On Dec 22, 12:31 am, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Dec 21, 11:05 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:

You are 4 orders of magnitude off. shrug

Oh, so now you know the conditions better than the spacecraft designed
to measure them?

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/ace_rtsw_data.html
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/

You are encouraged to show this 10/cm^3 of data. shrug

Look up, dip****. The links containing the data were JUST given to
you. Is there a particular reason you are unable to click links?

OK, dipsh*t. All the data shows protons with energy of greater than
47Kev. Wikapedia article specifically spells out for 1Kev.

Since you are incapable of doing the work yourself, I'll hold your
hand and direct you to the exact pages that have the current solar
wind conditions @ L1. If you can be bothered to look in the archives,
they have data going back for YEARS.

You deliberately twist the data around to perpetuate your lies. You
can never be an honest scientist. You can never be trusted. The rest
of garbage snipped.

On Dec 22, 12:07 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Dec 22, 12:31 am, Eric Gisse wrote:

On Dec 21, 11:05 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
You are 4 orders of magnitude off. shrug

Oh, so now you know the conditions better than the spacecraft designed
to measure them?

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/ace_rtsw_data.html
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/

You are encouraged to show this 10/cm^3 of data. shrug

Look up, dip****. The links containing the data were JUST given to
you. Is there a particular reason you are unable to click links?

OK, dipsh*t. All the data shows protons with energy of greater than
47Kev. Wikapedia article specifically spells out for 1Kev.

Gosh, I should have known a page with tables and links is too much for
you to handle without guidance. I have noone to blame but myself.

Let's look at the technical data regarding the MTOF proton monitor
aboard the SOHO craft.

http://umtof.umd.edu/pub/pm1.html

The only part relevant to your unending confusion is this: "PM accepts
ions from 0.3 to 6 keV/e with a minimum 2-dimensional angular
acceptance of ±15° and a geometry factor of 1 x 10-4 cm2."

What about the ACE craft? The relevant instrument being used is
SWEPAM.

http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/ace/swepam.html

The SWEPAM instrument can only measure ions with energies between 0.26
to 35 KeV.

We could go look at the SIS/EPAM high energy proton data, but that
would be a separate issue that isn't related to the solar wind since
the energies are far, far higher than is possible for solar wind. We
can do that if you'd like, though, because the flux is measured
directly and is relevant to the discussion.

So not only are the proton meters measuring proton energies over a
large range that covers the solar wind, but it _can't_ do valid
science on your claimed 47 KeV protons. The data from ACE and SOHO is
thus the solar wind data, as claimed.


Since you are incapable of doing the work yourself, I'll hold your
hand and direct you to the exact pages that have the current solar
wind conditions @ L1. If you can be bothered to look in the archives,
they have data going back for YEARS.

You deliberately twist the data around to perpetuate your lies. You
can never be an honest scientist. You can never be trusted. The rest
of garbage snipped.

Once again I have supported my position with the instrumentation data
and specifications, and all you have is "Wikipedia says...". Would you
like to revise your position or find a new way to deny the data? I do
hope your next denial is a little better than a deliberate
misunderstanding of the instrument energies and a vague reference to
Wikipedia.

I mean, damn. All you had to say was "oops" and revise your opinion.
But instead, you have to make yourself look very, very stupid. But
then again, you are used to that, aren't you?

On Dec 22, 10:24 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Dec 22, 12:07 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:

OK, dipsh*t. All the data shows protons with energy of greater than
47Kev. Wikapedia article specifically spells out for 1Kev.

Gosh, I should have known a page with tables and links is too much for
you to handle without guidance. I have noone to blame but myself.

Let's look at the technical data regarding the MTOF proton monitor
aboard the SOHO craft.

http://umtof.umd.edu/pub/pm1.html

The only part relevant to your unending confusion is this: "PM accepts
ions from 0.3 to 6 keV/e with a minimum 2-dimensional angular
acceptance of ±15° and a geometry factor of 1 x 10-4 cm2."

What about the ACE craft? The relevant instrument being used is
SWEPAM.

http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/ace/swepam.html

The SWEPAM instrument can only measure ions with energies between 0.26
to 35 KeV.

We could go look at the SIS/EPAM high energy proton data, but that
would be a separate issue that isn't related to the solar wind since
the energies are far, far higher than is possible for solar wind. We
can do that if you'd like, though, because the flux is measured
directly and is relevant to the discussion.

So not only are the proton meters measuring proton energies over a
large range that covers the solar wind, but it _can't_ do valid
science on your claimed 47 KeV protons. The data from ACE and SOHO is
thus the solar wind data, as claimed.

I have listened to your whining for quite sometime, and none of the
articles you have provided contradicts with the Wikapedia article on
the solar wind. The following site which you quoted only provided
data with protons of greater than 47KeV. Again, that does not refute
the Wikapedia article on the solar wind.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/ace_rtsw_data.html

My calculation stands, and my assessment on the radiation level the
Apollo astronauts still sands. With 20KJoul per year of protons
hitting the Apollo command modules, the astronauts would not stand a
chance to live as healthily as Aldrin, Armstrong, etc. You are
checkmated for many times already. Be a man and accept the logical
conclusion.

On Dec 22, 10:17 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:24 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:



On Dec 22, 12:07 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
OK, dipsh*t. All the data shows protons with energy of greater than
47Kev. Wikapedia article specifically spells out for 1Kev.

Gosh, I should have known a page with tables and links is too much for
you to handle without guidance. I have noone to blame but myself.

Let's look at the technical data regarding the MTOF proton monitor
aboard the SOHO craft.

http://umtof.umd.edu/pub/pm1.html

The only part relevant to your unending confusion is this: "PM accepts
ions from 0.3 to 6 keV/e with a minimum 2-dimensional angular
acceptance of ±15° and a geometry factor of 1 x 10-4 cm2."

What about the ACE craft? The relevant instrument being used is
SWEPAM.

http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/ace/swepam.html

The SWEPAM instrument can only measure ions with energies between 0.26
to 35 KeV.

We could go look at the SIS/EPAM high energy proton data, but that
would be a separate issue that isn't related to the solar wind since
the energies are far, far higher than is possible for solar wind. We
can do that if you'd like, though, because the flux is measured
directly and is relevant to the discussion.

So not only are the proton meters measuring proton energies over a
large range that covers the solar wind, but it _can't_ do valid
science on your claimed 47 KeV protons. The data from ACE and SOHO is
thus the solar wind data, as claimed.

I have listened to your whining for quite sometime, and none of the
articles you have provided contradicts with the Wikapedia article on
the solar wind. The following site which you quoted only provided
data with protons of greater than 47KeV. Again, that does not refute
the Wikapedia article on the solar wind.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/ace_rtsw_data.html

Nowhere in the SWEPAM data are the claimed 47 KeV protons. If you are
looking at the SIS or EPAM data, you are doing it wrong because
protons of those energies simply do not come from the Sun. I don't
care if Wikipedia says the sun spews a huge flux of MeV protons - it
is completely irrelevant because it is a secondary source. I am citing
the primary source of which Wikipedia is based: the actual spacecraft
data which samples the solar wind.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/MAG_SWEPAM_7d.html

The instrument is the SWEPAM, the specifications of which were just
given to you. The instrument CANNOT SEE 47KeV protons. Nowhere on the
ACE page does it say that the SWEPAM instrument is observing protons
with 47KeV energies. In fact, the only mention of the claimed 47 KeV
protons are on EPAM data which is completely irrelevant to the solar
wind.

You were also given the SOHO proton meter data. SOHO doesn't even /
have/ instruments that can sample these claimed 47KeV protons - the
energy cap for the MTOF proton meter is a full 10 KeV lower.


My calculation stands, and my assessment on the radiation level the
Apollo astronauts still sands. With 20KJoul per year of protons
hitting the Apollo command modules, the astronauts would not stand a
chance to live as healthily as Aldrin, Armstrong, etc. You are
checkmated for many times already. Be a man and accept the logical
conclusion.

I hand you the instrument data and specifications which disprove your
assertions, and you STILL think you are right when your only reference
is Wikipedia. Why don't you "be a man" and stop lying and bull****ting
when you are proven wrong?

On 21 Dec, 13:09, nonsense wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:49 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
[...]
That is from the Cosmic Ray only. *shrug
What do you believe the exposure near the moon to
be, and based on what?
Try 300,000 RADs per year. *Remember that the command capsule has a
shield of 0.3g/cm^2.
...and where did you get the first number, exactly?
Are you going to be your typical self and refuse to cite your sources?
What sources? He's self-referential.

Try these:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...trostatics.htm
http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/books/apollo/S2ch3.htm

Sure they were on only a short visit; maybe they had something
better than a skin-cream for the beach, though!
--
foolsrushin.

On Dec 27, 10:47 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Dec 27, 9:43 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:

How many times do I have to tell you that the data from the articles
you have brought up does not contradict my post referencing to the
Wikipedia article.

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...9ae092a3a8a71a

It is time for you to behave professionally for a change.

LIAR

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/MAG_SWEPAM_7d.html

Absolutely not a liar.

From the same website,

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/ace_rtsw_data.html

It shows as described below that there are a little bit under 2000
protons per cm^2 with energy of 47KeV to 68(?)KeV.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/EPAM_7d.html

You need to stop whining and stop lying for a change. With a flux of
20KJoul of protons per meter squared per year, there is no chance
anyone can get to the moon and come back as healthy as Niel Armstrong,
Buzz Aldrin, etc. Now, get lost.