If anyone colonizes the Moon
by
PeteyG
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
it will be China or India. The United States seriously lacks the resolve (or the infrastructure) to go to the Moon.
Maybe 20 years from now, we'll be surpassed in space and get shamed into exploring again.
-- no thanks
Moon bases are dumb.
by
n1ywb
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Why couldn't we have had humans living on the moon 20 years ago? Is there a technological reason? Afterall we could keep humans alive on the moon for a matter of days, all we'd have to do is launch frequent resupply missions and they'd be just dandy up there. Not really much different from the space station, except you get the added bonus of SOME gravity so maybe your bones won't complete decalicfy while you're up there. But there really are not pending technological obsticals to a moon base.
Now, weather a moon base is practical, usefull, or economically feasable is a whole another ball of wax, and the answers are probably all "no". What the hell are you going to do up there? I would like to have a ham radio linear transponder up there, but other than that what is the moon really good for? It can't be a RELIABLE communications satellite because it's only in the sky half the time and is very far away with a very high latency. It's got some rocks and minerals but nothing that would be worth flying back down to earth. Scientific research I suppose, but what could you do on the moon that you can't do on the space station for a lot less money, due to it being so much closer? Yea yea, a jumping off point for a Mars mission. See above, what is really the point to going to Mars? We still don't have the propulsion technology to make frequent Mars trips a practical reality.
One thing that could be a lucritive source of income for a moon base would be moon tourism. Perhaps the science could use it to fund itself, a la the russions and the space station.
IMO, before we even think about a moon base, we need to think long and hard about what the fuck we're going to do with it. Send more probes, shit send a thousand probes. Don't send big dumb expensive probes, send little cheap insectiod probes. Do the same to Mars. If there's something interesting there, we'll find it that way.
I know I know, if people said what I've said about the new world the US wouldn't be here. But the analagy with space is a little different. The "new world" was just another continent on earth. It had air, water, arible land, native people for which to enslave and abuse. Mars is a giant inhospitible desert with some frozen CO2 at the poles. Its possible we've overlooked something, but again it's a hell of a lot cheaper and easier to send probes.
If someone wants to squander their personal fortune on manned missions to Mars/Moon, go for it, but I'd rather my tax dollars be spent more efficiently.
Re:Moon bases are dumb.
by
Atzanteol
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I know I know, if people said what I've said about the new world the US wouldn't be here.
But they *did* say it about the new world. All of the first voyages were coming the the new world looking for gold, passages to the east, etc. Only later was it for settling, and then it was out of religious persecution.
So I agree that we need a 'reason' to go to the Moon. Once we've got that, it's only a matter of time.
-- "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
Is the "15 months" trip due to the ionic propulsion method ?
I believed that "traditionnal" engines could send people on the moon in two days.
Anyone can explain ?
-- Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
Necessity is the mother of invention...
by
E1v!$
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
On Earth 1 or 2 people die and we start inventing things to keep more from dying.
The Sol system is a little less friendly. A comet or other planet wide disaster is more likely to kill a very large portion of the planet, and totally destroy it's manufacturing infrastructure.
It would be far better to have a self sustaining economy away from Earth, one that could help rebuild our planet if BAD THINGS were to happen to it.
Before we can have a s.s. economy in space, we need to take first steps. We need to put people up there and find out what they need based on the circumstances, then we invent it and move on to the next thing.
The moon hopefully will provide enough resources for those living there to create what they feel they need.
As to your tax dollars, c'mon man, wouldn't you say your grand children being able to take a shuttle trip or elevator ride to the moon would be a good thing?
Re:Necessity is the mother of invention...
by
WTFmonkey
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
What about launch bases on the moon? Escaping the moon's gravity to get to other locations has gotta be way cheaper than escaping earth's gravity. A network of these on the moon, maybe on one of mars's moons or mars iteself. I know, supplies need to come from somewhere, but shipping water from mars's icecaps to the moon might be cheaper than shipping water from earth to them moon. Yeah, I'm talking out my ass, but it sounds good to me.
Re:maybe the tech is there, but show me the money
by
jgardn
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
There are several reasons why someone might want to set up a base on the moon.
Because the moon has lower gravity, it would make an ideal space station.
The moon has a higher content of metals than the earth's crust. Plus, you can dig up entire craters and no one will notice. You can set up low-G manufacturing processes, dump all the waste chemicals into the moon, and no one will care.
Because the moon is on top of the earth, it is really easy to launch attacks on the earth from the moon with missiles or bombs. Whoever can get the hardware on the moon first will dominate the entire earth.
The problems outweight the costs. There's the whole problem of radiation. Solar flares release enough dangerous radiation that it would kill anyone who stayed on the moon's surface for an extended period of time. We would need a lot of shielding to protect us from it, more than is reasonable to manufacture at this time.
Also, launching stuff into space is one thing, but it is more expensive to get it to the moon and back.
When these two problems are solved, then you may see people beging to establish bases on the moon.
-- The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
Well, I think the Chinese (and maybe Indian) governments *do* have the political will to go to the moon and stay there. By going to the moon, they send the world the message that they are just as capable a superpower as the United States. By staying there, they are doing something the American government cannot - or will not - do.
it will be China or India. The United States seriously lacks the resolve (or the infrastructure) to go to the Moon.
Maybe 20 years from now, we'll be surpassed in space and get shamed into exploring again.
no thanks
Why couldn't we have had humans living on the moon 20 years ago? Is there a technological reason? Afterall we could keep humans alive on the moon for a matter of days, all we'd have to do is launch frequent resupply missions and they'd be just dandy up there. Not really much different from the space station, except you get the added bonus of SOME gravity so maybe your bones won't complete decalicfy while you're up there. But there really are not pending technological obsticals to a moon base.
Now, weather a moon base is practical, usefull, or economically feasable is a whole another ball of wax, and the answers are probably all "no". What the hell are you going to do up there? I would like to have a ham radio linear transponder up there, but other than that what is the moon really good for? It can't be a RELIABLE communications satellite because it's only in the sky half the time and is very far away with a very high latency. It's got some rocks and minerals but nothing that would be worth flying back down to earth. Scientific research I suppose, but what could you do on the moon that you can't do on the space station for a lot less money, due to it being so much closer? Yea yea, a jumping off point for a Mars mission. See above, what is really the point to going to Mars? We still don't have the propulsion technology to make frequent Mars trips a practical reality.
One thing that could be a lucritive source of income for a moon base would be moon tourism. Perhaps the science could use it to fund itself, a la the russions and the space station.
IMO, before we even think about a moon base, we need to think long and hard about what the fuck we're going to do with it. Send more probes, shit send a thousand probes. Don't send big dumb expensive probes, send little cheap insectiod probes. Do the same to Mars. If there's something interesting there, we'll find it that way.
I know I know, if people said what I've said about the new world the US wouldn't be here. But the analagy with space is a little different. The "new world" was just another continent on earth. It had air, water, arible land, native people for which to enslave and abuse. Mars is a giant inhospitible desert with some frozen CO2 at the poles. Its possible we've overlooked something, but again it's a hell of a lot cheaper and easier to send probes.
If someone wants to squander their personal fortune on manned missions to Mars/Moon, go for it, but I'd rather my tax dollars be spent more efficiently.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
Is the "15 months" trip due to the ionic propulsion method ?
I believed that "traditionnal" engines could send people on the moon in two days.
Anyone can explain ?
Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
On Earth 1 or 2 people die and we start inventing things to keep more from dying.
The Sol system is a little less friendly. A comet or other planet wide disaster is more likely to kill a very large portion of the planet, and totally destroy it's manufacturing infrastructure.
It would be far better to have a self sustaining economy away from Earth, one that could help rebuild our planet if BAD THINGS were to happen to it.
Before we can have a s.s. economy in space, we need to take first steps. We need to put people up there and find out what they need based on the circumstances, then we invent it and move on to the next thing.
The moon hopefully will provide enough resources for those living there to create what they feel they need.
As to your tax dollars, c'mon man, wouldn't you say your grand children being able to take a shuttle trip or elevator ride to the moon would be a good thing?
There are several reasons why someone might want to set up a base on the moon.
Because the moon has lower gravity, it would make an ideal space station.
The moon has a higher content of metals than the earth's crust. Plus, you can dig up entire craters and no one will notice. You can set up low-G manufacturing processes, dump all the waste chemicals into the moon, and no one will care.
Because the moon is on top of the earth, it is really easy to launch attacks on the earth from the moon with missiles or bombs. Whoever can get the hardware on the moon first will dominate the entire earth.
The problems outweight the costs. There's the whole problem of radiation. Solar flares release enough dangerous radiation that it would kill anyone who stayed on the moon's surface for an extended period of time. We would need a lot of shielding to protect us from it, more than is reasonable to manufacture at this time.
Also, launching stuff into space is one thing, but it is more expensive to get it to the moon and back.
When these two problems are solved, then you may see people beging to establish bases on the moon.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
Well, I think the Chinese (and maybe Indian) governments *do* have the political will to go to the moon and stay there. By going to the moon, they send the world the message that they are just as capable a superpower as the United States. By staying there, they are doing something the American government cannot - or will not - do.