Prev: best way to trashcan Nebular-dust-cloud is **neighborhood star ages** Re: (use in 4th) Earth about 10 billion yrs old; Atom Totality theory (use in 4th)
Next:  Eric Gisse promotes my web·site ( www.JeffRelf.F-M.FM ).
From: BradGuth on 7 Jan 2010 22:32
On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins <s...(a)dcdaea.coms> wrote:
>
> I can remain silent no longer.  Here with the above quoted evidence I
> would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'.  The complaint is as
> follows:  Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format.  It
> should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
>
> Robert Collins

Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream
interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your
NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and
continuously emerging interpretations.

Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?

~ BG



From: BradGuth on 8 Jan 2010 01:34
On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > bit hollow?
>
> > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > (Selene L1) environment?
>
> > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
> >  ~ BG
>
> What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
>
> Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> psi:
>  14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> m2)
>
> Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
>  Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) =
> 62 t/m2
>
> Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently
> fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas
> 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar
> basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its
> tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious
> amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention
> whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by
> rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi.
>
> Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having
> allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization,
> whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of
> result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder.
>
> Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have
> those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified
> geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under
> that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that
> supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%)
> towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon
> saturated farside crust.
>
> The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated
> basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the
> metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely it’s
> only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed
> iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the
> greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth.
>
> Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is
> ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at
> 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course
> better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or
> voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected.
>
>   Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins <s...(a)dcdaea.coms> wrote:
> > I can remain silent no longer. Here with the above quoted evidence
> > I would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> > the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. The complaint is as follows:
> > Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> > activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. It
> > should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> > propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.

Gee whiz, outside of the usual gauntlet of mainstream bullies and
rusemasters that I have to contend with, you don't seem to have any
support for your dysfunctional interpretation of my research, that by
the way often uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data
that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations.

All that I’m suggesting is that our extremely unusual moon is not as
solid nor as inert as many here would like the rest of us to believe.

Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?

Some of Robert Collins wisdom isn’t without merit, such as the
following context as taken out of context from “Shuttle/ISS extended?”

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/6dfb773b56a8f06e?hl=en&scoring=d&
On Jul 31 2009, 4:41 pm, Robert Collins <s...(a)dcdaea.coms> wrote:
But we already _have_ that. Google "People's Republic of Upper U-
topi-a". If more countries had their socio-economic affairs
controlled
as well as Upper U-topi-a, the world would be a much better place.

Sometimes the necessity in a political strategy is deeply hidden in a
complex analysis relying on information many of us cannot ever know.
Who are you to say that a cold war of the West against the Chinese is
not wise given the threat they pose? Do you have magic information
that somehow makes moot the threat posed by a population of a billion
+
Communists? Big space operations would be nice today, but what good
is it if the geopoloitical economy is crippled or too unstable to
support the growth of nascent NEO facilities. Would it not be better
to order our affairs on Earth as well as possible before we set out
to
expand into space for good?

The difficulty of man's undertakings often arise because operations
are often undercapitalized or managed poorly. When we have a better
handle on how to run a world, decent-sized space settlements and
commercial undertakings will be much more likely to succeed.
Robert Collins
-

At least within this portion of his mindset, I’m on the exact same set
of tracks, and even close enough for accepting a few other notions
that Robert Collins sees fit to publish and defend. I only wish I was
half as good at words and subsequent story telling.

~ BG
From: BradGuth on 9 Jan 2010 15:17
On Jan 7, 10:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > > bit hollow?
>
> > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > > (Selene L1) environment?
>
> > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
> > >  ~ BG
>
> > What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
>
> > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> > psi:
> >  14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> > m2)
>
> > Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
> >  Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) =
> > 62 t/m2
>
> > Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently
> > fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas
> > 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar
> > basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its
> > tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious
> > amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention
> > whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by
> > rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi.
>
> > Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having
> > allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization,
> > whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of
> > result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder.
>
> > Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have
> > those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified
> > geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under
> > that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that
> > supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%)
> > towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon
> > saturated farside crust.
>
> > The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated
> > basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the
> > metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely it’s
> > only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed
> > iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the
> > greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth.
>
> > Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is
> > ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at
> > 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course
> > better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or
> > voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected.
>
> >   Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
>
> On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins <s...(a)dcdaea.coms> wrote:
>
> > > I can remain silent no longer.  Here with the above quoted evidence
> > > I  would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about
> > > the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'.  The complaint is as follows:
> > >  Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space
> > > activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format.  It
> > > should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its
> > > propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way.
>
> Gee whiz, outside of the usual gauntlet of mainstream bullies and
> rusemasters that I have to contend with, you don't seem to have any
> support for your dysfunctional interpretation of my research, that by
> the way often uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data
> that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations.
>
> All that I’m suggesting is that our extremely unusual moon is not as
> solid nor as inert as many here would like the rest of us to believe.
>
> Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations
> as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is?
>
> Some of Robert Collins wisdom isn’t without merit, such as the
> following context as taken out of context from “Shuttle/ISS extended?”
>
>  http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/6df....
>  On Jul 31 2009, 4:41 pm, Robert Collins <s...(a)dcdaea.coms> wrote:
>  But we already _have_ that.  Google "People's Republic of Upper U-
> topi-a".  If more countries had their socio-economic affairs
> controlled
> as well as Upper U-topi-a, the world would be a much better place.
>
> Sometimes the necessity in a political strategy is deeply hidden in a
> complex analysis relying on information many of us cannot ever know.
> Who are you to say that a cold war of the West against the Chinese is
> not wise given the threat they pose?  Do you have magic information
> that somehow makes moot the threat posed by a population of a billion
> +
> Communists?  Big space operations would be nice today, but what good
> is it if the geopoloitical economy is crippled or too unstable to
> support the growth of nascent NEO facilities.  Would it not be better
> to order our affairs on Earth as well as possible before we set out
> to
> expand into space for good?
>
> The difficulty of man's undertakings often arise because operations
> are often undercapitalized or managed poorly.  When we have a better
> handle on how to run a world, decent-sized space settlements and
> commercial undertakings will be much more likely to succeed.
>  Robert Collins
> -
>
> At least within this portion of his mindset, I’m on the exact same set
> of tracks, and even close enough for accepting a few other notions
> that Robert Collins sees fit to publish and defend.  I only wish I was
> half as good at words and subsequent story telling.

Why is it always so hard for so many to deal with the best available
truths?

~ BG
From: BradGuth on 9 Jan 2010 21:40
On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > bit hollow?
>
> > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > (Selene L1) environment?
>
> > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
> >  ~ BG
>
> What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
>
> Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> psi:
>  14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> m2)
>
> Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
>  Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) =
> 62 t/m2
>
> Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently
> fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas
> 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar
> basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its
> tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious
> amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention
> whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by
> rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi.
>
> Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having
> allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization,
> whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of
> result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder.
>
> Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have
> those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified
> geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under
> that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that
> supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%)
> towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon
> saturated farside crust.
>
> The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated
> basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the
> metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely it’s
> only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed
> iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the
> greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth.
>
> Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is
> ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at
> 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course
> better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or
> voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected.
>
>   Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Why is it always so hard for so many to deal with the best available
truths?

Where's our 5th grade and older spunk?

So what if our NASA/Apollo wizards didn't accomplish all that much
with their "right stuff", and then lost track of most everything
important as though it was of no significant value.

~ BG
From: BradGuth on 11 Jan 2010 19:55
On Jan 9, 6:40 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least
> > > bit hollow?
>
> > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1
> > > (Selene L1) environment?
>
> > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained
> > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible,
> > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science?
>
> > >  ~ BG
>
> > What’s not holding up that robust lunar crust?
>
> > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7
> > psi:
> >  14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/
> > m2)
>
> > Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2
> >  Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) =
> > 62 t/m2
>
> > Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently
> > fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas
> > 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar
> > basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its
> > tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious
> > amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention
> > whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by
> > rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi.
>
> > Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having
> > allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization,
> > whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of
> > result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder.
>
> > Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have
> > those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified
> > geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under
> > that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that
> > supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%)
> > towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon
> > saturated farside crust.
>
> > The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated
> > basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the
> > metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely it’s
> > only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed
> > iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the
> > greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth.
>
> > Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is
> > ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at
> > 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course
> > better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or
> > voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected.
>
> >   Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
>
> Why is it always so hard for so many to deal with the best available
> truths?
>
> Where's our 5th grade and older spunk?
>
> So what if our NASA/Apollo wizards didn't accomplish all that much
> with their "right stuff", and then lost track of most everything
> important as though it was of no significant value.
>
>  ~ BG

Perhaps this topic should have been named "The 100% solid moon that's
passive and inert"

Adding that we've simply chosen to never set foot on that sucker
again, because it's so boring and monochrome light gray (in most
places near off-white, or lets call it antique-white). At least that
way I wouldn't have upset our NASA/Apollo good ship LOLLIPOP so much.

Odd that something that supposedly cooled off and thus having
solidified in orbit (within such a terrific vacuum), by rights it
should have become uniformly rather dense, all the way through.

~ BG
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Prev: best way to trashcan Nebular-dust-cloud is **neighborhood star ages** Re: (use in 4th) Earth about 10 billion yrs old; Atom Totality theory (use in 4th)
Next:  Eric Gisse promotes my web·site ( www.JeffRelf.F-M.FM ).