So, with your degree in math and physics, can you explain how a metal vehicle, the size of a car, shaped like a cone:
1/ fell through the atmosphere at thousands of miles per hour, with absolutely no fins or vanes and did not topple like a tumbling hat, but.... fell perfectly with the "heat shield" facing the direction of travel... This happened perfectly "every" time.
First I will tell you why. Very simple, aerodynamics. The same reason why a plane doesn't "tumble through the air like a top hat" is the same reason why the cone shaped reentry module didn't tumble through the air like a top hat.
Lets have some fun with science. For this, You need to design a simple cone. Grab an index card and some glue or tape. Make a funnel by rolling the edges of the card around any of the corners. Glue or tape it then cut the remaining excess so that you have a nice cone.
Now, find a very thin long needle and punch the needle through the center of the cone so that you essential make a weather vane. it will look similar to the "last" pic of this windsock
IN fact, a windsock also answers your question in reverse. But alas, lets stick to your original question why the "cone" doesn't tumble through the reentry like a top hat.
Now, make sure your cone can "easily" pivot around the needle 360 degrees. Now grab a fan and place the cone in front of the fan., Feel free to position the cone at different angles such that fan initially strikes the cone from the sides. What you will notice is that the flow of air around the cone will create a lift force that will point the cone directly INTO the fan.
Just like a windsock will always orient into the direction of the wind that is blowing.
But but but... when you reenter the atmosphere it's like a vacuum there isn't a lot of air....
True, there isn't a lot of air... but there is ENOUGH air. the stray air particles striking the cone at thousands of miles per hour have the net effect of "alot of air" and result in that flow force bending around the cone that orients the cone into the direction that the cone is traveling.
You can do this experiment ad nasuem as many times as you like in your home until you understand some basic air flow dynamics.
So, with your degree in math and physics, can you explain how a metal vehicle, the size of a car, shaped like a cone:
2/ Had a heat shield on the bottom that glowed red hot from the friction while three men sat inches away and were not affected by the incredible heat being generated? How do you dissipate that much heat from a metal object in that short of a distance from the heat source.... Hint: think frying pan.
The answer is due to heat transfer, conductivity, insulation, dissipation... First, let me tell you something about nature. Everything in nature, every force, every energy state is essentially very very lazy. IN general, they all follow the path of least resistance. Another principle in terms of transfer of things like "heat" is that it requires a medium. The heat energy needs a carrier to take it from one location to another. On earth, we are familiar with more physical carriers like air molecules and water molecules or ever direct surface contact which enables the direct transfer of that heat energy (there are other carriers but I'm limiting it to this for the sake of discussion and not to write a book here)...
Now, an interesting thing happens when you are dealing with super sonic air flow. You get shock waves which essentially can be thought of as regions that result in drastically different aerodynamics. One side effect of properly utilized shockwave fronts is insulation from heat. That is, you create regions in which the convective transfer of heat is greatly reduced and hindered.
Lastly, you have dissipation, taking heat energy and dumping it somewhere else. If you have a hot mug of tea on a cold day and your hands are cold and you wrap your hands around the mug the heat readily flows from the hot mug into your cold hands.
So, combining all of the above is how the astronauts heat shield works. The supersonic air flow creates a shockwave which results in a layer of insulation. THe remaining heat hits the heat shield but due to design that heat is carried away and dumped away from the astronauts. There are other layers of insulation which severely effects heat flow slowing it down long enough for the astronauts to make it through.
Have you ever seen someone walk on burning coals? Think about it. The coals are hundreds of degrees hot, hot enough to burn your skin right? Well, there is only a "thin" layer of ash between your foot and the coals. So how is it possible to walk on the coals without burning your feet?
Similarly principle.
There was a special ablative heat shield. Back in the 60s there was a great publicity shot of a kitten sitting over a roaring bunsen burner, with only a thin heat shield in between. The kitten felt no heat at all.
.
thanks for the assist. If that conceptual image doesn't help him understand than I don't know what to say.
Here is a picture of someone holding a bunsen burner up against a piece of aerogel with their hand on the other side in direct contact. Similar principle
Well, they must have been brilliant back then as they went to the moon with a computer that was smaller than the calculators kids use today.
Not to mention that, when asked, on record, a NASA astronaut said that they cannot go to the moon today because......"we have lost that technology".
.
I apologize for sounding condescending, but I find that the average person does not understand how truly brilliant the scientific minds of the past were and how smart scientists are in general.
I wish there was a "scientific history" course because there are so many amazing achievements made by mental giants of the past that the public does not properly appreciate.
Did you know that as far back as the 1600s they managed to calculate the diameter of the moon to within 1% accuracy? Or that in the 1700s they managed to predict the orbit of comets that pop in and out of our solar system?
Yes, the minds working at NASA (and any other scientific org worldwide) are brilliant. I don't know if you've ever been around someone who is brilliant, but it is a humbling experience. I worked with a man whose IQ was north of 170 and it was scary how insanely smart he was.
Back to sounding condescending, you need to put this "moon landing was fake" energy into actually studying the history of science.
This whole "Lost technology" argument is utter rubbish. Once you understand what science and technology are, then you'd understand you don't "lose" the secrets of going to the moon anymore than we'd lose the secret to building a skyscraper or designing an electronic circuit.
I will stop here. Got actual stuff to do and though this was fun, I'm done. Radagast did a fine job answering you. Similarly, in this age of google you can easily answer your own questions...
