Nonbelievers of the Apollo missions claim the US government fabricated each intergalactic journey in order to beat the rest of the world to the moon and win the “space race. Theorists don’t believe Cernan (right) touched down on the moon. “I’ve always thought it was a hoax since we didn’t go back in modern times,” claimed someone else. you can see that he has both arms slightly stretched forward and the shadow shows the bulkyness of the spacesuit, including the life support on his back,” another commented. “To me it clearly looks like another astronaut with the white, bulky spacesuit. When you look at the shadow you can clearly see the boxy shape of his life support system,” argued one user in the comments. Just Google ‘fish eye lens pics’ and you will see how distorted they are. “The curvature of the astronaut’s visor causes a fish-eye lens effect. For decades, conspiracy theorists have continued to claim that the landings were a hoax. “Where’s this guy’s space suit?” he continued later in the clip, which has been viewed more than 2.8 million times.īut not everyone in the comments was convinced of the YouTuber’s supposed discovery. “You can see some sort of, it looks like a man, back in the early ’70s, long hair, wearing some sort of waistcoat-type thing … and a shadow of that figure, presumably,” the narrator claimed, using his mouse to outline the figure as he talks. July 2023 new moon in Cancer creates ‘sex magic’ for all zodiac signsĬiting this image, the YouTuber zoomed in on the astronaut’s visor, pointing to a figure that didn’t seem to fit the scene. Two supermoons will appear in August in rare astronomical event TimeSample should be declared volatile, and you should temporarily disable interrupts while accessing it since an int is two bytes and an interrupt can occur between bytes.August 2023 horoscopes: Tackle the romantic unruliness of your lifeįull sturgeon supermoon in Aquarius will make you ‘defiant AF’: astrologer Call micros once and save that value, then use the saved value for the calculation. The printing, and more significantly the float calculation and analogRead, will take a fairly significant number of microseconds and cause an error in the calculation. You are using micros for the calculation before you print the data, then setting t0 to the value of micros after printing. The variables t and t0 should be unsigned long. I hope my problem is clear for you, and thanks so much for help When I display the micros (), the elapsed time between two successive values is 14792 microS (ex : 2407229164 - 2407243956), that's mean for me, we have 67,6 Hz ((1/14792)*1000000), so far from the resulte 76.92 KHz? When I use the function analogRead (), the result is correct.įor me, the frequency of data acqusition is 76.92 Hz, but for my friend the frequency is 76.92KHz? Which one is right (Hz or KHz)? Why I have only one value 54 from the input A0? The code result as follows : Sampling frequency: 76.92 KHzīut I have three problems with this result : Although it is limited to the resolution of the analog to digital converter (0-1023 for 10 bits or 0-4095 for 12 bits). T = micros()-t0 // calculate elapsed time Syntax analogRead (pin) Parameters pin: the name of the analog input pin to read from (A0 to A5 on most boards, A0 to A6 on MKR boards, A0 to A7 on the Mini and Nano, A0 to A15 on the Mega). The code below read the analog input signal by my arduino Mega2560 without use the function analogRead ().įor that, I was sitting the registre ADMUX (0 & 0x07) and prescale the ADC clock in 16.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |