So I guess Buzz Aldrin is still brainwashed

If gravity is so strong, why can I defeat gravity by simply jumping?

Gravity is a force applied on you all the time. If you yourself can apply an opposite force to gravity ... all the time ... you will float or fly. Jumping on FE is just a temporary force applied a short time after which you are back on FE, where FE applies the opposite force so you stay on FE. Basic. Buzz (topic) never understood it and had to lie and cheat all his life after his imaginary Moon trip.

This dude has a bad flat cookie habit.

Jumping on FE is just a temporary force applied a short time after which you are back on FE, where FE applies the opposite force so you stay on FE.

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) has infected this forum with his loony tunes notions.  He pops up all over the place proudly parading his scientific ignorance like a badge of honour, and hasn't yet realised that 99% of the rest of the world spend most of their time laughing hysterically as they (if so inclined) wade through the copious amounts of pseudo-scientific drivel he posts across the interwebs.

He's one of the first guys I'd think of if someone wanted to suggest a successor to sceptimatic or Charles Bloomington LOL.

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) ...

Well, you just have to study my web pages more carefully and soon you will understand that I am 100% serious. I evidently publish all my findings under my own name and do not hide behind funny signatures. I also offer €1M to anybody showing how a small top of a structure can crush the big bottom of same structure by gravity force - the famous Björkman Challenges - Google it. Structural intact design and dynamic damage analysises are one of my specialities. Interesting stuff.

Quote from: ausGeoff on August 14, 2014, 08:53:33 AM

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) ...

Well, you just have to study my web pages more carefully and soon you will understand that I am 100% serious. I evidently publish all my findings under my own name and do not hide behind funny signatures. I also offer €1M to anybody showing how a small top of a structure can crush the big bottom of same structure by gravity force - the famous Björkman Challenges - Google it. Structural intact design and dynamic damage analysises are one of my specialities. Interesting stuff.

You actually claim that a pancake collapse (aka progressive collapse) is impossible, all evidence to the contrary.  Shall I send you my mailing address for the €1M?

Quote from: Heiwa on August 14, 2014, 09:13:54 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on August 14, 2014, 08:53:33 AM

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) ...

Well, you just have to study my web pages more carefully and soon you will understand that I am 100% serious. I evidently publish all my findings under my own name and do not hide behind funny signatures. I also offer €1M to anybody showing how a small top of a structure can crush the big bottom of same structure by gravity force - the famous Björkman Challenges - Google it. Structural intact design and dynamic damage analysises are one of my specialities. Interesting stuff.

You actually claim that a pancake collapse (aka progressive collapse) is impossible, all evidence to the contrary.  Shall I send you my mailing address for the €1M?

Can I get a cut of that money?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=feb_1297545164
and
#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Top-Down building collapse 2

Lets go to the bahamas brohim.

You actually claim that a pancake collapse (aka progressive collapse) is impossible, all evidence to the contrary.  Shall I send you my mailing address for the €1M?

Your are miles off topic of course as we discuss Buzz' lies about returning to FE. No, I just claim - the famous Björkman Challenges - that a (small) top part of a structure cannot crush the (bigger) bottom part of same structure by gravity (the top is dropped on the bottom) and if you can prove the opposite, I pay €1M. You find all details about it on the net - Google.

Controlled demolition of concrete buildings on FE destroying the bottom part first using explosives and removing support allowing the top to drop into the rubble on FE has nothing to do with my findings. Pls, try to read and understand what I say and start another FE thread about it, if you want.

Moving the goal posts, are we?

Moving the goal posts, are we?

Did you expect any less?

Quote from: markjo on August 14, 2014, 01:29:00 PM

Moving the goal posts, are we?

Did you expect any less?

With a million euros on the line, I guess not.

No, I just claim - the famous Björkman Challenges - that a (small) top part of a structure cannot crush the (bigger) bottom part of same structure by gravity (the top is dropped on the bottom) and if you can prove the opposite, I pay €1M. You find all details about it on the net...

Ha ha... this is so funny.  This poor delusional dimwit seems to truly think his self-styled "Bjorkman Challenge" is regarded as a legitimate offer, when everybody treats it with the same levity as a Bozo the clown pratfall.  The only reason it's "famous" is as a source of constant amusement if you're having a down day LOL.

He's obviously unaware that his silly challenge has been shown to be fraudulent a dozen times on a hundred other forums.  Bjorkman has not once satisfactorily proved that he even has a million Euros ($1.4 million) to honour his challenge anyway—because he doesn't.  His challenge is just a hollow arguing point that he uses in an attempt to imply that he's got absolute confidence in the pseudo-scientific drivel he fills numerous forums with.

I'm not even sure as to why he's repeatedly posting off-topic comments here anyway, rambling on about the way tall buildings falling over ad nauseam.

Maybe if we just ignore him he'll go away and annoy some other people?   

Controlled demolition of concrete buildings on FE destroying the bottom part first using explosives and removing support allowing the top to drop into the rubble on FE has nothing to do with my findings.

I'm sorry but I see no evidence that explosives were used in any of those buildings to destroy the bottom part first.

Ha ha... this is so funny.  This poor delusional dimwit seems to truly think his self-styled "Bjorkman Challenge" is regarded as a legitimate offer, when everybody treats it with the same levity as a Bozo the clown pratfall. ...

Topic is Brainwashed Buzz and why he is lying. Buzz is just a victim of US Ministry of Love that invents things that people must believe in, e.g. atomic bombs, human space travel and a bearded arab with a turban sitting in a cave ordering twenty other arabs to hijack airplanes in USA and flying them into buildings. To be politically correct in USA (and allied countries) you must not only believe the US Love propaganda, you must spell it out. Like Buzz. I just show on my web site that Buzz is lying as human space travel is physically impossible. Heat shields on command capsules to land does not work. Like atomic bombs! Or buildings/structures collapsing from tops. And because I am rich, I offer €1M to anybody showing that I am wrong. Evidently US Love lovers are getting upset but I just feel sorry for them.

Quote from: Heiwa on August 14, 2014, 09:13:54 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on August 14, 2014, 08:53:33 AM

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) ...

Well, you just have to study my web pages more carefully and soon you will understand that I am 100% serious. I evidently publish all my findings under my own name and do not hide behind funny signatures. I also offer €1M to anybody showing how a small top of a structure can crush the big bottom of same structure by gravity force - the famous Björkman Challenges - Google it. Structural intact design and dynamic damage analysises are one of my specialities. Interesting stuff.

You actually claim that a pancake collapse (aka progressive collapse) is impossible, all evidence to the contrary.  Shall I send you my mailing address for the €1M?

Rama Set your kidding right ? You surly cant  think Steel H beams concertina ?

Quote from: Rama Set on August 14, 2014, 09:21:44 AM

Quote from: Heiwa on August 14, 2014, 09:13:54 AM

Quote from: ausGeoff on August 14, 2014, 08:53:33 AM

I can't believe this guy Heiwa (AKA Anders Björkman—Google it) ...

Well, you just have to study my web pages more carefully and soon you will understand that I am 100% serious. I evidently publish all my findings under my own name and do not hide behind funny signatures. I also offer €1M to anybody showing how a small top of a structure can crush the big bottom of same structure by gravity force - the famous Björkman Challenges - Google it. Structural intact design and dynamic damage analysises are one of my specialities. Interesting stuff.

You actually claim that a pancake collapse (aka progressive collapse) is impossible, all evidence to the contrary.  Shall I send you my mailing address for the €1M?

Rama Set your kidding right ? You surly cant  think Steel H beams concertina ?

They do when they are hot. The history channel made a claim along the line that if the steel used has 0.5% more chromium, then the towers wouldn't have collapsed.

I just show on my web site that Buzz is lying as human space travel is physically impossible. Heat shields on command capsules to land does not work.

No, you don't show anything.  All you do is make claims of incredulity, like heat shields don't work.  It isn't enough to claim something, you need to explain why things like heat shields don't work like NASA and SpaceX claim.

No, you don't show anything.  All you do is make claims of incredulity, like heat shields don't work.  It isn't enough to claim something, you need to explain why things like heat shields don't work like NASA and SpaceX claim.

Off topic of course but anyway:
NASA & SpaceX say that their heat shields are made of some secret material that can absorb plenty energy (heat) without melting. SpaceX says it has a patent of the material but ... what it is, is secret. Buzz has said that he saw melted material of the Apollo 11 command module heat shield flowing past a window he was looking through at re-entry 1969. What a story! He lied through his nose.
The heat shield/capsule has also a fantastic aerodynamic design that can reduce speed by friction only in a very thin atmosphere at 100 000 m altitude. The people inside the capsule face backwards at re-entry at 9000 m/s speed, while the capsule bounces up against the atmosphere getting denser, and one way or another a 1969 model computer steers the capsule automatically down to Earth, while speed is reduced to 50 m/s when parachutes are released.
There is evidently no evidence anywhere that all these components work. My conclusion is that it is all really bad science fiction fairy tales. But prove me wrong and earn €1M with my Challenge.
The 46 kg capsule of the Stardust spaceship entered Earth atmosphere at the fantastic speed of 20 000 m/s 2006 and landed intact without heat shield somewhere in Utah a little later. Another fantasy invented by NASA/JPL. 

Yet another argument from incredulity. Don't you have anything to actually say?

On the topic of heat shields... What is hotter?  The surface of a craft on reentry or a blast furnace?

Quote from: markjo on August 16, 2014, 08:51:53 AM

No, you don't show anything.  All you do is make claims of incredulity, like heat shields don't work.  It isn't enough to claim something, you need to explain why things like heat shields don't work like NASA and SpaceX claim.

Off topic of course but anyway:
NASA & SpaceX say that their heat shields are made of some secret material that can absorb plenty energy (heat) without melting.

NASA uses two different kinds of heat shields.  Perhaps you should read up on them before you try to disprove them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_shield#Space

SpaceX says it has a patent of the material but ... what it is, is secret.

Who said it was a secret?

Buzz has said that he saw melted material of the Apollo 11 command module heat shield flowing past a window he was looking through at re-entry 1969. What a story! He lied through his nose.

How do you know what Buzz did or did not see?  Were you there?

The heat shield/capsule has also a fantastic aerodynamic design that can reduce speed by friction only in a very thin atmosphere at 100 000 m altitude. The people inside the capsule face backwards at re-entry at 9000 m/s speed, while the capsule bounces up against the atmosphere getting denser, and one way or another a 1969 model computer steers the capsule automatically down to Earth, while speed is reduced to 50 m/s when parachutes are released.
There is evidently no evidence anywhere that all these components work. My conclusion is that it is all really bad science fiction fairy tales. But prove me wrong and earn €1M with my Challenge.

How much do you know about aerodynamics?  My guess is that it isn't very much.

The 46 kg capsule of the Stardust spaceship entered Earth atmosphere at the fantastic speed of 20 000 m/s 2006 and landed intact without heat shield somewhere in Utah a little later. Another fantasy invented by NASA/JPL.

Huh?  Who said there was no heat shield?

Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) was developed at NASA Ames Research Center under the lightweight ceramic ablator development program in the '80s. PICA has the advantages of low density (~ 0.27g/cc) coupled with efficient ablative capability at high heat fluxes making PICA an enabling technology for the Stardust mission. Three cores at key locations were extracted from the forebody heatshield of the Stardust Sample Return Capsule (SRC) post flight and evaluated.

AA. Who said it was a secret?

BB. How do you know what Buzz did or did not see?  Were you there?

AA. SpaceX. I asked and a secretary told me.

BB. Buzz is quoted on the Internet saying that he saw molten material from the PICA heat shield flowing by the window of the Command Module.

I find re-entries from outer space fascinating. A module or capsule arrives, like a comet, at 9000-20000 m/s velocity and enters Earth atmosphere at 100 000 meter altitude.  Evidently the direction is not vertical because then you would hit ground after 11-5 seconds; no you enter almost horisontally and then you bounce up and reach 150 000 meter altitude at reduced speed ... and then you finally drop down and land. I would expect any module or capsule to start rotate forwards around itself at re-entry due to turbulence, etc, and then the heat shield would be useless, but we are told that module/capsule is aerodynamically stable at speeds 0-9000/20000 m/s like a bullet (that rotates sideways) and that the heat shield is always at the front. However, there is no test laboratory that can do tests at speeds Mac 30/60 so what NASA/JPL/SpaceX suggest is just ... SF fantasy.
Nothing to get upset about! Nobody gets hurt and it is quite entertaining. And hero Buzz knows he is just a puppet on a string.

Quote from: markjo on August 16, 2014, 11:14:47 AM

AA. Who said it was a secret?

BB. How do you know what Buzz did or did not see?  Were you there?

AA. SpaceX. I asked and a secretary told me.

Oh well, it must be true if a secretary said so.

However, there is no test laboratory that can do tests at speeds Mac 30/60 so what NASA/JPL/SpaceX suggest is just ... SF fantasy.
Nothing to get upset about! Nobody gets hurt and it is quite entertaining. And hero Buzz knows he is just a puppet on a string.

Good thing we have this thing called math, and that we also know how aerodynamics work.

How much do you know about aerodynamics?  My guess is that it isn't very much.

Hydrodynamics was my biz in the 1960's but there was no real money to make in it. I worked in ship model testing tanks in the USA 1968 and Sweden 1969.

The brother Einar Hogner of my father's aunt Ellen Hogner (she was married to the brother Gunnar of my grandfather Eric and she was my godmother) was in the hydrodynamics biz though:

http://ittc.sname.org/proc7/A%20Complementary%20Method%20for%20Evaluating%20Ship%20Wave%20Resistance.pdf

Little progress has been done since in the hydrodynamics biz, I am sorry to say.

Hydrodynamics study what happens to moving bodies in the interface water/air. Very complicated. Aerodynamics are much simpler - the body just moves in the air.

At a speed of 9000-20000 m/s in air any body (NASA/JPL capsule) will just disintergrate (break into pieces) or burn up, IMHO.

What do you think?

But if it is a rigid structure isn't it, by definition, indestructible?

Or wait, hydrodynamics... You mean the dynamics of water from the mop bucket on the floor?

Quote from: markjo on August 16, 2014, 11:14:47 AM

AA. Who said it was a secret?

BB. How do you know what Buzz did or did not see?  Were you there?

AA. SpaceX. I asked and a secretary told me.

It's nice to know that SpaceX hires secretaries that can keep a secret. 

BB. Buzz is quoted on the Internet saying that he saw molten material from the PICA heat shield flowing by the window of the Command Module.

You do realize that's how the heat shield was designed to work, don't you?

I find re-entries from outer space fascinating. A module or capsule arrives, like a comet, at 9000-20000 m/s velocity and enters Earth atmosphere at 100 000 meter altitude.

Or, like a meteor.  BTW, do you know how many meteors survive entry into our atmosphere?  Quite a few.

Evidently the direction is not vertical because then you would hit ground after 11-5 seconds; no you enter almost horisontally and then you bounce up and reach 150 000 meter altitude at reduced speed ...

Yes, it's good to bleed of some of that excess speed so that you have to dissipate too much heat in one shot.

...and then you finally drop down and land. I would expect any module or capsule to start rotate forwards around itself at re-entry due to turbulence, etc, and then the heat shield would be useless, but we are told that module/capsule is aerodynamically stable at speeds 0-9000/20000 m/s like a bullet (that rotates sideways) and that the heat shield is always at the front.

Ummm... You do realize that a certain amount of stability is due to thrusters on the capsule, don't you?

However, there is no test laboratory that can do tests at speeds Mac 30/60 so what NASA/JPL/SpaceX suggest is just ... SF fantasy.

What makes you think that Mach 30-60 in a very thin atmosphere is all that hard to simulate?
#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">NASA Ames Helps SpaceX Develop Dragon's Heat Shield

Quote from: markjo on August 16, 2014, 11:14:47 AM

How much do you know about aerodynamics?  My guess is that it isn't very much.

Hydrodynamics was my biz in the 1960's but there was no real money to make in it. I worked in ship model testing tanks in the USA 1968 and Sweden 1969.

So, how testing ships in a water tank qualify you to evaluate the aerodynamics of a reentry capsule?

Hydrodynamics study what happens to moving bodies in the interface water/air. Very complicated. Aerodynamics are much simpler - the body just moves in the air.

Says someone who hasn't studied aerodynamics.

At a speed of 9000-20000 m/s in air any body (NASA/JPL capsule) will just disintergrate (break into pieces) or burn up, IMHO.

What do you think?

I think that you have little faith in the abilities of people who have studied aerodynamic and materials sciences.

What do you think?

Bjorkman, I think—and have thought—for a long time that you're mentally deranged.  According to many reputable sources (which are easy to find on the web if one Googles your name) all accredited scientists think exactly the same.

Your non-existent academic credentials, and your self-ascribed work history are all bogus, and nothing more than the results of a distorted sense of ego, or delusions of grandeur, or maybe incipient lunacy.

I can only suggest (in all seriousness) that you get some sort of psychiatric intervention, as your delusional state of mind will, inevitably, have serious ramifications in later life.

For anybody who'd "like" to read the pseudo-scientific drivel that Bjorkman spews in massive quantities, you can check his site out HERE.

Be prepared with a pound of popcorn and a gallon of Coke though... it's a long, long read.

   

Quote from: Heiwa on August 17, 2014, 03:42:51 AM

What do you think?

Bjorkman, I think—and have thought—for a long time that you're mentally deranged.  According to many reputable sources (which are easy to find on the web if one Googles your name) all accredited scientists think exactly the same.

Your non-existent academic credentials, and your self-ascribed work history are all bogus, and nothing more than the results of a distorted sense of ego, or delusions of grandeur, or maybe incipient lunacy.

I can only suggest (in all seriousness) that you get some sort of psychiatric intervention, as your delusional state of mind will, inevitably, have serious ramifications in later life.

For anybody who'd "like" to read the pseudo-scientific drivel that Bjorkman spews in massive quantities, you can check his site out HERE.

Be prepared with a pound of popcorn and a gallon of Coke though... it's a long, long read.

   

Hm - question was on topic, i.e. Buzz arrives at 11 000 m/s speed into Earth atmosphere and I suggest he burns up and dies and cannot land and boast about having visited the Moon. And you change topic and post something else. No respect.
Anyway, we are at the FEF. Just because E appears round seen from e.g. space (where a human cannot go) or on photos taken from space (photos are easy to manipulate), many persons believe there is an RE and ridicule persons suggesting the FE alternative. RE supporters seem blocked in their minds that there are alternative answers to many questions ... and get very upset.
Personally I just feel sorry for Buzz that is lying since 1969 to promote USA being no. 1 in space. 
I feel sorry for you too. Your head seems flat and void of anything.

Hm - question was on topic, i.e. Buzz arrives at 11 000 m/s speed into Earth atmosphere and I suggest he burns up and dies and cannot land and boast about having visited the Moon.

And I suggest that it's nothing more than an engineering problem.  A difficult problem, to be sure, but you have yet to give any reason that it should be an unsolvable one.

For anybody who'd like to check out some of the lunatic ideas that Heiwa (AKA Anders Bjorkman) propounds, check out his site HERE.

Be prepared though—you'll have to wade through literally hundreds of pages of utterly absurd pseudo-scientific and pseudo-engineering drivel.  Although some of his funnier stuff does lighten up an otherwise boring day.

What's even worse about Heiwa's repeated lies about Buzz Aldrin is the fact that as an academically unqualified, self-described "engineer", Heiwa is attacking Aldrin's legitimate credentials;  a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering,  and a Doctor of Science degree in astronautics from MIT.

On September 9, 2002, Aldrin was lured to a Beverly Hills hotel on the pretext of being interviewed for a Japanese children's television show on the subject of space.  When he arrived, Apollo conspiracy proponent Bart Sibrel accosted him with a film crew and demanded he swear on a Bible that the Moon landings were not faked, insisting that Aldrin and others had lied about walking on the Moon.  After a brief confrontation, in which Sibrel called him "a coward and a liar", Aldrin punched Sibrel in the jaw.  The police determined that Aldrin was provoked and no charges were filed.  Aldrin dedicates a chapter to this incident in his autobiography Magnificent Desolation.

  [—Extract BBC NEWS: 21 September, 2002, 07:01 GMT 08:01]

Heiwa is possibly the most renowned (infamous?) multiple-conspiracy theorist on the planet—flat or round LOL.

For anybody who'd like to check out some of the lunatic ideas that Heiwa (AKA Anders Bjorkman) propounds, check out his site HERE.

Be prepared though—you'll have to wade through literally hundreds of pages of utterly absurd pseudo-scientific and pseudo-engineering drivel.  Although some of his funnier stuff does lighten up an otherwise boring day.

What's even worse about Heiwa's repeated lies about Buzz Aldrin is the fact that as an academically unqualified, self-described "engineer", Heiwa is attacking Aldrin's legitimate credentials;  a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering,  and a Doctor of Science degree in astronautics from MIT.

Quote

On September 9, 2002, Aldrin was lured to a Beverly Hills hotel on the pretext of being interviewed for a Japanese children's television show on the subject of space.  When he arrived, Apollo conspiracy proponent Bart Sibrel accosted him with a film crew and demanded he swear on a Bible that the Moon landings were not faked, insisting that Aldrin and others had lied about walking on the Moon.  After a brief confrontation, in which Sibrel called him "a coward and a liar", Aldrin punched Sibrel in the jaw.  The police determined that Aldrin was provoked and no charges were filed.  Aldrin dedicates a chapter to this incident in his autobiography Magnificent Desolation.

  [—Extract BBC NEWS: 21 September, 2002, 07:01 GMT 08:01]

Heiwa is possibly the most renowned (infamous?) multiple-conspiracy theorist on the planet—flat or round LOL.

You literally posted all of this, except the Aldrin excerpt, which is interesting, 2 days ago.  No need to spam the fora.