't remember it. It's a standard mechanical engineering recipe.

David Hall
2002-May-05, 11:42 AM
On 2002-05-03 19:08, JayUtah wrote:
My own IQ exceeds my weight; interpret that as you will.


My IQ far exceeds my weight. At least when you measure it in kilograms. And if you use metric tons, well, it's just unbelievable. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

2002-Aug-13, 09:13 AM
<a name="JD2452500.A"> page JD2452500.A aka dredge from PAGE 13
On 2002-05-05 07:42, David Hall wrote: To: August 13, 2002

The thingEE that gets to me about the
"Collection" of nit picky Pictures Perfect
Procastinators
Not one link {do i find} to the seismic data
True all agree its /picture / seismograph / A11
but not one link to "OUTPUT data" ? WHY?
Why is there no connection between object [SEISMOGRAPH] and DATA { missing }( as far is i can tell ) i'd like to see the DATA :thak you: