Moon Landing: Apollo 17

A little more controversy in the moon landing missions

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• Apollo
• Moon
• Landing
• News
• Fake

[Tweekerhead]

@Daddyo930 You just transferred what it is with you...You are willfully ignorant.

How many times ..how many people have tried to help you, and you discredit them or dismiss them as fools?

You read over the top of these words or what?

Only 0.5MeV have been detected here from Gamma Ray Bursts.

Only 0.5MeV have been detected here from Gamma Ray Bursts.

Only 0.5MeV have been detected here from Gamma Ray Bursts.

Only 0.5MeV have been detected here from Gamma Ray Bursts.

You're a fool.

[Tweekerhead]

@Daddyo930 Finish the discussion, we'll see who the 'lame-brain" is here in this debate.

Go back and read the paper you posted dolt. It says the opposite of what you're saying.

0.5MeV is all that has been detected from GRB's remember?

Or didn't you get that far in Mészáros' paper?

Anyway thanks for posting your opinion, it's wrong and it makes you look real stupid.

[Tweekerhead]

@Daddyo930 If 10^54 erg. was detected here in this solar system, we wouldn't be having this ball bustin party & no Y-Tube.

If a GRB went off say..in our arm of the galaxy,the Orion Arm, we would fry, then you'd have your reason for space flight being impossible.

A GRB at 6,500 light yrs.away in the Perseus Arm it could be brighter than 10 Suns!

.

What you've implied is laughable, not only because of the magnitude of stupidity but the paper you posted said only 0.5MeV was detected.

[MTMind2]

@Daddyo930 - From your cut 'n paste post, you confirm what we've been telling you. Quote "For GRBs, astrophysicists TYPICALLY estimate the intrinsic power generation of these bursts by assuming the INVERSE-SQUARE LAW". That contradicts your claim that the ISL is never applied to GRBs! Then it says if (the key word being 'IF') faster than light effects are involved, they should use a simple inverse law, which STILL means energy reduces over distance, so 10^54 erg HERE is impossible! :)

[krisdevalle]

@Daddyo930 How's it going getting anyone else to agree with your retarded claims?

You've been working on this for months.

Maybe it would help you if you ran it by a real physicist and then you could have some peer-review to back it all up.

I mean, if you know you are right, then it can't hurt.

[Tweekerhead]

@Daddyo930 No this entity' doesn't need help in understanding GRB's.

Tweekerhead has been studying this 'stuff' since the early 70's.

Go back & read Peter Mészáros' paper carefully this time.

If GRB's are isotropic then how could they not be subject to I~1/d²?

What you're assuming is impossible.

There is no way 10^54erg.at the event would transfer to 10^54erg. in this solar system.

Peter Mészáros claims only 0.5MeV was detected in this solar system.

0.5MeV 0.5MeV 0.5MeV that's all.

[Daddyo930]

If gamma ray bursts emissions are isotropic (uniform in every direction) then a burst passing through this system would have the same energy passing through this solar system (using the fireball shock model) as it had at the source of emission. The entity calling him or herself Tweekerhead needs a little help understanding gamma ray bursts. Understandable as they are still being studied.

[Tweekerhead]

@Daddyo930 Yes intrinsic power of 10^54 erg. as in at the event, NOT in our solar system.

Only 0.5MeV has been detected. That's what the paper you posted the link to says.

[stalkervision]

@Daddyo930 Yes please. he doesn't seem able to "elucidate" these simple concepts.

[Daddyo930]

Possible Models of Gamma Ray Bursts

Inverse Squared Law places huge constraints on total energy

Emission is probably beamed in jets

Beaming reduces total energy needed

Will someone please help this lamebrain out?