> Moon Fountains ___________ When astronauts return to the Moon in the years
> ahead, they might encounter electrified fountains and other strange things.
>
> March 30, 2005:
>
> It's astonishing how prophetic some science fiction has been.
>
> Back in 1956, two years before NASA was even created, Hal Clement wrote a
> short story called "Dust Rag" published in Astounding Science Fiction, about
> two astronauts descending into a crater on the Moon to investigate a
> mysterious haze dimming stars near the lunar horizon. After discarding a wild
> guess that they were seeing traces of a lunar atmosphere--"gases don't behave
> that way"--they figured it had to be dust somehow suspended above the ground.
> In a conversation remarkable for its scientific prescience, one of the
> astronauts explains:
>
> Read the full story here:
>
> <a> href="http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/30mar_moonfountains.htm?list725710"><B>http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/30mar_moonfountains.htm?list725710</B>[/url]
>
> My very best wishes and kindest to every one ................ and ___ please
> ____ keep on crunching ____ :)
>
> friendly and respectful
> byron
>

I was reminded of sci-fi movie special effects when I was reading this article. How nice it would be to actually see the real thing though.

Moon Fountains ___________ When astronauts return to the Moon in the years ahead, they might encounter electrified fountains and other strange things.

March 30, 2005:

It's astonishing how prophetic some science fiction has been.

Back in 1956, two years before NASA was even created, Hal Clement wrote a short story called "Dust Rag" published in Astounding Science Fiction, about two astronauts descending into a crater on the Moon to investigate a mysterious haze dimming stars near the lunar horizon. After discarding a wild guess that they were seeing traces of a lunar atmosphere--"gases don't behave that way"--they figured it had to be dust somehow suspended above the ground. In a conversation remarkable for its scientific prescience, one of the astronauts explains:

Read the full story here:

<B>http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/30mar_moonfountains.htm?list725710</B>

My very best wishes and kindest to every one ................ and ___ please ____ keep on crunching ____ :)

friendly and respectful
byron

> Some people say that
> the powder on the surface would pose a significant hurdle to overcome, not to
> mention those that say no gravity at all would allow truly immense power and
> scope. Would we get better results from a large mirror 10X the size of the
> Keck 1&2 or would money be better spent on something akin to TPF-I?

That's a good question, but I imagine that if there really is an industrial process (construction, optics, and electronics fabrication, as well as mining and processing) set up on the moon, then many types of devices will be built. Money is an interesting question: would industry be run as a private concern or will the base just run as a commune of government employees?

The environment is a strange problem. I imagine that a shell will have to be built just like on Earth, though instead of protecting the device from weather and atmosphere borne dust this will be for protection from the temperature extremes, "thermal blooming", etc of exposure to Sol (remember one of the initial problems with the Hubble was the machine vibrated as the sunrise suddenly heated up the solar panels). As for the moondust itself, I imagine they'll engineer charged dust collection grids and such to keep it away. Also the observatories could be built on just enough elevation to protect them from the "charged leaping" dust described in the article Byron's post above links to.

> What I would like to see, though I guess it won't be in my lifetime, is enough
> industry on the moon to be able to build real terrestrial-style observatories.
> Look at the fantastically detailed pictures the relatively diminutive Hubble
> telescope returns. Imagine Keck observatory (or something even larger, since
> mirrors can be even bigger in the light gravity) on the far side of the moon,
> away from even light pollution from earthshine.

That would be something indeed but I agree with you, it'll probably be out of my lifetime as well.(I'm 24 at the moment and since I'm expected to live until I'm 82, gotta love Hawaii and our high life-expectancy.) Some people say that the powder on the surface would pose a significant hurdle to overcome, not to mention those that say no gravity at all would allow truly immense power and scope. Would we get better results from a large mirror 10X the size of the Keck 1&2 or would money be better spent on something akin to TPF-I?

---

Thanks for this Info Byron

btw


Resolving the twin paradox of Special Relativity using animations.

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club m7 ©

What I would like to see, though I guess it won't be in my lifetime, is enough industry on the moon to be able to build real terrestrial-style observatories. Look at the fantastically detailed pictures the relatively diminutive Hubble telescope returns. Imagine Keck observatory (or something even larger, since mirrors can be even bigger in the light gravity) on the far side of the moon, away from even light pollution from earthshine.

> Hi Alex thanks for your post.
>

You're welcome Byron. It's just that we just seem to advance so slowly when it comes to space exploration. Think about how far deep in space we would be right now if we were as efficent as the ants are.

Hi Alex ...

thank you very much for your post.

friendly and respectful
byron

My Very Best wishes to everyone ......... and keep on crunching :)

Wishful thinking, but I think that NASA should do both at the same time Byron.

En route to Mars, the Moon Why colonize the Moon before going to Mars?

NASA scientists give their reasons.

March 18, 2005: NASA has a new Vision for Space Exploration:
in the decades ahead, humans will land on Mars
and explore the red planet.
Brief visits will lead to longer stays and, maybe one day, to colonies.

First, though, we're returning to the Moon.

Why the Moon before Mars?




scientists give their reasons here:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/18mar_moonfirst.htm?list725710





More about the Moon here:

http://www.solarviews.com/raw/moon/farside.gif




A human being is a part of a whole, called by us humans as the universe .... a part limited in time and space we humans experiences our selfs , our thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of our consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us humans, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us
<A><B> there-fore Our task as humans must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.</B>[/url]
[/url] _ Earth Flag

<B>S@h _ Berkeley's Staff Friends Club member m2 ©[/b]