A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Shuttle
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[51-L] More Feynman, & etc.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 8th 03, 04:54 AM
Jon Berndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [51-L] More Feynman, & etc.

MR. FEYNMAN: There is another possibility for a transient; the O-rings don't have good resilience when they are cold, and the first bit of gas that comes in gets through and makes the black smoke. And then it becomes warmer, it takes time, but it goes through where the metal is cold, and it has to warm up the metal.

I am not sure myself, and I don't know how long it should take, but warm up the piece of rubber, and then the rubber expands, fills the hole. But in the meantime, putty and junk has gotten in, and it is not really a perfect seal. It just seems to work for a while, but it gradually leaks and finally breaks down.

DR. LUCAS: I think that is a plausible scenario.

....

MR. FEYNMAN: Suppose that we do seem to all agree and that we have established something, which is that the black smoke appears to come from a region which is the same region as the flame later comes from the rocket. Nobody is proposing that that is a mere coincidence.

So if I have understood our situation, to take a very elementary view without solving too many problems at once, axiom one, you have got to explain the black smoke. After that, the rest of the problems will be less important.

How long does it take before the other thing comes out and so on are clues perhaps to the mechanism of the black smoke, but are not as essential. I mean, they are just helpers.

Is that true? Is that the viewpoint we are taking, that it can't be a coincidence that these things are in the same place?

DR. COVERT: I don't rule that out yet.

MR. FEYNMAN: Good, I am glad to hear there is somebody still thinking because I have ruled it out.

(Laughter.)

----------------- *** -----------------

John Thomas Maxson claims that the flare seen on many cameras was not really a flare at all:

"I discredit your "*huge* flare" on page 86, and many times thereafter. I believe that it was carefully *inserted* during enhancement, as a perfect, gradually-increasing, computer-generated ellipse. Anyone who doubts this need only examine the pertinent images in the Rogers Summary under a good magnifier. I do not ignore the period in question -- far from it. I simply use footage from *many* different cameras to help explain what actually happened during that interval."

The problem for him is, the blowtorch flare is visible in all views where the aft field joint is in view. There are no movies of a pristine aft field joint with no blowtorch after T+59 seconds.

I mentioned in a past post the photo evidence of black smoke (as Mr. Feynman, above, pursues with interest). John Maxson's reply was:

No one disputes (1) above, so why include it? And (2) above sounds like:

Masked Man (the Lone Ranger): See O-ring smoke, Tonto?

with my response being similar to:

Faithful Indian companion Tonto: See smoke, Kemosabe. No see O-ring smoke.

Question: Why did Feynman view the black smoke with interest, and John Maxson makes jokes about its _insignificance_?

----------------- *** -----------------

There will also be mention of "Oversoul" and his review of John Maxson's book. There is an excellent commentary on that review here, which sheds more light on some of the inaccuracies in "Betrayal", as relayed by Oversoul:

http://tinyurl.com/ml6b

Jon



  #2  
Old September 8th 03, 04:55 PM
John Maxson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [51-L] More Feynman, & etc.

Jon Berndt wrote in message
...
MR. FEYNMAN: Suppose that we do seem to all agree and that

we have established something, which is that the black smoke

appears to come from a region which is the same region as the

# VVVV (pure assumption)

flame later comes from the rocket.

# AAAA (pure assumption)

The problem for him is, the blowtorch flare is visible in all views where

the aft field joint is in view. There are no movies of a pristine aft field

joint with no blowtorch after T+59 seconds.

# You can start by proving that about TV-2, the video which you and
# Balettie have decided to remove from his libeling web page.

# --
# John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
# Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

  #3  
Old September 9th 03, 03:06 AM
John Maxson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [51-L] More Feynman, & etc.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."

Dr. Richard Feynman

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight Greg Kuperberg Space Shuttle 55 July 30th 03 11:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.