Drop Hammer and Feather on the Moon

[yesiamawizardjonny]

You know that's not actually the moon, right? Check out my video, "Apollo Moon Landing Hoax: The Case of the Missing Tracks."

[Regards200800]

NASA.COM!!!

[zambi007i]

nobody in this world sane and with physics knowledge even cares to mention the "lunar" hammer & feather mockery. who knows even if the feather wasn't made of lead? did scott demonstrate the feather to be an "actual" falcon feather, soft as here on the earth.

my challenge is how did nasa manage to preserve an organic part on the moon with solar radiation not damaging it? or was it an artificial feather made of "radiation-proof" material? explanations, scientific, needed here!

[BadBoriBoy]

@zambi007i : either way that experiment will give you the same exact results on Earth, outside, and within 5 tries or less w/o heavy winds.

[shananagans5]

@zambi007i Is this a serious question? You are aware the radiation isn't really going to effect something That's already dead. Last time I checked the bird wasn't still attached to the feather.

[zambi007i]

@shananagans5 ha ha, that was a good one! ok, try this experiment if you've got the resources. i did this in my univ physics lab.

took some rooster and pigeon feathers, put them inside a vacuum flask under a perforated disc, depressurized the flask and then kept the depressurized flask in line with a cobalt-60 radio source.

in under two minutes the feathers went from brown to black - charcoal black. the end result wasn't very pleasing :-|.

[zambi007i]

@shananagans5 my point is: the feather might be 'dead' but it still has organic material inside. and radiation exposure is like deep roasting anything organic. even inorganic matter like iron rods, plastics, ceramics &c get dangerously radioactive when exposed to such a source.

a physics lesson: there's one and the only thing that protects us here on earth from deadly solar radiation: 20k of atmosphere. now the question is does (did) moon have an atmosphere? over to you, dude!

[yesiamawizardjonny]

@zambi007i It was a real feather, but it was attached to a ball-bearing and fell as fast as the hammer in the studio. All they needed to do then was just slow the footage down. NASA faked it, bro. Anyone with a brain knows that...

[zambi007i]

@yesiamawizardjonny

nasa definitely did not fake the moon missions but have faked the video. i believe the apollo missions were as real as icing on a cake. but the videos show up so much anomalies that they look like having been taken here on the earth under "carefully planned" circumstances because films (contd)

my point is even a 'dead' feather is organic until it withers off. but no organic material, living or otherwise, would not have been charred to coal under the deadly solar radiation.

[zambi007i]

@yesiamawizardjonny (contd)

can't survive beyond the van allen radiation doughnut. and since there must be some evidence of having landed on the moon in the absence of any such, the videos would have been made.

[alderusdmc]

Well, now that we got the arguing out of the way, I was wondering if anyone knew the name of the accompanying music. I know it can't be NASA's own music since I heard it in a movie prewiew as well.

[samanosuke4]

stop arguing

[EGMAG]

She is so wrong as the moon is not an absolute vacuum and is still 1/6 gravity of earth.

[breeknow]

I don't see how that makes her wrong...

[EGMAG]

IronyMan85<<

Great arguement. True no "perfect" vacuum. Theres still is some friction! Did you notice when they threw things or jump or hit golf balls, dropped hammers & feathers, & ran the rover with the sand settleing at different speeds, that all these masses were not equal in time & accelleration, as you say, to the same amount unrelated to their own mass? It's simple to measure by professional & ameteur enthusiasts.There should be some slight feather floatation in a "partial" vacuum.

[EGMAG]

The moon is partial vacuum and still retains 1/6th gravity, therefore a very light feather would have very slight resistance with a bit of quick swirl while the heavy hammer would slam to the ground just a bit faster. Don't forget this is not an absolute vacuum or zero gravity either. Nasa made Boobo.

[breeknow]

Except...

The friction just above the moon's surface is so ridiculously close to zero that there's no way to detect anything macroscopically...

We're talking about ZERO resistance for all practical purposes....

You can't extrapolate your knowledge that it's not an absolute vacuum like this...

Macroscopically you can describe the phenomena pretty much as if they were in an absolute vacuum...

You'd need pretty sensitive equipment to detect anything there.. not just your eyes...

[breeknow]

Here goes the data: it's equivalent to about

0,000000000000003% of the atmospheric pressure we have here on earth...

Go to the Moon entry (atmosphere session) on wikipedia...

[EGMAG]

breeknow<<

Pretty good answer. Now do you think they really went to the moon?

[breeknow]

I've researched a LOT...

Using proper info and science..

And so far.. I don't see why not, even though if they did.. they did it in a "space raft"...

I mean... seriously... very... very precarious...

But scientifically there's nothing indicating otherwise...

[EGMAG]

breeknow (I've researched a LOT<<

So have I. For you to say nothing indicates otherwise is a very bad understatement. LOL

[GrifOli]

Great video!

[5953056]

You welcome and best of luck with your homework.

[Pikkon22]

Thanks so much you did my physics homework for me! LOL