Moon Walkers.

[PIH123]

There is also the fact that the flags first motion is toward the astronaut. If ejected gas was hitting the flag,causing it to move,then it's first motion should be away from the astronaut.

Wouldn't that also be true if filmed on Earth with an atmosphere ?

The moving air would push the flag away first ?

So  the logical conclusion is that it was neither filmed in an atmosphere or in a vacuum

But what ?

[tinman]

The impact energy is related to mass, not weight. If you can't comprehend the difference then do us a favour and learn the difference before making such ridiculous assertions.

Obviously you (like MH) cannot grasp the fact that the acceleration of G is far less on the moon,nor have you bothered to go back and read what we are talking about.
So perhaps you go do some learning first,before trying to make your self look good-which you failed at this time.

Brad

[tinman]

Due to much less gravity you would probably want to move slow, or inertia may take you farther than intended.

Mags

Exactly Mags
Now go watch the lunar rover in action,and tell me what you see wrong there?.

Brad

[tinman]

 author=MileHigh link=topic=16359.msg472492#msg472492 date=1453941818
"

The problem is that you are taking my statement and re-spinning it so that it fits inside your head and works the way you want it to work and that is not going to fly because I described the situation and not you.  I made the statement.  I never said anything at all about "hitting the moon's surface from the same height.

Whats not going to fly MH,is your incorrect calculated weights--which make a very big difference.
Once again,the weight of the astronaut and his suit is NOT 130kg's on the moon-and we are talking about what kind of impact the astronaut will have on the moons surface in order to cause the flag to waver. If you cannot put forth the correct weights when making up some sort of theory as to why the flag wavers on the MOON,then do not place your theory on this thread,as it is flawed right from the start, due to incorrect weights being stated. On earth we calculate mass in way of KG's.

So once again,the astronaut and his suit do not weigh 130KG's on the moon-they weigh 21.45KG's.
I dont give two squirts of duck sh-t if the mass is the same on earth as it is on the moon,the fact remains that the astronaut and his suit has a combined weight of 21.45KG's-not 130KG's. So the impact the astronaut and his suit has on the moon will be far less when the correct weight is used,rather than your incorrect weight of 130KG's is used. Like i said,you tried to slip this through to make your idiotic theory sound more plausible-but i caught you out.
Post correct data-or post non at all. I will not have you (once again) turn this thread into some sort of bullshit dribble thread,just because you have a bias view on the moon landings. In any other thread,you would be the one calling bullshit data,and yet here you are posting it your self.

I will say it to you again to see if it sinks in.  I simply stated that when the astronaut hits the moon's surface it could create a tremor that makes the flag shake.  I did not talk about dropping from a certain height.  I did not even mention the final velocity.

What you did(once again) is post incorrect mass weights-in excess of over 600% of the actual mass weights.

[quote]Because the 170-pound astronaut and the 120-pound space suit form a 290-pound "ground thumper" that hits the ground for every bounce.  That makes the ground shake, a small portion of the energy from the bounce makes the flag pole rattle.[/quote]

Right there highlighted in red.
A blatant misconception clearly inferring that the impact was going to be from a mass with a weight of 290lb's,when the actual truth is the impact will be from a mass with a weight of only 47.85lb's. So the impact energy (when the correct mass weight is used) will be far less than the one you tried to use.

You have to look at the situation from the way I am describing it and not the way you want to describe it.

How do you ever think i would do that,when the way you have described it is totally wrong.
The way i want you to describe it is with correct value's--not the incorrect values you tried to sneak in there.

There is no comparison taking place between Earth's gravity and the moon's gravity.

Yes there is--by you MH.
You decided to use the mass weight of the astronaut and his suit here on earth to put forth a theory of something that you thought may be happening on the moon-->and that is just bull shit- period.

When the astronaut and his space suit hits the surface of the Earth, or if he hits the surface of the moon, the energy dissipated in the impact is a function of the mass and the final velocity, and you can ignore the strength of the gravitational field.  For sure in the moon's gravity the final velocity will be less, but that's not the point.

No-the point is the impact energy is determined by the !!correct!! mass weight on the moon,and the gravitational acceleration--1.62519 m/s2.
So MH,which will deliver the greatest impact energy when impacting the moon surface-something that weighs 130KG's on the moon,or something that weight 21.45KG's on the moon.

What's the formula for the energy in the impact?  It's energy equals one-half of the mass times the square of the velocity.
You notice that there is no gravitational acceleration in the formula for the energy in the impact.
You notice that they use mass in the formula and not weight.

The formula for GPE is M x G x H, Where as the GPE is converted to kinetic energy,and then to the displaced energy upon impact.
What is the angular velocity of your space man MH?

If the only way that my example is going to fit into your head is by modifying my example and answering in the only way you are capable of answering it then you have some real limitations.  You are also failing to realize that you don't have the slightest clue if the astronaut's impact will make the flag shake or not.

The only way your example is going to be true,is if you use the value of the moons gravitational force(and not earths) when making up theories of events that are taking place on the moon.
Now it is up to you to prove that your moon quake theory is sound--and i can tell you right now,it is not--so prove me wrong. Show me just one example that exist on the WWW to prove your theory-as you would ask of us-and do all the time.

It's the same thing where you fail to realize that it would be impossible from just a photograph to know if you are looking at a flag made out of nylon or cotton or rayon.  Yet you claim that you can which is ridiculous.

And yet,i got it right.
Like i said,if you cant tell what the nylon material looks like that !off the shelf! flags are made from by looking at a close up of a very clear picture,then you need glasses. Dose it not make sense to you that you have a pretty good chance at getting it right by looking at a picture of a material that you have seen many times before,and know that almost all !off the shelf! flags are made of that material.

Ultimately this is a debate about nothing because we are not disagreeing with each other, we are simply talking about different things.  Nonetheless, if you can't agree that a statement that says, "the energy of the impact an astronaut will make on the moon's surface is a function of his mass and his velocity" is true, then you have some serious problems.

No MH. The impact energy from something that weighs 21.45kg's on the moon is going to be far less than something that weights 130kg's on the moon ,when in reference to the same motion of the astronaut and suit--and thats a fact. If you are going to disagree with that,then you need to go back to school.
The hammer and feather is thrown at the same velocity at the same 45* angle. They impact the moons surface at the same time--which is going to impart the greatest amount of energy when they hit the moons surface?.


Brad

[LibreEnergia]

Obviously you (like MH) cannot grasp the fact that the acceleration of G is far less on the moon,nor have you bothered to go back and read what we are talking about.
So perhaps you go do some learning first,before trying to make your self look good-which you failed at this time.

Brad

Consider the folowing two scenarios.
1. An astronaut stands on a one metre high platform on the earth and jumps off. He does the same from a one metre high platform on the moon. He hits the moon with less energy than he does on the earth.

2. He stands on the earth and jumps into the air. He does the same on the moon using the same amount of effort for the jump. In this situation , whenhe comes back down the energy that he impacts both the moon and earth is exactly the same.

I think youll find I understand the dynamics of this perectly well.