A google search says the Van Allen belt is composed of high energy electrons.

The thing about electrons is they don't penetrate very well. The walls of the spacecraft for Apollo or really any vehicle capable of space travel would easily block even hugely energetic electrons. When I say "hugely energetic" you also have to understand that this is huge on the scale of an electron, which has a mass around 10^-31 kg. More specifically, it has 0.0000000000000000000000000000009109 kg of mass, so even the most energetic electron isn't going to pass through a six inch steel plate.

Well everything is high energy electrons really, except ice or stone. The issue of importance is that is also highly radioactive and humans would not be able to travel through it with grave effects or taking the necessary precautions and Nasa is just realizing this - when Van Allen himself specifically warned Nasa about this in the 60s, pretty strange.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jun 6 2016 11:16pm

The first part is incorrect. Electrons actually LOSE energy by being part of atoms and molecules. Even ice is at a much lower energy state than any free electron floating through space. That's the whole reason they form bonds and molecules in the first place, to minimize energy.

Electrons are a form of radiation. You can have beta decay which results in a release of an electron. The Van Allen belt is an area dense with high energy electrons. You can shield radiation with thick, dense materials. Alpha radiation is the easiest to block (neutrons and protons), followed by beta (electrons), and gamma is the most difficult to block because it is a photon instead of a particle. The gamble was that the space shuttle would be naturally thick enough (since it has to withstand the outward pressure from the gas inside the space craft) that it would also act as a radiation shield. If you just do a google search (like I just did) you can actually find that NASA was aware of the issue since the 1950's.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 6 2016 11:18pm

Flat_sultan doesnt do google searches... Its all rigged!
He downloads info streight from his spirit friends as the voices kick in every night... After he watches the Pupper Show that is... To learn some more physics and math.

Regards,

Rekt

Next photo plz

Excellent video that has pretty much exactly what Card_Sultan wants. Mainly posting it because it's a cool video.

Well weight concerned thin metal space capsules aren't really qualified to be referred to as "Dense Materials" are they? If you just did a quick google search - how did Nasa address this issue, since your demanding evidence, so will I.

Oh and that video you posted is very nice - but notice how they never mention what focal length the lense is, which is obviously wide angle as you can actually see curve while its still on the ground, so that fact it sees curve in the air is hardly a surprise. More evidence to delude their child into heliocentric faith. I mean look at that huge curve when the camera is only a few hundred feet up in the air - completely hilarious when you actually understand the methods of deceit.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jun 7 2016 12:15am

It doesn't take a very thick layer of a dense material to block an electron. Electrons repel other electrons. Even if you had a very high energy electron hit a metal surface it wouldn't really do anything since the metal surface is made of billions of electrons that will literally throw the intruder in the opposite direction.

I just like that video. There are plenty more you can look up, and of higher quality. The easiest way to see the curvature of Earth is to watch a large ship disappear off the horizon, bottom first, using binoculars. Or you can do it the opposite way and go out to sea on a boat and watch the buildings you move away from disappear bottom to top.

I just want to interject with the proposal that the light from celestial bodies coming into the atmosphere may actually be reduced from their energy states into a more primitive light once they refract and converge upon the solid plasma semisphere.


http://news.mit.edu/2014/plasma-shield-against-harmful-radiation-1126

“It’s like looking at the phenomenon with new eyes, with a new set of instrumentation, which give us the detail to say, ‘Yes, there is this hard, fast boundary,’” Foster says.

Well since you wont post any video of where you got your description of the Van Allen Belt, Ill assume it was from Wiki that simply describes it as charged electrons, and in this day of information where ironically people only read a few words in a paragraph, I will make note of this interesting fact they also mention:

"The belts endanger satellites, which must protect their sensitive components with adequate shielding if they spend significant time in the radiation belts. In 2013, NASA reported that the Van Allen Probes had discovered a transient, third radiation belt, which was observed for four weeks until destroyed by a powerful, interplanetary shock wave from the Sun."

Um really, they just discovered a third belt , that total blew up a satellite - from a shock wave from the sun? Um wtf - yeah - they really went to the moon only 11 years after the whole program was formed, the Government can hardly even get a website running properly in 11 years, let alone go to the moon.
yet we are totally programmed into blindly accepting their art as reality.

As for the ship going over the horizon thing, I think your describing it slightly wrong - it was always used as a proof for curvature, as in you can't see it because its gone over the curve, but you can use binoculars to bring it back into view. But while Binoculars allow you to extend your view of the horizon, they also "focus" Light rays which skew your perspective in that all those light rays from the water are now building up a wall of water which make you think your still seeing curve and this is a giant trick of focusing optics - that its not actually focusing the view but concentrating the light.