Im stuck on what to get should I buy/make a gokart or should I buy a quad bike what will be more fun!!??
Question by rhys25690811234 | last reply
Does anybody know what the object in this photo is? The thing was in a box of stuff I got at an auction and neither myself or several friends know what it is for. It is 6" long and made of metal (I think it is brass) and is kind of heavy in my hand. The tip on the smaller end of it unscrews at the narrowest point and reveals a hollow shaft. Thx for your input!
Question by vjpcat | last reply
Hi everyone! Someone gave me a small electric project and one of the part is now broken:( Its part of a heart beat monitor... there was 2 tubes like like plug into the machine. How the machine worked ; When you were touching the 2 tubes with your hands, its automatically started to pulse light (in the 2 tubes) It then synchronise with your heart beat. Now, I cant figue out How a kind of neon like this could DETECT AND GLOW at the same time?!?!?! The two output connector ARE SHORTED TOGETHER! And the big question is: WHAT IS THIS part!! i would like to replace it. It doesnt look like a neon, not even a lamp! so...??? I think its a kind of laser diode inside. You dont see very well on the picture, but inside the white ring on the top of what i think maybe is a laser diode, is empty, theres a hole the rest of the white glass tube is empty. Its the top part of the tube (dont see in the picture) is broken.
Topic by johnybody | last reply
A friend gave this to me, wanted me to find out what it is. I have no idea, she was a bit creeped out by it. It's small, as you can see, sitting on counter in front of coffee pot. When it sits right side up, it looks like a goats head, and upside down it looks like an old man with beard. Someone suggested to me that it could be an end to a samurai sword, however I think that is incorrect. What do you guys think?
Question by SandyF42 | last reply
Can anyone tell me what this tool is for? I came across it all rusted and thought it was some type of pliers or cutter. After I cleaned it up I could tell it was probably neither. What I thought was a plier jaw is actually one piece and does not close and what i thought maybe the cutting blade, actually had lines and numbers, like a ruler. The one small screw that the spring is attached to, will allow you to adjust how far the jaw/cutter will close and the other screw, when loosened a bit allows you to slide the little metal 'arm' in or out, like a measuring template. It has some fancy designs on the handles as you can see and the only marking says "Made in Western Germany".
Question by millsy22 | last reply
Today, I had a clear out of the workshop (Okay, shed) and found this peculiar tool. It's being lingering around for years now, and I've never been able to figure out exactly what it is and where it came from. The orange thing pushes down and locks, and when it is at the bottom a tiny metal rod appears and dissapears again at the end of the white nozzle. It holds in place until you press the orange button, at which point it fires the orange thing out at a fairly high speed, and it stops when it reaches the end of the blue channel. If you cover over the nozzle, it fires very slowly, so it probably sucks air from there. Does anybody know what this tool is?
Question by Ikkalebob | last reply
I am building a hose extension. I have a garden hose hooked up to the house supply, the hose runs to the back yard where it connects to PVC fittings. The rest of the system is a series of sprinklers too complex to explain here. My question is, should I use glue or plummers tape to make each connection water tight? Thanks!
Question by TXTCLA55 | last reply
In the Physics topic on the EPR paradox, NachoMahma asked about wavefunctions and "collapse."Let's put aside the whole "collapse" issue -- not all physicists agree that it is a sensible concept. NM's comment has a link to the Measurement Problem, and I'm not a good enough theorist or philsopher to contribute to that argument.What is the wavefunction? "Is wavefunction only a convenient way to say it's located somewhere close to here, but we're not sure exactly where until we measure it?""At any particular point in time/space the object is in a definite spot with a definite set of properties, but we can only make a reasonable guess?"No. The wavefunction, spread out over all of space (I'm speaking non-relativistically here, but the formal interpretation applies to spacetime), is the fundamental "thing" in QM. "Objects" are wavefunctions. If the wavefunction is localized (non-zero for a small contiguous set of coordinates, zero everywhere else) then treating it like a particle makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn't; the thing behaves like a wave, showing diffraction, interference, and lots of other effects. My preference, when I talk about these things, is to just call them "quanta." They are not particles, they are not waves; they are their own kind of entity with well defined, if really hard to understand, behaviour.How do I get to that point? Well, quantum mechanics is one example of a "field theory" (electromagnetism is the most familiar classical field theory). The equations we write down (the Schrödinger equation non-relativisitically, the relativistic Dirac and Klein-Gordon equations) to describe how quanta behave are coupled partial differential equations (PDEs), which relate the values (and derivatives) of the field at every point in space to their evolution in time.A PDE which relates the time and spatial properties of a function is either a wave equation (if the solutions are sines and cosines) or a diffusion equation (if the solutions are exponentials). The Schrödinger equation is a wave equation, and we call the solutions wavefunctions. Electromagnetism also has a wave equation, which is how we get radio, light, etc.The difference is that the functions in EM are "real valued:" the value of the field at each point in space/time is a regular floating-point number (the "phase" in EM is determined by the relative values of the field and nearby points). The wavefunction is a '''complex valued''' field -- at each point in space/time, the field has both an amplitude and a phase (or equivalently a real and an imaginary component). This means that wavefunctions can interfere in ways more complex than simply "adding" or "subtracting", which can have quite interesting consequences.You get probabilities by taking the square (norm) of the wavefunction. This procedure gives you a real value, a probability, at each coordinate. When you make a measurement, those probabilities determine which coordinate value you see as the "location" of the quantum. The actual result is random, but that isn't because "we're not sure exactly." The quantum objective does not have a single coordinate location until we make the measurement.How that happens, whether by "collapse," "decoherence," "many worlds splitting" or something else, is a subject of intense philosophical and experimental argument.
Topic by kelseymh | last reply
My partner passed away last November and this was in his storage. I have been searching to try to find what it is and the company name Baulaser, but most of the results are in german. Please if anyone knows what this is, I would be so grateful.
Question by nvofmarin | last reply
What is this thing? I found this while hiking. It was half buried in the ground. It has two huge M20 Bolts, One is a left hand, And one is a right hand bolt. I suppose that it has soemthing to do with cars I have attached a couple pictures below. What is this?
Question by Yonatan24 | last reply
I am working on a project and saw this tool used in the instructable. It was used to cut wood (I'm using acrylic) but the author did not say what this hand tool is. I want to find one either in-store or online but I don't know what it would be called. It looks like some kind of coping saw but the blade looks different.
Question by Arya42 | last reply
I have been into rockets for a while now but am growing old of the model ones. i now wish to make my own, but am finding it hard to come across oxidizers. they seem to restrict everything now days because a bunch of cowards flew some planes into buildings in a country 9000kms from me(AUST). talk about game wreckers. what common household products have duel purposes?
Topic by QuestionableHat | last reply
There is a "rust movement" that seems to be in fashion these days. I understand that iron will rust but it seems to be made to happen a bit faster than normal in the dry Arizona desert. One picture is of a fence that has been finished for some time. The other is of a mail box that was just finished.
Question by onrust | last reply
Please excuse me, that was very impolite! - javax.servlet.ServletException: javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: ServletException in '/pages/forum/forum_layout.jspx': ServletException in '/pages/answer/answer_rightbar.jsp': java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException Exception javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: ServletException in '/pages/forum/forum_layout.jspx': ServletException in '/pages/answer/answer_rightbar.jsp': java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag$InsertHandler.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:923) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:457) at _jsp._pages._answer._answer__jsp._jspService(_answer__jsp.java:81) at com.caucho.jsp.JavaPage.service(JavaPage.java:60) at com.caucho.jsp.Page.pageservice(Page.java:570) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.PageFilterChain.doFilter(PageFilterChain.java:179) at com.caucho.server.webapp.DispatchFilterChain.doFilter(DispatchFilterChain.java:115) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletInvocation.service(ServletInvocation.java:229) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:485) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:350) at com.instructables.servlet.ActionServlet.sendToJspPage(ActionServlet.java:279) at com.instructables.servlet.ActionServlet.doGet(ActionServlet.java:87) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:115) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:92) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletFilterChain.doFilter(ServletFilterChain.java:106) at com.caucho.filters.GzipFilter.doFilter(GzipFilter.java:208) at com.instructables.filter.FilterWrapperFilter.doFilter(FilterWrapperFilter.java:47) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.FilterFilterChain.doFilter(FilterFilterChain.java:70) at com.instructables.filter.HibernateSessionRequestFilter.doFilter(HibernateSessionRequestFilter.java:48) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.FilterFilterChain.doFilter(FilterFilterChain.java:70) at com.instructables.filter.TemporaryProFilter.doFilter(TemporaryProFilter.java:77) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.FilterFilterChain.doFilter(FilterFilterChain.java:70) at com.instructables.filter.SecurityFilter.doFilter(SecurityFilter.java:212) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.FilterFilterChain.doFilter(FilterFilterChain.java:70) at com.instructables.filter.SetupFilter.doFilter(SetupFilter.java:68) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.FilterFilterChain.doFilter(FilterFilterChain.java:70) at com.caucho.server.webapp.WebAppFilterChain.doFilter(WebAppFilterChain.java:173) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletInvocation.service(ServletInvocation.java:229) at com.caucho.server.http.HttpRequest.handleRequest(HttpRequest.java:274) at com.caucho.server.port.TcpConnection.run(TcpConnection.java:514) at com.caucho.util.ThreadPool.runTasks(ThreadPool.java:527) at com.caucho.util.ThreadPool.run(ThreadPool.java:449) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595) Caused by: javax.servlet.ServletException: javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: ServletException in '/pages/answer/answer_rightbar.jsp': java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.handlePageException(PageContextImpl.java:1120) at _jsp._pages._forum._forum_0layout__jspx._jspService(_forum_0layout__jspx.java:286) at com.caucho.jsp.JavaPage.service(JavaPage.java:60) at com.caucho.jsp.Page.pageservice(Page.java:570) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.PageFilterChain.doFilter(PageFilterChain.java:179) at com.caucho.server.webapp.DispatchFilterChain.doFilter(DispatchFilterChain.java:115) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletInvocation.service(ServletInvocation.java:229) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:485) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:350) at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.include(PageContextImpl.java:933) at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.include(PageContextImpl.java:870) at org.apache.tiles.TilesUtilImpl.doInclude(TilesUtilImpl.java:143) at org.apache.tiles.TilesUtil.doInclude(TilesUtil.java:149) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag.doInclude(InsertTag.java:760) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag$InsertHandler.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:892) ... 32 more Caused by: javax.servlet.jsp.JspException: ServletException in '/pages/answer/answer_rightbar.jsp': java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag$InsertHandler.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:923) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:457) at _jsp._pages._forum._forum_0layout__jspx._jspService(_forum_0layout__jspx.java:243) ... 45 more Caused by: javax.servlet.ServletException: javax.servlet.jsp.el.ELException: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.handlePageException(PageContextImpl.java:1120) at _jsp._common._instruct_0meta__jsp._jspService(_instruct_0meta__jsp.java:393) at com.caucho.jsp.JavaPage.service(JavaPage.java:60) at com.caucho.jsp.Page.pageservice(Page.java:570) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.PageFilterChain.doFilter(PageFilterChain.java:179) at com.caucho.server.webapp.DispatchFilterChain.doFilter(DispatchFilterChain.java:115) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletInvocation.service(ServletInvocation.java:229) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:485) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:350) at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.include(PageContextImpl.java:933) at _jsp._pages._answer._answer_0rightbar__jsp._jspService(_answer_0rightbar__jsp.java:127) at com.caucho.jsp.JavaPage.service(JavaPage.java:60) at com.caucho.jsp.Page.pageservice(Page.java:570) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.PageFilterChain.doFilter(PageFilterChain.java:179) at com.caucho.server.webapp.DispatchFilterChain.doFilter(DispatchFilterChain.java:115) at com.caucho.server.dispatch.ServletInvocation.service(ServletInvocation.java:229) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:485) at com.caucho.server.webapp.RequestDispatcherImpl.include(RequestDispatcherImpl.java:350) at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.include(PageContextImpl.java:933) at com.caucho.jsp.PageContextImpl.include(PageContextImpl.java:870) at org.apache.tiles.TilesUtilImpl.doInclude(TilesUtilImpl.java:143) at org.apache.tiles.TilesUtil.doInclude(TilesUtil.java:149) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag.doInclude(InsertTag.java:760) at org.apache.tiles.taglib.InsertTag$InsertHandler.doEndTag(InsertTag.java:892) ... 47 more Caused by: javax.servlet.jsp.el.ELException: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at com.caucho.el.StaticMethodExpr.evalMethod(StaticMethodExpr.java:142) at com.caucho.el.FunctionExpr.evalObject(FunctionExpr.java:71) at _jsp._common._instruct_0meta__jsp._jspService(_instruct_0meta__jsp.java:346) ... 69 more Caused by: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1313.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585) at com.caucho.el.StaticMethodExpr.evalMethod(StaticMethodExpr.java:133) ... 71 more Caused by: java.lang.NullPointerException at com.instructables.sql.direct.HitLoggerSQL.getTopReferrers(HitLoggerSQL.java:317) at com.instructables.taglib.Functions.getTopReferrers(Functions.java:808) ... 75 more
Question by vishalapr | last reply
Question by ThomasW123 | last reply
Last Sunday, I posted my very first Instructable involving 3D printing. On Monday evening (yesterday), I also posted a very brief version of the I'ble on Thingiverse. The good thing for me was that the projects got featured on both I'bles and Thingiverse. What's not so good (according to me) is the viewcount: The project attracts more visitors on Thingiverse than on Instructables, where I'bles is the bigger website in visitor numbers by far. And the project was published on I'bles first and only a full day later on Thingiverse. I'm thinking that I'm doing something wrong in presenting my project on Instructables. Or is Instructables just not big on 3D printing yet? That can't be right :-). The project gets lost between so many other projects? But even then, 680 views for a featured I'ble is really low...) A penny for your thoughts! Thanks, Ynze
Topic by ynze | last reply
3D printers have seen insane amounts of attention in the past year with lots of stories coming out about how amazing they are. How they can make replacement parts for anything that breaks. How they’ll revolutionize manufacturing. How everyone will have one and they’ll do everything that you need ever. Long story short, 3D printers are pretty amazing, but they aren’t quite the miracle on a stick that the hype is pushing them to be. So let’s sift through and see what there really is to get excited about right now. Consumer 3D printers AKA what most people will be using The 3D printing that’s available to consumers right now is fused deposition modeling or FDM. These printers build up a model layer by layer by extruding ABS or PLA into the build area. It’s basically a much fancier version of a glue gun. A tiny glue gun controlled by a computer, that is. These 3D printers typically run $1k - $2k, but smaller ones can be had for as little as $200. The MakerBot Replicator 2 is the most popular printer of this kind, but there are dozens of others to choose from as well. With some fiddling and work you can pretty much print any shape that fits inside the build volume. So if the printer can fit it, you can make it. That’s simplifying it a bit (OK, a lot), but that’s the idea, and it’s a very cool idea. After some practice you can learn how to design new things like jewelry, ornaments, or toys. Since everything is printed out you can customize any piece that you’d like. Take a couple hours to learn 123D Design and you’ll start to have new things to print out. That’s the power of 3D printing right there. You can quickly go from an idea to a design and then to reality. Your skills in making things by hand don’t matter here. This is why it’s so amazingly helpful to use a 3D printer for prototyping your ideas. I recently worked on a flash drive case and the first model took about 2 minutes to design. After that it was about 15 minutes to print out on a Replicator 2. Then I tested it and adjusted the design for another print. I repeated the process a few times and within 2 hours I had a file that I was happy with. This is even better considering that I only spent about 20 minutes of those 2 hours actively working. The rest was spent on other non-related work. All about the materials So that’s the power of 3D printing. With services like 3D Creation Systems you can upload your file and get it printed on much fancier machines with better resolution. There’s no immediate gratification, but you still get a high-quality print quickly and access to more materials. Even with this expanded selection of printing materials, it’s still a very limited selection. If we were just to look at all the plastics out there we’d be here for days. There are thousands of them and that’s just plastics. There’s also wood and metal and more beyond that. Each different material in this insanely huge selection has a different quality to it. I’ve seen countless people print out items in ABS or PLA and complain about how their printer must not be working since the printed piece doesn’t work like the original. But of course we can’t recreate every item out there with a couple kinds of plastic. It's about using 3D printing with other tools The key forward in using 3D printing is to use it as an amazing new tool of forming great pieces to work alongside all the other great items and materials out there. Why bother making a weak spring out of plastic when you can drop in a metal spring? So 3D printing isn’t everything, but it can be used alongside most everything. It can get us where we want to go so much faster than before it’s ridiculous. But it’s still not the miracle on a stick, not the only tool we’ll ever need from here on out. When the hype dies down we won’t be looking on at amazement at something being 3D printed, we’ll be looking at lots of awesome new things that were made faster with the help of 3D printing. And that is going to be incredible.
Topic by fungus amungus | last reply
If we look up then seeing the moon is the most normal thing to us there is in the sky.But did you ever wonder how it actually got there? ;)Theories are out there by the lot, including those from real scientists.One of the most common is that it all started by catching the thing and that all was perfect at the time.Over time the orbit then stabilized.Other theories include that formed when our planet formed..What they all lack is what is common and true for all other moond out there: These rotate.According to science an object the size of our moon would need to rotate to maintain a stable orbit.No one told this to our moon, so it just stays in a stable orbit anyway.The only other accepted theory, that funny enough never mentioned OUR moon, is that the center of mass must be facing the orbiting planet.Now theories can run and wild if you let schientifically people loose on a subject.Official NASA data obtained by monitoring equippment on the moon supports the theory of the center of gravity.You see, sesmometers recorded "moon quakes" but also the impact of burnt rocket stages - the later were dropped on purpose.At first everyone agreed the equippment must be faulty but going through it again and again confirmed all works fine.So what got them so exited that was never officially made public?You see, every thing with suffient mass will create a sesmic shock on impact.On earth we can located the source of an earthquake or even explosion quite accurately.Same happened on the moon only with one difference to earth.Every impact caused a ringing effect.Like a bell, the soundwaves and shockwaves traveled through the moon for very long times.An early explanation was that the moon is made from really hard rock or that it might even have a metal core.This was rendered useless once the actual mass was calculated and it turned out the moon would rip us apart while spinning around us.The term "hollow moon" was born.Another interesting thing happens when you try to track down what equippment was left on the moon during which specific mission.Everything up there must have been installed at some stage.For some things though it seems there is no record when or where exactly something was left up there.Then there is the thing with the interviews...If you check the fuzz about the first moon landing then back then you couldn't help yourself but got exited as well.None of the three astronauts however appeared to be at least a little bit exited about going where no man has gone before.Somehow like visiting Iceland for the first time only to realise someone was there before you already.But it was the moon, not some easy to reach island...And while up there we did not see any exitement either, like fully staged and planned ahead.Like a not so 100% school rehersal.Claims that it was a fake and actually filmed in some studio have been verified to be false - they really were up there.After they came back two went silent and refused any interviews about the moon.All three though never spoke about anything we did not see on "live TV"...All the missing segments, the drop outs, the silence during communications...The money...Apart from the Pentagon making a disappearing act of 6Billion US, the already planned and staged moon missions were cancelled with no valid reason at all.One mission already ready to go to the launch pad, crew fully trained and briefed.Two more ready for final assembly.Official reason back then was "We have been there, it is time to explore new things."Almost the same statement was made by Obama a few weeks after he claimed "We will go up there again!".If you take away the costs for the abandoned missions then the money blown up to the moon has a huge difference to what can be tracked back.The lost sum equals out to about 8 more moon missions plus tons of state of the art equippment (back at the time it was state of the art).If you add what the Pentagon lost we are close to 15 more missions.The now...A few years back a lot of previously declared top secret documents have been released to the public.What was a good idea however turned out to be a bit too much.Quite a few documents were included that provide missing links to "incidents, missions, money spent"...Within these piles were documents indicating that space missions of the same extend as the much later moon missions were made.Same rockets, similar crafts, same requirements for water, food and oxygen, some though with just payloads of oxygen and water.Mind you though the documents speak from proposed options and not planned missions.And none of them had any exploration within it, just deliveries if you don't mind the comparison.Those documents about the ringing of the moon and how this would impact on the things we assumed to know about the moon were in there as well.What is really interesting though is what came back from the moon.None of it actually indicate that there is suffient ressources up there to justify mining.Funny enough exactly is planned on a military style.Seems fair enough considering the military can provide the best people for such a hard job.Some normal miner might have no problems getting under ground every day but knowing he is on the moon and might never make it back is another.With all the probing done that we know of you would assume the planned mining operations would be in an area rich in minerals, metals or at least something to generate fuel or oxygen.But no, it is planned to happen "on the dark side" and in an area that appearently was never explored in other ways then taking a few blurry pics while flying around the moon.However, both Russia and China claim to have been very close to this area long before details about the mining became public.And that brings us back to the past and what astromauts stated or to be precise refused to confirm or deny.In some videos we can see movements in the background.In several adio stream we hear the comments to what happens in the videos.If there is light moving around then it does not matter that is blue.You just wonder what it is and where it might have come from.Imagine the surprise if then in other videos you hear things like that the lights are back or that steam comes out of the moon like a gysir.There were official explanations for the first sightings made by the normal people when watching those videos on the NASA websites.Soon after the videos disappeared from the servers.Copies were made by the curious and quite a few videos were identified later to have contained "sightings" as well.Some even show what appears to flying machines with great manouverbilities.And if you take the high point of the happenings then it is also the same time when it was decided that we actually have no real interest in the moon.Astromauts later denied to have ever made any comments like that they are being followed or "escorted" by another craft.And the same Astromauts many years later still refuse to deny or confirm that what we could see and hear during their mission videos actually happened.Don't get me wrong but if the deny it then it just means we all saw some refections or such things.If the confirm it then we know something was out there with them.Doing neither usually means what we saw is ture enough to deny any knowledge about more details.Why then the sudden interest?Trump wants to get up there, military mining, private companies not to forget China.If there is nothing at all up there then why would they all spent money that could provide a much better living for those with low incomes?Even if it would be just for new schools and hospitals the money would be better spent if we trust the official claims about what is up there.The not so official claims....We already know NASA does not want to come with an official explanation why the moon sounds and reacts as if it would be hollow.Same for any video, audio or picture evidence indication there is sturctures on the moon or activities.Here is some of things that other people of great knowledge and with nice degrees under the belt say could, might or even is true about the moon.1. We have no evidence that the moon was always there, only what we have in record throughout history.Some claim the moon would be an artificially created structure.Indications of techonlogically highly advanced civilisations before us are there.And mining out a tiny planet and placing it in earths orbit is not far fetched if you consider higher technology levels than what we currently (officially) have.2. The satellite claim.Like the Death Star our moon could be an artifical satellite placed there for a purpose.What speaks for that theory is the impact craters on the moon.If it was never spinning or better rotating around all axis then a lot them would have been impossible.A crater always shows to some extend the direction of the impact.And on the moon they all apear to be direct and straight hits only.And even at some proper angle that against physics did not create a corresponding crater: Our plant would have been in the way.Officially it is claimed though that there would not be much of a directional crater because of the missing atmosphere and all debris settling evenly.Debris however does not explain the deformation from an impact at an angle.The satellite claim would also explain the missing depth in the craters.By the size of the bigger ones the crater should be much deeper and as said show some direction.If however the rocky surface landed there over time or is just the remaining natural hull then the craters could no go deeper.No advanced civilisation would design a stationary satellite that get a hole as soon as some big space rock hits it...3. Undocumented missions.If claims are true then we have been up there a lot more times than what our history lessons tell us.Tiny probes to analyse things, send data and so on are a thing not the the USA did.If you explain the reason for collecting seismic data by wanting to document an impact of an astroid then it is a joke.Sure it would be possible but what could we learn from the data?Nothing unless you consider that in some unoffial missions drilling was attempted on the moon.Sample collection to evaluate what is in the ground of use for future missions.Some documents now claim that all these attempts ended prematurely.Drills failed or broke, drill heads failed to go deeper and upon inspection were totally worn out.And all seemed to have happend at around the same depth.Although there is no atmosphere on the moon - if you stand on it you would be able to feel vibrations of the surface.Something astronauts would have felt during the drilling.And you can feel the difference between a vibration ending by stoping the drill and one that keeps going for a long time after...The dark side is visible in quite a few school books.Looks like the front with the brightness corrected just with different craters.Ever bothered to scan these pictures in and use some software to find matches to craters on the front of the moon ? ;)Anyways, those images show us the moon as near perfect sphere.What they don't show is how the images were actually made.They certainly did not use massive search lights from orbit to provide light for cameras.Means other sources were used, like IR, Radar, Microwaves and so on.Like we found the ruins of old civilisations by using satellites that can "see" through the forest and soil.And with that it would certainly be impossible to create such a nice and detailed image like we get from the front side.If some is edited, then why not all of it...And if all those missions we don't really know about also landed on the dark side it would explain a lot of things.All sightings seem to have disappeared to the dark side.And all leaked informations about previous missions before our first landing idicate the interest in the dark side was actually huge.They all ended though with one mission report claiming to have spotted lights on the dark side.Moving and stationary and when trying to get a better look by adjusting the orbit for the next round those lights were all gone.But audio recording indicate that from that moment on the astronauts were no longer alone and followed until turning back to earth.Several attempts seem to have been made to land near sightings on the dark side.Those where the astronauts returned home the never were the same again.Documents claim long treatment in mental facilites or suicide.The official missions appearntly started with the backstory of exploring.Some now claim it was attempt for a peaceful presence that still was not tolerated.4. Stories from involved companies.Even if NASA builds a craft themself they still need the corresponding supplies.And for a lot of things they are made outside by independent companies and contractors.Trying to track down early space mission again seems to confirm all claims about previous missions.The amount of materials provided would otherwise mean NASA actually crashed the majority of things right after take off without anyone noticing.5. Launches...So far all claims about previous moon missions or just secret ones were denied.I call this "plausible deniability".In all statements it is refered to the official launch sites.Things like being in public view and so on.What is not that commonly known is that there were a lot of capable launch sites available.After all big rockets have been tested in secrecy since we had the first.The claimed landing of the chinese started a big conundrum.At first the US claimed it never happened because there was no rocket that went up.Images prived by the chinese however clearly indicated the opposite.Not much later it was noticed that a few launches might have been misinterpreted as missle tests....What does that really mean?Quite simple: The surveillance is not perfect if the other side insists that it happened.The plausible deniablity is gone.If the US was "forced" to confrim they actually noticed the launches then it also means the chinese claims about the US doing the same could be true as well.And wasn't it a very important thing during the cold war to know when, where and why the other side launched anything?The silent agreement not to go up there again was broken many times...And although most if not all of these mission ended in orbit only it makes you wonder.What would be big deal even if all claims and conspiracies would be true?A hollow moon would defy what we know about how the universe works.With that it would also contradict some of solid laws of physics.So we need(ed) proof.Assuming we had that for a long time already then it leaves the big question of why it is hollow.Natural or artificial.Nothing natural would make sense so we investigate further.And if people still claim that they can use their little equippment to every now and then hear transmissions from the moon...Sure some things up there transmit data all the time but they do so on common frequencies and not in a range that is and never was used for long distance communications.The interest in the mon came back with our modern technology.We have watches with more computer power than what was used for the old moon missions.Materials and manufacturing methods that provide much safe crafts and space suits with a fraction of the weight of old designs.And we have new means of taking more or less limited energy up with us...We are prepared so to say.No matter what really is up there, no matter if it natural or artificial, just the fact that the moon is hollow changes our views on a lot of things....What do you think would be the best explanation for the data showing the moon rings like a bell?
Topic by Downunder35m | last reply
Ok, I have seen a lot of variants on potato cannons (here on instructables as well as all over the internet) and have a few questions: 1. What is the best best cannon design? 2. What is the best propellant? 3. What is the best ammo? 4. What is the best barrel size?
Topic by Valkyrie103 | last reply