Will
someone revise the school syllabus now? And the Facebook statuses...
I would have loved to keep it to myself,
but it’s funny how people think of Neil Armstrong as a legend. Well, as far as
I understand, he didn’t do anything extraordinary.
Please don’t frown! Neil Armstrong NEVER
landed on moon. Apollo moon landings were one of the biggest controversies of
all times, and of course, the best ones (They have managed to gain public
interest even after 4 decades). According to a survey, less than 10% of the
people have an idea about it.
The photographs claiming Apollo six-manned
landings were carefully observed and there are several simplistic and technical
discrepancies that prove that this was all a hoax. Nonetheless, NASA gave
very technical justifications for all these on news channels that time that
were equally convincing, but too arduous for me to write here.
But I want you to think over the following
points:
A space shuttle needs enormous, initial
thrust to gain velocity for the upward movement (and I presume we all know
that). There are support rockets attached, which get removed in the course
after the space shuttle reaches a specific height (The astrophysicists would
want to kill me after reading this convenient terminology). There’s a whole
station, the LAUNCH PAD that monitors all this (You must have seen this in
videos). In order to enter one celestial body from the other, the space shuttle
is made to follow an orbit. This can’t happen directly. So, after leaving
earth’s atmosphere, the space shuttle has to land along the moon’s orbit.
Did you ever think HOW the space shuttle
landed on the moon safely without a station, track and any one to monitor etc.
The shuttle should have had crashed. Or at least the the rocky surface of the
moon would have disturbed the shuttle structure. Had this been the case, a
slight disturbance would have violated laws of aerodynamics, making the next
flight impossible.
Even the present day technology lets the
space shuttles to land only on water bodies (I am sorry if you didn’t know
this) as there is NO MECHANISM that ensures safe landing of space shuttles on
the land. There’s a high risk of explosion and hence mission failure when
astronauts, who travel (just travel, not land on planets!) in the space
shuttles, enter the Earth’s atmosphere back (remember Kalpana Chawla and
Columbia?). How could NASA ensure safe, dual landing 40 years back?
Okay, they landed on moon safely! But when
they decided to come back, who provided them with the enormous thrust, angle
adjustments, etc. again? Please recollect the Newton’s third law of motion
(yeah…the one that says something about the equal and opposite reactions). The
shuttle can’t move upwards without exerting an equal force in the downward
direction. (Just as you use your hands to stand up, while you are sitting).
So not only did the shuttle land safely,
but somehow left the moon without a launch pad. This ain’t no funny! Don't
laugh. (I guess the person controlling the space shuttle had been to moon
before. He mastered the shuttle's behavior/dynamics in diametrical atmospheric
conditions.)
Aha! Another one. We landed on moon in
1960’s. Never after that? Why NASA? You couldn't make the travel
frequent and easier. Is there no one willing to land on the moon again? We
still send dogs, robots on other planets like Mars. If we could do it on the
moon, that to more than 4 decades back, why not Mars?
Well, I know, those who were unaware would
question, why would USA and NASA do that? There are many theories that explain
it, but I personally find the then competition against the Soviet Union as the
most justified one. You can read about them in various books.
Those who are still reading (and
understanding!) have to answer a simple question (yes, please mail me…). Who
was the first person to land on the moon?
The
‘penner’ of this piece mourns Mr. Armstrong’s death, but that won’t stop her
from writing the truth. She finds it crazy that she once won a quiz competition
at school, giving the wrong answer.