Paul Attivissimo, with the contribution of Ka9q.net . The article was updated after initial publication.
In television footage of the second lunar excursion Dave Scott and Jim Irwin during the Apollo 15 mission, there is a phenomenon that, according to supporters of the thesis of staging shows that the images were shown in a movie set, because the American flag planted in the moon moves in spite of Scott, who has gone before, has not touched. The phenomenon is documented by videos like this, which takes place at about 2:35 from the beginning.
The impression you get from this video footage is that the flag has been hit by the blast due to the passage of the astronaut in its vicinity. But there is no atmosphere on the moon, and then (according to lunacomplottisti) this phenomenon shows that the shots were not made on the ground selenic but in an environment where there was air, revealing the fiction.
The thesis of the flag that flies or moves is often supported by reference to other pictures, but where it is clear that the visual effect of the flapping is due to the fact that the cloth was supported by a horizontal bar or to the fact that the astronauts were moving l'asta per conficcarla. Qui, invece, la tesi sembra più robusta: la bandiera è già stata piantata e non sembra esserci alcun contatto nell'istante in cui il suo angolo inferiore destro inizia ad oscillare leggermente. Il caso è intrigante e merita quindi un approfondimento. Cominciamo dai fatti.
L'evento avviene a 148 ore, 57 minuti e 15 secondi dopo il lancio dalla Terra, secondo la cronologia della missione, ed è discusso dall'Apollo Lunar Surface Journal in questa pagina , nella quale si fanno varie ipotesi sulla sua causa.
Scott potrebbe aver sfiorato l'angolo della bandiera con il proprio braccio sinistro o calciato della sabbia lunare che ha colpito il drappo o urtato l'asta. In alternativa, i suoi passi potrebbero aver prodotto vibrazioni nel terreno che si sono trasmesse all'asta oppure la sua tuta poteva aver accumulato una carica elettrostatica che ha attratto il materiale del drappo. Inoltre lo scarico gassoso degli apparati di regolazione della temperatura della tuta, presenti nello zaino della tuta, potrebbe aver raggiunto la bandiera. Secondo l'ALSJ, l'ipotesi più plausibile è quella del contatto, nonostante le apparenze.
La scena è documentata non solo dal video, ma anche da una serie di fotografie in bianco e nero scattate da Irwin negli istanti che precedono il movimento del drappo. Le foto sono classificate con le sigle AS15-92-12447 , 12448 , 12449 , 12450 and 12451.
The most significant of these images is 12447, which depicts the salute to the flag of Jim Irwin and shows the camera position with respect to the flag. The camera (shown below the arrow) was mounted on the Rover, the car power used during some of Apollo lunar missions (those from 15 onwards), and was directly controlled by radio from Earth.
Based on these facts we can analyze the situation. 12447
It can be noted that the camera was not far from the flag: using the width of the Rover (183 cm ) as a reference and with the inevitable approximate due to perspective, we can estimate that the distance from the camera of the flagpole was equal to about two widths of the Rover, and about 4 meters.
By comparing this image with the corresponding moment of filming, we see that the flagpole is framed for his full height, that the documentation appears to be about 2.4 m before being planted to nine inches high, and above it there is still room in the frame.
The zoom lens of the camera was then adjusted to a position rather wide, which exaggerates the perspective: a small change in distance results in a significant difference in apparent size. This can be seen, for example, by comparing one frame of that video sequence in which an astronaut is close to the flag, including the flag and the camera, and a frame that is on the opposite side of the flag with respect to the camera.
12,447 can be drawn on the picture the top and bottom margins of the frame and the optical axis of recovery.
If you now move the figure of the astronaut (taken from 12,449 photos) in a position where it would be in contact with the flag and the nearest the camera, we get this result:
In other words, and always with due caution arising dall'approximation, if the astronaut had been in a position at a distance such as to knock the bottom corner banner, the camera would broadly framed from the top of the helmet to the knee. It is in fact a result very similar to that observed in the frames of the passage of Scott at the time charged, bearing in mind that the camera is raised slightly from the moment of greeting.
It is therefore plausible (but unproven) that because of perspective distortion wide-angle lens produced Scott, when passing in front of the camera just before the flag is moving, the flag is closer than it looks visually, and then he touched the left arm.
This hypothesis is supported by the fact that only the lower right corner of the flag moves, the rest of the cloth does not move. The same applies to the horizontal bar from which it rises and the vertical shaft. The hypothesis of lunacomplottista
blast, however, is belied by a simple argument: covering the complete video sequence (available for example in the Spacecraft Films DVD) note that the two astronauts will spend more time close the flag. If their passage was enough to create a blast in the offending scene, it would have been in other times of the video in which pass close to the flag. But in other passages, during the same uninterrupted sequence (for example at 2:10 or so), the cloth does not move at all.
Moreover, as noted the comments below, the full sequence (which - it should be noted - it is one continuous shot) you notice that the lunar dust kicked by astronauts falls to the ground without forming spirals, with the characteristic behavior of the regolith in the absence of air, already seen about the traces of the rover. This is another indication that images were taken in a vacuum and not in a set containing air.
This case, although it is not resolved beyond all doubt, highlights the fundamental error of lunacomplottismo and many other conspiracy theories: the idea that one tiny detail unusual in some way offsets disappear and make the entire mountain of facts and documents confirming the reality of the events that the plot is so determined to deny, and that if a phenomenon has a range of possible explanations for perfectly sensible and consistent, for some strange reason it is necessary to embrace only the foolish ignore that fits preconceived thesis .
0 comments:
Post a Comment