Moon

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Moon
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
KLiKProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Mar 14
Posts: 1289
Credit: 9,075,328
RAC: 17,385
Croatia
Message 1751864 - Posted: 27 Dec 2015, 11:50:38 UTC

ID: 1751864 · Report as offensive
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2848
Credit: 1,215,344
RAC: 206
United States
Message 1751998 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 7:33:47 UTC

I think the space community was far too hasty in writing off the moon as an interesting place to go back to. Mining our moon will be far easier than going out to the asteroid belt and I still believe a colony on the moon could be self supporting and the best place to build the spacecraft needed to explore the rest of the solar system.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1751998 · Report as offensive
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6296
Credit: 1,675,461
RAC: 1,272
Italy
Message 1752022 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 8:46:16 UTC - in response to Message 1751998.  

First you have to send a nuclear reactor to the Moon to obtain electricity. Then you must find some water ice to produce hydrogen as a rocket fuel and oxygen to breathe. All this in a harsh Moon environment without any atmosphere to shield you from cosmic rays. It is not an easy task.
Tullio
ID: 1752022 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40032
Credit: 34,739,232
RAC: 63,537
United Kingdom
Message 1752051 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 11:33:00 UTC

In a January 2012 speech Newt Gingrich, Republican candidate for President of the United States of America, proposed a plan to build a U.S. moon colony by the year 2020. However, some consider this plan economically unfeasible and nationalistic, and an attempt to garner votes through public enthusiasm for space travel.
ID: 1752051 · Report as offensive
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2848
Credit: 1,215,344
RAC: 206
United States
Message 1752070 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 15:16:10 UTC - in response to Message 1752022.  

First you have to send a nuclear reactor to the Moon to obtain electricity. Then you must find some water ice to produce hydrogen as a rocket fuel and oxygen to breathe. All this in a harsh Moon environment without any atmosphere to shield you from cosmic rays. It is not an easy task.
Tullio

Still easier than landing on an asteroid or going to Mars or one of the moons of the gas giants.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1752070 · Report as offensive
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6296
Credit: 1,675,461
RAC: 1,272
Italy
Message 1752074 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 16:26:46 UTC - in response to Message 1752070.  

To build a base on the Moon you should have to build thousands of chemical rockets and send them to a lunar orbit to build a Moon satellite, from which a few pioneers would have to go down to the Moon surface to build the lunar base and back to the satellite. A trip to Mars would require on a rocket, possibly nuclear powered, provided the human body (and mind) can survive such a trip.
Tullio
ID: 1752074 · Report as offensive
rob smithProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 15193
Credit: 251,326,363
RAC: 322,318
United Kingdom
Message 1752075 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 16:32:04 UTC

...certainly closer.
My first thought was to use solar power, but given the 14 days of night that might prove to be a bit of an issue in the early days. Sending suitable batteries would require a lot of launching power.
So my mind went to alternative sources, geothermal was the first, but I'm pretty certain that there is no geothermal activity on the moon, so what else?
Ground energy? There may be a way of using the temperatyre difference btween lit and unlit locations during the day while at night using the surface to sub-surface temperature difference.
As to shielding, dig down a short way, or roof in a handy crater. Whatever way the materials for the early days would have to come from Earth, so how about harvsting some of the boosters and the like that have been 'abondoned' in orbit over the years; with luck some of them might be in suitable orbits to be boosted to Lunar tragetory orbits ahead of the mission (I've not thought how to get them to the surface in a non-destructive way...).
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1752075 · Report as offensive
KLiKProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Mar 14
Posts: 1289
Credit: 9,075,328
RAC: 17,385
Croatia
Message 1752078 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 16:42:06 UTC - in response to Message 1752022.  

First you have to send a nuclear reactor to the Moon to obtain electricity. Then you must find some water ice to produce hydrogen as a rocket fuel and oxygen to breathe. All this in a harsh Moon environment without any atmosphere to shield you from cosmic rays. It is not an easy task.
Tullio

No you don't...there's a Sun!

Again, water has been found on Moon...confirmed several years ago!

Also, living underground would be the best way...plans have been made several decades ago!

Nobody said it was easy...just weather it's feasible?!
From my opinion, YES:
1. you can mine He-3 or H3:
http://www.space.com/28189-moon-mining-economic-feasibility.html
2. also, you can observe all the Universe from the back side of the Moon...& establish a dish the size of a FAST or greater to listed out the Galaxy & beyond...
;)

non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU
ID: 1752078 · Report as offensive
Michael Watson

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 08
Posts: 937
Credit: 1,107,254
RAC: 1,404
Message 1752087 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 17:24:51 UTC

The Moon shows definite signs of natural tunnels, akin to lava tube caves on our planet. These could be used as shelters. They would offer protection from radiation, and would moderate the day-night extremes of temperature to some degree.
Many lava tubes on Earth contain ice. If one with ice could be found on the Moon, perhaps it could provide enough oxygen for breathing, and with hydrogen for fuel, through electrolytic splitting with solar-derived electricity. Perhaps enough of these gasses could be stored during the day to provide energy, through fuel cells, during the long Lunar night.
ID: 1752087 · Report as offensive
Profile Gordon Lowe
Volunteer moderator
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Nov 00
Posts: 9785
Credit: 5,163,074
RAC: 2,673
United States
Message 1752088 - Posted: 28 Dec 2015, 17:25:02 UTC - in response to Message 1752075.  

As to shielding, dig down a short way, or roof in a handy crater. Whatever way the materials for the early days would have to come from Earth, so how about harvsting some of the boosters and the like that have been 'abondoned' in orbit over the years; with luck some of them might be in suitable orbits to be boosted to Lunar tragetory orbits ahead of the mission (I've not thought how to get them to the surface in a non-destructive way...).


That's a clever use of a crater. I don't know how it would be done, but it's a clever idea. :~)

I also never thought about using old orbiting booster rockets for anything. I would have thought they were all too deteriorated.
The mind is a weird and mysterious place
ID: 1752088 · Report as offensive
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6296
Credit: 1,675,461
RAC: 1,272
Italy
Message 1752188 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 2:48:10 UTC

A nuclear fission reactor is a must for a lunar base. Fusion reactors do not exist, despite what Lockheed-Martin says. The solar power source is not continuous, and there are no winds on the Moon.
Tullio
ID: 1752188 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3335
Credit: 1,322,163
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1752201 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 3:53:36 UTC - in response to Message 1752088.  
Last modified: 29 Dec 2015, 3:55:29 UTC

Booster rockets fell into the ocean on parachutes and almost all of the 270 examples were re-used.

In any event we should return to the moon with a moon base with an eye toward building a Mars exploration ship if radiation problems can be solved.
ID: 1752201 · Report as offensive
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6296
Credit: 1,675,461
RAC: 1,272
Italy
Message 1752228 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 8:01:33 UTC - in response to Message 1752201.  

It's not only a radiation protection problem, it's the loss of muscle power in a gravity free condition. An American astronaut and a Russian cosmonaut are staying for one year on the ISS to check the consequences of a long flight.
Tullio
ID: 1752228 · Report as offensive
rob smithProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 15193
Credit: 251,326,363
RAC: 322,318
United Kingdom
Message 1752233 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 8:55:01 UTC

Lower stage boosters fall back to Earth, but a number of orbital stage boosters are still up there, all be it in decaying orbits.
Boosters are basically tubes, so could either be used as tubes, or sources of the sheet metal and composites they contain.
Further on the idea of scavenging space junk, what about solar panels from dead sattelites?
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1752233 · Report as offensive
Profile SciManStevProject Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6185
Credit: 109,158,475
RAC: 1,198
United States
Message 1752262 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 13:44:03 UTC - in response to Message 1752233.  

Lower stage boosters fall back to Earth, but a number of orbital stage boosters are still up there, all be it in decaying orbits.
Boosters are basically tubes, so could either be used as tubes, or sources of the sheet metal and composites they contain.
Further on the idea of scavenging space junk, what about solar panels from dead sattelites?

One issue I see about old solar panels, is that the new ones are much more efficient, and the output of all solar panels begins to decay after about 10 years. I am not sure if the materials can be recycled, but the panels themselves, most likely not worth the effort.

Steve
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1752262 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1752263 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 13:56:58 UTC - in response to Message 1752228.  

It's not only a radiation protection problem, it's the loss of muscle power in a gravity free condition. An American astronaut and a Russian cosmonaut are staying for one year on the ISS to check the consequences of a long flight.
Tullio

The heart is a muscle. Loosing it's muscle power is perhaps not a problem when staying in micro gravity but what happens when returning back to earth?
ID: 1752263 · Report as offensive
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 6296
Credit: 1,675,461
RAC: 1,272
Italy
Message 1752264 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 14:02:15 UTC - in response to Message 1752263.  

I don't think it is a heart problem. More likely a problem with the legs' muscles. I have problems while standing still that I don't have walking or cycling.
Tullio
ID: 1752264 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40032
Credit: 34,739,232
RAC: 63,537
United Kingdom
Message 1752265 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 14:04:01 UTC - in response to Message 1752262.  

One issue I see about old solar panels, is that the new ones are much more efficient

Yes they are, and the cost a lot less, which is the main reason why feed-in tariffs are being reduced in the UK. Had you bought in a few years ago at the beginning you would have made a profit, not now. The average payback period is 18 years. A commercial enterprise can write it off to tax, a home user can't.
ID: 1752265 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1752269 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 14:19:58 UTC - in response to Message 1752264.  

But if you loose leg's muscles doesn't that mean that you don't have to use the heart so much?
It's from my understanding/experience that if you doesn't use the muscles, you loose them.
Trying to walk around with both loss of leg's muscles and a low blood pressure seems not nice to me.
I have no idea how long time it takes to restore the muscles.
ID: 1752269 · Report as offensive
Mark StevensonProject Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 11
Posts: 1573
Credit: 136,695,478
RAC: 88,217
United Kingdom
Message 1752272 - Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 14:29:50 UTC - in response to Message 1752269.  
Last modified: 29 Dec 2015, 14:32:57 UTC

I know from having a motorbike crash back in 2010 , it takes a lot of physiotherapy and exercise to rebuild your mussel mass but it deteriorates very quickly if you just lay / sit around doing nothing , the physio's told me for everyday of not doing exercises you loose a weeks worth of what progress you made , but I never wanted to find out for myself if they are right or not . This is on earth . In the ISS I think they have to do a set of exercises for a set amount of time each day so the loss is kept to a minimum , but when they return to earth it takes them a few weeks to fully recover from being in space
ID: 1752272 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Moon


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.