Is it only Apollo 11’s landing that is conspiratorially disputed, or all moon landings?

Also, I’m watching Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks is having his chest hair sandpapered off in order to attach the medical thingies. Did they not have wax back then?

Divine Angel said:

Is it only Apollo 11’s landing that is conspiratorially disputed, or all moon landings?

Also, I’m watching Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks is having his chest hair sandpapered off in order to attach the medical thingies. Did they not have wax back then?

All of them I think.

And… When the urine is dumped, does it boil away?

It’s fairly random I think. Some say they were all faked, some say only the first one, some say the first two etc etc. Obviousman (evil roy) would have a better idea of whether there’s much pattern to them.

How did that happen?!

furious said:

How did that happen?!

What?

Of note, the originator of the LOR mission, John Houbolt, died.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/john-c-houbolt-unsung-hero-of-the-apollo-program-dies-at-age-95/

And… When the urine is dumped, does it boil away?

freezes.

Obviousman said:

Of note, the originator of the LOR mission, John Houbolt, died.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/john-c-houbolt-unsung-hero-of-the-apollo-program-dies-at-age-95/

Hey ERB!

(Popped in at a good time I see)

ChrispenEvan said:

And… When the urine is dumped, does it boil away?

freezes.

Yeah?

Into droplets?

yep. some astronauts thought it looked quite lovely.

I’m confused about why some things would freeze and some would boil in space.

ChrispenEvan said:

yep. some astronauts thought it looked quite lovely.

I thought they recycled urine

ChrispenEvan said:

yep. some astronauts thought it looked quite lovely.

The Constellation Urine.

It eventually all accretes to form mini-comets of pure weewee.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/06/29/water-in-space-what-happens/

Spiny Norman said:

Obviousman said:

Of note, the originator of the LOR mission, John Houbolt, died.

http://www.nasa.gov/content/john-c-houbolt-unsung-hero-of-the-apollo-program-dies-at-age-95/

Hey ERB!

(Popped in at a good time I see)

Sorry – just dropping in now and again whilst watching TV.

Divine Angel said:

Is it only Apollo 11’s landing that is conspiratorially disputed, or all moon landings?

Also, I’m watching Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks is having his chest hair sandpapered off in order to attach the medical thingies. Did they not have wax back then?

Nope – they used sandpaper. At the end of a mission, most astronauts hand some type of skin irritation.

Divine Angel said:

Also, I’m watching Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks is having his chest hair sandpapered off in order to attach the medical thingies. Did they not have wax back then?

Removing body hair using sticky liquids that set goes back to the ancient Egyptians. However, waxing technology has improved a bit in recent decades, mostly due to the commercial availability of waxes that have a relatively narrow melting point, and accurate temperature control in the devices that melt the wax.

But waxing isn’t for every body. :) Male chest hair can be particularly thick & tough, and may not respond so well to waxing. Apart from the pain factor of waxing such tough hair, there’s a much greater chance of bleeding and ingrown hairs, both of which can lead to infected follicles, which you really don’t want happening to your astronauts.

Sanding is much less traumatic on the follicles than waxing is, and it also leaves the hair tip nice and smooth, further reducing the chance of ingrown hairs.

FWIW, I used to know a woman who claimed that shaving & sanding her legs gave a far superior result to waxing.

Skeptic Pete said:

ChrispenEvan said:

yep. some astronauts thought it looked quite lovely.

I thought they recycled urine

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Sure, distillation’s not too difficult, but it consumes energy, and then you have the problem of dealing with the icky residues (both solid & gaseous). But I guess they could compromise, and recover some of the water using distillation or osmotic techniques…

PM 2Ring said:

Skeptic Pete said:

ChrispenEvan said:

yep. some astronauts thought it looked quite lovely.

I thought they recycled urine

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Sure, distillation’s not too difficult, but it consumes energy, and then you have the problem of dealing with the icky residues (both solid & gaseous). But I guess they could compromise, and recover some of the water using distillation or osmotic techniques…

Pretty sure the ISS recycles a fair proportion of the urine.

ChrispenEvan said:

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/06/29/water-in-space-what-happens/

I used to have great fun in the school science lab playing with water under reduced pressure. :)
There’s something mesmerising about watching water boil from the heat of your hand until it’s lost enough heat to freeze and boil at the same time.

PM 2Ring said:

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Apollo: it was the 1960s, the missions were only several days long, room aboard was at a very high premium anyway, and the fuel cells (usually) produced sufficient water for their needs, so the weight and room penalties for recycling equipment were probably too great.

Spiny Norman said:

Pretty sure the ISS recycles a fair proportion of the urine.

Hey, you’re right. But it looks like the ISS is the first space vessel to do so.
An Inside Look at the Water/Urine Recycling System on the Space Station

Nancy Atkinson on April 26, 2013 said:

International Space Station Commander Chris Hadfield “lifts the lid” on the Water Recovery System, the first liquid recycling system to be flown in space that cleans almost all the “water” (greywater, urine, sweat) produced by crew members so that it can be used again. As previous space station resident Don Pettit has said, “Yesterday’s coffee becomes today’s coffee.”

It’s still amazing no one died during an Apollo mission, so many things could have gone wrong.

captain_spalding said:

PM 2Ring said:

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Apollo: it was the 1960s, the missions were only several days long, room aboard was at a very high premium anyway, and the fuel cells (usually) produced sufficient water for their needs, so the weight and room penalties for recycling equipment were probably too great.

Understood. Sorry, given the thread subject line, I should’ve made it clear that I was making a general comment, and not just talking about Apollo.

It seems from my previous link that space water recycling is a pretty new thing. Mir did some recycling; Skylab certainly didn’t.

PM 2Ring said:

Spiny Norman said:

Pretty sure the ISS recycles a fair proportion of the urine.

Hey, you’re right. But it looks like the ISS is the first space vessel to do so.
An Inside Look at the Water/Urine Recycling System on the Space Station

Nancy Atkinson on April 26, 2013 said:

International Space Station Commander Chris Hadfield “lifts the lid” on the Water Recovery System, the first liquid recycling system to be flown in space that cleans almost all the “water” (greywater, urine, sweat) produced by crew members so that it can be used again. As previous space station resident Don Pettit has said, “Yesterday’s coffee becomes today’s coffee.”

Howard Wolowitz designed that…didn’t he?

PM 2Ring said:

But it looks like the ISS is the first space vessel to do so.

Or should I say “it looks like the ISS is the first space vessel to do so to a significant extent”. :)

sibeen said:

PM 2Ring said:

Spiny Norman said:

Pretty sure the ISS recycles a fair proportion of the urine.

Hey, you’re right. But it looks like the ISS is the first space vessel to do so.
An Inside Look at the Water/Urine Recycling System on the Space Station

Nancy Atkinson on April 26, 2013 said:

International Space Station Commander Chris Hadfield “lifts the lid” on the Water Recovery System, the first liquid recycling system to be flown in space that cleans almost all the “water” (greywater, urine, sweat) produced by crew members so that it can be used again. As previous space station resident Don Pettit has said, “Yesterday’s coffee becomes today’s coffee.”

Howard Wolowitz designed that…didn’t he?

An engineer that you aspire to be, yes. :)

Spiny Norman said:

sibeen said:

PM 2Ring said:

Howard Wolowitz designed that…didn’t he?

An engineer that you aspire to be, yes. :)

WHAT!!! He’s a mech eng. Go wash your mouth out, you feelthy beast.

Gees, I should read my links more carefully before I post. Sheesh! :)

The Mir system only recycled some water from sweat, it didn’t handle urine; this ISS system is the first system to recycle urine.

>>The Mir system only recycled some water from sweat

I don’t het this bit.
I suspect that they just filter the sweat out of the cabin air, yeah?

PM 2Ring said:

Gees, I should read my links more carefully before I post. Sheesh! :)

The Mir system only recycled some water from sweat, it didn’t handle urine; this ISS system is the first system to recycle urine.

How do they capture the sweat to recycle it?

Peak Warming Man said:

>>The Mir system only recycled some water from sweat

I don’t het this bit.
I suspect that they just filter the sweat out of the cabin air, yeah?

I guess so – like the condensation you get from any air-conditioning system. But you do need to remove volatiles like ammonia before you get potable water.

PM 2Ring said:

Peak Warming Man said:

>>The Mir system only recycled some water from sweat

I don’t het this bit.
I suspect that they just filter the sweat out of the cabin air, yeah?

I guess so – like the condensation you get from any air-conditioning system. But you do need to remove volatiles like ammonia before you get potable water.

I recall catching buses on freezing Canberra nights. You could see how much humidity was in the air from breathing by watching it drip down the windows. It is not a small amount.

I can’t get my head around freezing and boiling at the same time.

Divine Angel said:

I can’t get my head around freezing and boiling at the same time.

It was just a phase that PM was going through.

your sublime sometimes sibeen.

Divine Angel said:

I can’t get my head around freezing and boiling at the same time.

Yeah, it’s pretty counter-intuitive. Which is why it’s so mesmerising to watch.

sibeen said:

It was just a phase that PM was going through.

:giggles:

and ridiculous at other.

Teen pees in Portland dam, city ditches 140 million litres of drinking water

On Wednesday a 19 year old was filmed peeing into Portland’s reservoir, while accompanied by two other men who were ‘carrying skateboards’ (side note: of course they were skaters). As a safety precaution, the Portland Water Bureau decided that it was in everyone’s best interest to flush all 140 million litres of water, and refill the reservoir with fresh supplies. Which seems, you know, insane – especially when coastal cohabitators California are experiencing one of the worst droughts on record.

they are recycling urine on the ISS as discussed above, I saw this a few days ago, I had a laugh, I mean what about all the birds pooing into the water, and animals and runoff etc, Imagine all that bird poo, in every reservoir, every where, idiots

yes, real interesting the recycling on the ISS

Someone really need a foot up their backside, I mean dispersion, parts per million, it would disperse to be nothing, big deal, show them the recycling urine on the ISS so they all look like idiots.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Someone really need a foot up their backside, I mean dispersion, parts per million, it would disperse to be nothing, big deal, show them the recycling urine on the ISS so they all look like idiots.

Homeopathy says you’re wrong!

What if the kid suffered from cooties.

there could be a grain truth to the faked landing theory

in the event of cameras not working shots might need to be faked to present something to the public

the Russians were watching the whole thing unfold – it wouldn’t have occurred to them to declare a fake mission , they would have tracked the whole mission via radar and radio transmission.

the yanks suspected that the Russians having the capability could jam the radio signals and so the mission could be run wholly from the spaceship alone, to do this they had to invent new smaller , smarter computers

And… When the urine is dumped, does it boil away?

freezes.
————————-

How can it freeze without boiling away…

sure , first it might boil then the vapour freezes

there was a spacesuit being tested under vaccum, the bloke inside stumbled and fell to the floor. the ring on the helmet cracked and the air under 1 bar inside rushed out , the last thing he remembered was the water on his tongue bubbling away.

he was back at work the next day

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

there was a spacesuit being tested under vaccum, the bloke inside stumbled and fell to the floor. the ring on the helmet cracked and the air under 1 bar inside rushed out , the last thing he remembered was the water on his tongue bubbling away.

he was back at work the next day

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?
—————————

Yeah, of course…

It would be in Sun light.

The urine should freeze, but assuming it is illuminated by the sun, it should sublime to a vapour after that. How long it would take to do this would depend on its surface area to mass ratio (ie big drops will take longer to sublime, duh)

wookiemeister said:

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

Yes, the low pressure depresses the boiling point, but the heat energy isn’t primarily lost via radiation. A lot of heat goes into changing the phase of the water from liquid to gas, and then the gas carries it away.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_heat

For water, the latent heat of vaporisation is about 7 times the latent heat of fusion.

Well, the temperature of space is, at its coldest, just the temperature of the leftover glow from the Big Bang. This radiation, known as the Cosmic Microwave Background, bathes the entire Universe in a temperature of only 2.7 Kelvin. That’s less than 3 degrees above absolute zero, or -455 degrees Fahrenheit! But there’s also — literally — no pressure in space. So, what happens? Who wins? Does the water freeze or boil?

Oddly enough, the answer is first one, and then the other! It turns out that having a pressure vacuum will cause the water to boil almost instantly. In other words, the effect of boiling is much, much faster than the effect of freezing.

But the story doesn’t end there. Once the water has boiled, we now have some isolated water molecules in a gaseous state, but a very, very cold environment! These tiny water vapor droplets now immediately freeze (or, technically, desublimate), and become ice crystals.
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/06/29/water-in-space-what-happens/

Well, the temperature of space is, at its coldest, just the temperature of the leftover glow from the Big Bang. This radiation, known as the Cosmic Microwave Background, bathes the entire Universe in a temperature of only 2.7 Kelvin. That’s less than 3 degrees above absolute zero, or -455 degrees Fahrenheit! But there’s also — literally — no pressure in space. So, what happens? Who wins? Does the water freeze or boil?

Oddly enough, the answer is first one, and then the other! It turns out that having a pressure vacuum will cause the water to boil almost instantly. In other words, the effect of boiling is much, much faster than the effect of freezing.

But the story doesn’t end there. Once the water has boiled, we now have some isolated water molecules in a gaseous state, but a very, very cold environment! These tiny water vapor droplets now immediately freeze (or, technically, desublimate), and become ice crystals.
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/06/29/water-in-space-what-happens/

Divine Angel said:

Is it only Apollo 11’s landing that is conspiratorially disputed, or all moon landings?

It depends. The best idea is to put forward a hoax claim, and let people respond to it.

If you just say “Were the lunar landings faked?” I’ll just say NO…

captain_spalding said:

PM 2Ring said:

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Apollo: it was the 1960s, the missions were only several days long, room aboard was at a very high premium anyway, and the fuel cells (usually) produced sufficient water for their needs, so the weight and room penalties for recycling equipment were probably too great.

Correct. They did keep some samples for medical purposes but otherwise it was dump.

wookiemeister said:

there was a spacesuit being tested under vaccum, the bloke inside stumbled and fell to the floor. the ring on the helmet cracked and the air under 1 bar inside rushed out , the last thing he remembered was the water on his tongue bubbling away.

he was back at work the next day

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

IIRC, not quite. Ir was a glove / wrist seal… but I’d have to confirm that. The result was that he was placed in serious danger.

Obviousman said:

captain_spalding said:

PM 2Ring said:

Considering how much it costs to transport stuff up to orbit you’d think they would recycle urine on space vessels, but apparently it’s too hard to do it properly.

Apollo: it was the 1960s, the missions were only several days long, room aboard was at a very high premium anyway, and the fuel cells (usually) produced sufficient water for their needs, so the weight and room penalties for recycling equipment were probably too great.

Correct. They did keep some samples for medical purposes but otherwise it was dump.

Consider that the only value that this would have had would be to produce drinking water, ie to save on bringing drinking water. The mass of the drinking water required for the whole journey couldn’t have been more than 40 kg.

dv said:

Obviousman said:

captain_spalding said:

Apollo: it was the 1960s, the missions were only several days long, room aboard was at a very high premium anyway, and the fuel cells (usually) produced sufficient water for their needs, so the weight and room penalties for recycling equipment were probably too great.

Correct. They did keep some samples for medical purposes but otherwise it was dump.

Consider that the only value that this would have had would be to produce drinking water, ie to save on bringing drinking water. The mass of the drinking water required for the whole journey couldn’t have been more than 40 kg.

On the ISS they recycle everything.

As far as Apollo was concerned, saving a few grams was considered significant. For example, in the first aid kit, they were talking about reducing the number of band-aids from (something like) 20 to 10.

Obviousman said:

On the ISS they recycle everything.

The ISS operates for three months without being replenished.

The Apollo missions were little week long jaunts.

Obviousman said:

wookiemeister said:

there was a spacesuit being tested under vaccum, the bloke inside stumbled and fell to the floor. the ring on the helmet cracked and the air under 1 bar inside rushed out , the last thing he remembered was the water on his tongue bubbling away.

he was back at work the next day

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

IIRC, not quite. Ir was a glove / wrist seal… but I’d have to confirm that. The result was that he was placed in serious danger.

not according to this book

http://www.amazon.com/NASA-Apollo-11-Insight-Hardware/dp/1844256839

page 143 chapter 5

but assuming it is illuminated by the sun,
————————————————————————————

Fair assumption as space is big, really big. And shadows are small.

—————————————————

it should sublime to a vapour after that. How long it would take to do this would depend on its surface area to mass ratio (ie big drops will take longer to sublime, duh)

But you have got me here, Shirley the ratio of mass to surface area is the same in a big round droplet as in a small.

Albeit that it stands to reason that a large pool of piss would take longer to dissipate than a small squirt.

Ready for a learning…

Does the water freeze or boil.
——————————————-

It boils to freezing point…

wookiemeister said:

Obviousman said:

wookiemeister said:

there was a spacesuit being tested under vaccum, the bloke inside stumbled and fell to the floor. the ring on the helmet cracked and the air under 1 bar inside rushed out , the last thing he remembered was the water on his tongue bubbling away.

he was back at work the next day

under low pressure the boiling point is dropped, then the heat in the liquid radiates away and it freezes

any rebuttals?

IIRC, not quite. Ir was a glove / wrist seal… but I’d have to confirm that. The result was that he was placed in serious danger.

not according to this book

http://www.amazon.com/NASA-Apollo-11-Insight-Hardware/dp/1844256839

page 143 chapter 5

Not at home right now; my library is back east. Don’t disagree with the result; might disagree with the cause.

wookiemeister said:

It’s okay but has many errors.

wookiemeister said:

Assembly:

Assembly is the reverse of the removal procedure

IIRC, the suits they wore on the Moon used water-baesd evaporative (well, sublimative) cooling, with the water vapour being vented from the suit backpack into space.

http://www.mkicorp.com/a-t-sublimation.asp

But there are at least a couple of human exposures to whole body vacuum that ended happily. In 1966, a technician testing a space suit in a vacuum chamber experienced a rapid loss of suit pressure due to equipment failure *. He recalled the sensation of saliva boiling off his tongue before losing consciousness. The chamber was rapidly repressurized, he regained consciousness quickly, and went home for lunch. Another man was accidentally exposed to vacuum in an industrial chamber; it was at least three minutes before he was repressurized. He required intensive medical care, but eventually regained full function. These instances show that ebullism is not inevitably fatal — and the body holds together just fine.

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2691.htm

*For example, in 1965 a technician inside a vacuum chamber at Johnson Space Center in Houston accidentally depressurized his space suit by disrupting a hose. After 12 to 15 seconds he lost consciousness. He regained it at 27 seconds, after his suit was repressurized to about half that of sea level. The man reported that his last memory before blacking out was of the moisture on his tongue beginning to boil as well as a loss of taste sensation that lingered for four days following the accident, but he was otherwise unharmed.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/survival-in-space-unprotected-possible/

Kittinger lost pressure in a glove.

During one of the EVAs, a small rod from within the spacesuit punctured the seal of one of the astronauts’ gloves. However, the astronaut’s hand partially sealed the hole, resulting in no detectable depressurization. In fact, the puncture was not noticed until after the spacewalkers were safely back inside Atlantis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-37

the Apollo mission was initially developed with one purpose in mind, to win the competition to get to the moon first. as such the rocket and the payload were constructed to that end. once the mission was completed psychologically the mission was over, the yanks were still fighting a lost war in south asia and couldn’t justify spending more money. thus it was the Apollo mission was closed and a new era of on going wars and lost opportunities began.

However, the astronaut’s hand partially sealed the hole,
———————————————————————————-

Not possible…

In Alien resurrection a small hole sucked out an entire DNA bastard.

Mr Ironic said:

However, the astronaut’s hand partially sealed the hole,
———————————————————————————-

Not possible…

In Alien resurrection a small hole sucked out an entire DNA bastard.

small holes are Alien kryptonite……..

ahh wait a minute

leblanc suit does have a broken hose connection after all

it then does mention that as he falls backwards he then breaks the neck ring which releases whatever pressure is left in the suit

one failure leads to another

it should sublime to a vapour after that. How long it would take to do this would depend on its surface area to mass ratio (ie big drops will take longer to sublime, duh)
——————————————————————————————

But you have got me here, Shirley the ratio of mass to surface area is the same in a big round droplet as in a small.

Albeit that it stands to reason that a large pool of piss would take longer to dissipate than a small squirt.

Ready for a learning…
—————————————-

I’ll take silence as acquiescence…

> Shirley the ratio of mass to surface area is the same in a big round droplet as in a small.

No. Mass is proportional to the cube of the radius, but surface area is proportional to the square of the radius. So the ratio of mass:surface is proportional to the radius.

This is commonly known as the square-cube law.

This is commonly known as the square-cube law.
—————————————————————-

You kinda gotta love a square-cubed law that defines a sphere.

Ta.

PM 2Ring said:

> Shirley the ratio of mass to surface area is the same in a big round droplet as in a small.

No. Mass is proportional to the cube of the radius, but surface area is proportional to the square of the radius. So the ratio of mass:surface is proportional to the radius.

This is commonly known as the square-cube law.

pfft, next you’ll be telling us that V = 4/3 * pi* r^3 and that SA = 4* pi * r^2

pull the other one.

No. Mass is proportional to the cube of the radius, but surface area is proportional to the square of the radius.
————————————————————-

lol

It’s nearly like volume is 3 dimensional but the surface is only 2…

Mr Ironic said:

This is commonly known as the square-cube law.
—————————————————————-

You kinda gotta love a square-cubed law that defines a sphere.

Ta.

It doesn’t just apply to spheres…

, seems I’m latent to this discussion

// It doesn’t just apply to spheres…

try a pebble

/*
pfft, next you’ll be telling us that V = 4/3 * pi* r^3 and that SA = 4* pi * r^2

pull the other one. */

OK, V = ½ * pi^2 * r^4 and SA = 2 * pi^2 * r^3.

/* Once the water has boiled, we now have some isolated water molecules in a gaseous state, but a very, very cold environment! These tiny water vapor droplets */

¿“droplets”?

/* now immediately freeze (or, technically, desublimate), and become ice crystals. */

the main sublimation that will be happening is from solid to gas;

nonvacuum test

PM 2Ring said:

Divine Angel said:

Also, I’m watching Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks is having his chest hair sandpapered off in order to attach the medical thingies. Did they not have wax back then?

Removing body hair using sticky liquids that set goes back to the ancient Egyptians. However, waxing technology has improved a bit in recent decades, mostly due to the commercial availability of waxes that have a relatively narrow melting point, and accurate temperature control in the devices that melt the wax.

But waxing isn’t for every body. :) Male chest hair can be particularly thick & tough, and may not respond so well to waxing. Apart from the pain factor of waxing such tough hair, there’s a much greater chance of bleeding and ingrown hairs, both of which can lead to infected follicles, which you really don’t want happening to your astronauts.

Sanding is much less traumatic on the follicles than waxing is, and it also leaves the hair tip nice and smooth, further reducing the chance of ingrown hairs.

FWIW, I used to know a woman who claimed that shaving & sanding her legs gave a far superior result to waxing.

Well there you go.

I’m not sure it’s the hair tip that is being left “nice and smooth” to reduce the chance of ingrown hairs, but the exfoliation of skin to reduce the chance. Every woman knows that removing hair (by certain methods e.g. by epilator) requires exfoliation to prevent ingrown hair.

Re: http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2009/06/29/water-in-space-what-happens/

If someone had just said that gas freezes, I would have understood it :p
(This sublimate – desublimate stuff is currently too much for my poor virus-riddled brain).

Can’t use too simple terms, let we look like we don’t know…

The moon landings were genuine, but the program had to be shortened because the aliens that had bases on the moon didn’t like us going there and kicking up dust. That’s why we’ve never been back.

I had another look at Apollo 13 recently and then played it with the Lovells’ commentary.

It seems that there was fairly limited use of artistic licence…

Some that I can recall.. the manual burn was not as wild a ride as depicted and there was more than one manual course correction; the Grumman guy was a lot cooler than depicted; the farewell scene on the evening before the launch didn’t happen.

Coincidentally -

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/apr/17/apollo-13-tom-hanks-space-ron-howard

Divine Angel said:

And… When the urine is dumped, does it boil away?

Repeating what was said above, with a bit of elaboration.

It starts by evaporating extremely quickly, the latent of evaporation then cools the urine down to the point where it freezes. After freezing it sublimes, but slowly. So it appears as frozen drops for quite a while after ejection to space.

The first occurrences of frozen urine seen in space were treated as UFO stories, as the beautiful shiny frozen drops were genuinely “unidentified”. But it didn’t take long for an astronaut to link the appearance of many shiny things outside the spacecraft to the ejection of urine.