Spirituality of Science..

What is the relation between Science and Spiritual Philosophy?
Nowadays a craze hase been started to compare the parallels between Mystcism and Science..
As modern Science evolved With full swing the followers of the Modern Physics struck with the close resemblence between the bizarre concepts of Modern Physics and Spirituality..
The stock of infinite words became finite when the Modern Physics Tried to enter into the heart of mother nature..
The Only choice left was a language which flows as a fluid between the reality and spirituality..
There Comes the language of Philosophy...
People thought it is unusual.. They Stunned...
But if we analyse deeply.. The parallels are not Acciedental..
They are quite natural..
From One Golden Era the human brain started to evolve..
It tried to understand the truth by experience..
Human race tried to document each and every thing through experience..
But the problem with this kind of document was "non-reproducibility" of most of the part..
You cant experience the experience by reading About the experience..
Later on other problems added to this documentation of the truth by experience..
People tried to impose their experiences as absolute truth which must be followed by others..
The stronger race ruled weaker race by claiming their supiriority in their documentation of truth by experience..
But people started to oppose this slowly..
They thought these documentations of truth by experience are inadequate..
Everybody dont have the ability or the time to experience the truth..
The truth must be "accesible" and "available" all the time to all the people..
So they tried to find the truth and secrets of nature by "Expriments"..
"Well defined logics"...
They tried to formulate the "Experience into Experiments"..
Hence "Science "Evolved..
But as time passed some people thought that "The Science is absolute"..
Some people argued that spirituality is absolute..
Both forgot that their mission is to understand the truth..
Nowadays we humans are slowly realising the fact that "Science and Spirituality" are just different approaches to reach the truth..
Truth .. Which is "Natural"..
Truth .. Which is "Absolute"..
Truth .. which is "Beautiful"..
Truth .. which is "Simple"..!!

Fake of Fake Moon Part 7

Who filmed Neil Armstrong coming out of the Lunar Module when there was no-one on the surface to do this?

There was a video camera mounted and extended from the side of the landing module especially for this purpose. NASA anticipated that the moment that Armstrong stepped onto the Moon would be thought as being particularly significant and something everyone would want to see.
As Armstrong started down the ladder he remotely deployed it, swinging it out from its storage position in the side of the module. Note how the left hand side of the video image is obscured by both the side of the Lunar Module and the arm of the storage compartment that lowered it. (The horizontal black bar across the middle is interference flickering across the TV screen it was filmed off.)
The way the camera was mounted meant that these first pictures were actually upside-down and had to be flipped over once received on Earth. The same camera was then removed and used to send video pictures of the rest of the lunar activities from a stand on the lunar surface.

Great News for Students..

Hi..

This is ekhagola and I am your ekhagoli Once again..

I recieved many questions related to astronomy after I published this blog.

Thank you one and all for your support.

If you are a student intrested trully in writing short science(Articles On Astronomy are Preffered) articles then ekhagola and khagola is going to provide you an International Stage!

From Now onwards you could be a part of ekhagola author team..

All you Have to do is..

1) Learn about creating a e-blog and publishing post in a blog..

2)Write an article(Short or long) in Microsoft Word with your name, Education Qualification, Educational Institution, Your Teacher's name and address in either Kannada(for http://khagola.blogspot.com/ ) or in English(for http://ekhagola.blogspot.com/ ) and send it to meethariprasad@gmail.com

3) Write whatever you want, Don't hesitate to write. Forget about the quality,quantity etc.!!We will guide you.

By evaluvating the articles and the provided details we will intimate within 7 days about your application status.

Don't miss this great oppourtunity to be a part of this revolution!!

Hurry Up!!

Fake of Fake of Moon-Part 6

This picture and other filmed footage of the American flag on the moon seems to show it fluttering. How is this possible if there's no atmosphere or wind on the moon?










This is one of the most common questions about the Apollo landings and is often used as evidence of a hoax. Fortunately there is nothing peculiar about what we can see here at all. Not if we remember this is happening on the moon.
Firstly the flag had a horizontal bar attached to it at the top. This was done so that the flag would stand out from the flagpole. NASA appreciated that there would be no wind on the moon, so any normal flag would just hang limply and unattractively down the pole. To make things look better they added a bar that stood out at 90 degrees from the pole. The flag was really hanging from this, rather than from the pole. The bar was also not quite the full width of the flag, so that it was slightly furled to give a 'wave look' to it.
The moon's surface, once you get past the thin layer of dust, is very hard. So getting the flagpole to stick in was a tough job. The footage shows the astronaut twisting the pole back and forth in order to try and get it further into the ground. This movement made the attached bar and flag flutter.
The flagpole itself was light aluminium that is quite springy. Even once the astronaut let go the pole would continue to vibrate. This in turn would shake the bar and flap the flag. Without any air to dampen this it would continue to do so for longer than you might expect.

Fake of Fake Moon 5

Why doesn't the dust stay in the air longer than in earth? Surely with the less gravity it would float around for ages?
This is one of the most common reasons for confusion and claims of hoaxery. Let's get straight two basic facts;
Dust does not float in a vacuum. The only reason it 'floats' on Earth is because of the air that surrounds it. In a vacuum dust behaves exactly like any other object. You throw it up and it will then fall. It is no different from what a rock would do. Rocks do not float or billow around nor does the dust, even if it is lighter.
Because there is no air, dust falls quicker on the moon than on Earth. This may seem strange, as the Moon's gravity is much less. But the lack of an atmosphere is far more significant to the dust. But it still falls slower than you'd expect a rock to on Earth.
These two facts make almost dead certain proof of a lunar landing. There is absolutely nowhere on Earth that you could make dust behave in this, to us, peculiar way. If you were to create a vacuum on Earth, the dust would fall very quickly, just as we are used to a rock doing. But here is evidence of dust behaving like it's in a vacuum and in low gravity. Without modern computer movie graphics there is no way this could be faked on Earth.

Fake of Fake Moon Part-4

If the sun is the only source of light on the moon, why do lots of the photos, like this one, show shadows at different angles and lengths? Doesn't this show the use of spot lights?







You can see in this photograph that the astronaut on the right is much longer and at a different angle to the one on the left. This isn't at all strange if you consider the slopes on the landscape. There is a dip in the surface between the two figures. The shadow on the right is sloping downhill, the shadow on the left uphill.

These diagrams represent what is happening in the photograph.
The angle of the sun is identical in both diagrams, yet because of the angle of the ground the shadow on the right is almost double the length of the one on the left.






You might also want to ask; if they was more than one light source because spotlights were used, then why do we not see more than one shadow on everything? Surely this would be impossible to avoid, yet no photograph ever shows it happening

Fake of Fake moon Part 3

Why can we see the astronaut in this picture when he is in the shadow of the lander? Shouldn't he be in the dark?

This is a question posed about a lot of the photos taken on the moon. What needs to be realised is that the sun, while being the only source of direct light, was not the only light source. Light reflects off everything around the astronauts and because this is very bright light, the reflected light can be very significant.
So the answer to all these questions is reflected light. In the photograph above the astronaut is significantly above the ground and is lit by reflected light off the surrounding lunar landscape. The fact he is wearing a pristine white spacesuit also helps, as it reflects most of that light again. So he really shows up against the shadow on the ground below him.
The highly reflective white spacesuits also explain some of the light in individual pictures of the astronauts. These were taken with the sun's light reflecting off the photographer, providing a great deal of infill on the astronaut being photographed. Remember that the photographer would be reflecting a lot of light, think of a snowy landscape on a bright winter's day. This is a very common trick also used by photographers on Earth. They get someone to hold up a large sheet of white card or cloth. This reflects the sunlight back across the shadows on the person being photographed, providing a natural infill to any harsh shadows.