#1
I read recently that Russia is planning a moon base. A bunch of rovers are going to explore the surface and take samples to explore the potential for mining. I like the idea and see it it as a step in the right direction. All this talk of Mars is crazy when the moon is right in our backyard. I've been saying for years now that we need to establish a moon base. It's the perfect means of exploring the effects of reduced gravity on the human body, as well as learning to protect ourselves from the harsh cosmic rays that our atmosphere usually shields us from. It would also be possible to send much larger payloads into space if they were constructed or assembled (at least partially) on the lunar surface as Earth's gravity and thick atmosphere make sending objects into space costly and inefficient. We already know that the lunar surface is rich in Silica, Titanium and Aluminum.

It seems crazy to me that we've been able to reach the moon for almost 50 years now and yet no real attempts have been made to establish any kind of foothold there, whether it's a manned research base, or rovers, or some type of military base. Reagan may have been full of shit when he said the wealth would trickle down, but technology certainly does, and many of our common modern conveniences were the result of the space race pushing technology to it's upper limits. And I'd much prefer another space race type scenario to the technological advancement that results from war.

Thoughts on potential habitation/mining of the Moon?
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
Last edited by robertito696 at Jun 1, 2014,
#2
two things:
1) of what we know about reduced gravity and the human body, it ain't good
2) the earth is also rich in silica, titanium, and aluminum.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#3
So now Russia wants to annex the moon?!? Is there no stop to their madness?????
#4
Quote by Eastwinn
two things:
1) of what we know about reduced gravity and the human body, it ain't good
2) the earth is also rich in silica, titanium, and aluminum.

1) Exactly, and if we ever hope to spend prolonged periods of time in space we need to learn to deal with that, some kind of centrifuge could allow astronauts to spend time in a 1G environment, but I think it's something we need to explore further.
2) True but its always good to diversify your source of resources, and it's be easier (possibly), to mine it on the moon and build stuff there than to ship it from Earth into orbit.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
#6
Quote by robertito696
1) Exactly, and if we ever hope to spend prolonged periods of time in space we need to learn to deal with that, some kind of centrifuge could allow astronauts to spend time in a 1G environment, but I think it's something we need to explore further.
2) True but its always good to diversify your source of resources, and it's be easier (possibly), to mine it on the moon and build stuff there than to ship it from Earth into orbit.


1) have you considered the human cost of exploring this matter further?
2) we already have out of control pollution on earth. why should we pollute another heavenly body?
i don't know why i feel so dry
#7
Mother Russia!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#8
Well, first of all, we'd need to mount a large laser on the moon, turning it into what I like to call a "Death Star". This "Death Star" will be manned by 2 teams of top scientists, engineers and evil henchmen, referred to as Moon Unit Alpha, and Moon Unit Zappa.
#9
Quote by robertito696
We already know that the lunar surface is rich in Silica, Titanium and Aluminum.


M8 the moon is made of cheese so that's a lie.
The plan was to drink until the pain over.
But what's worse, the pain or the hangover?
Who am I? I'm a titan so be expectin' a clash.
#10
Quote by WaterGod
So now Russia wants to annex the moon?!? Is there no stop to their madness?????


Don't act like if we had a moon base up there we wouldn't try to do the same.
#11
Mars probably being pushed as a possible colony.
Quote by Fat Lard
Why would you spend tens of thousands of dollars to learn about a language you already speak? It was over before it even started dude

Quote by captainsnazz
brot pls
#13
Quote by Weaponized
NO humans on the MOON. It would destroy the ecosystem

yeah guys think about the penguins
banned
#14
Quote by Eastwinn
1) have you considered the human cost of exploring this matter further?
2) we already have out of control pollution on earth. why should we pollute another heavenly body?

It's not like the astronauts wouldn't be aware of what they're getting into. If anything I'm sure they'd be eager to try new ways to maintain muscle mass and bone density in less than normal gravity. As of right now they have to exercise excessively just to maintain themselves. If anything it's been shown that lower gravity is actually good for your back as you get older, as the force that originally held your spine in place starts to put excessive wear and tear on your aging spine.

Who said the plan was to pollute the moon? Not only does it not have an atmosphere to pollute but most proposals for any type of lunar structure are solar or nuclear powered. I'm not suggesting we fire up a coal plant on the moon, that's ******ed. And again, there's no ecosystem or atmosphere to destroy, I'd argue we're better off polluting the Moon than Earth.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
#15
Quote by robertito696
I read recently that Russia is planning a moon base. A bunch of rovers are going to explore the surface and take samples to explore the potential for mining. I like the idea and see it it as a step in the right direction. All this talk of Mars is crazy when the moon is right in our backyard. I've been saying for years now that we need to establish a moon base. It's the perfect means of exploring the effects of reduced gravity on the human body, as well as learning to protect ourselves from the harsh cosmic rays that our atmosphere usually shields us from. It would also be possible to send much larger payloads into space if they were constructed or assembled (at least partially) on the lunar surface as Earth's gravity and thick atmosphere make sending objects into space costly and inefficient. We already know that the lunar surface is rich in Silica, Titanium and Aluminum.

It seems crazy to me that we've been able to reach the moon for almost 50 years now and yet no real attempts have been made to establish any kind of foothold there, whether it's a manned research base, or rovers, or some type of military base. Reagan may have been full of shit when he said the wealth would trickle down, but technology certainly does, and many of our common modern conveniences were the result of the space race pushing technology to it's upper limits. And I'd much prefer another space race type scenario to the technological advancement that results from war.

Thoughts on potential habitation/mining of the Moon?


Your post is surprisingly well informed for being in the Pit and on this particular topic.

While revisitations to the Moon can definitely have significant benefits as far as testing certain systems and techniques that could perhaps be used or developed for a Mars mission (with a 6 month flight time), it is definitely not the definitive destination in local space.

Personally, I'm a fan of the Flexible Path option, proposed and summarily endorsed by the Augustine Commission, as the most feasible and ultimately beneficial route to be taken by NASA in regards to near- and medium-term space exploration. As opposed to a Moon First option, the Flexible Path (which is still the templated path for NASA and has been endorsed by the Obama administration) aims to explore a variety of space destinations and develop a commensurate variety of technologies, vehicles, and techniques. Asteroid rendezvous, manned Lagrange point missions, etc.

As a side, there is enormous economic potential if mineral/metal mining both on the moon and on asteroids becomes a feasible and sufficiently efficient option.

EDIT: I think that the political environment with regards to these topics is going to be very interesting in the near future, especially considering the UN Outer Space Treaties and the fact that, if I remember correctly, both the US and Russia have not signed some/any of them.

Quote by Eastwinn
1) of what we know about reduced gravity and the human body, it ain't good


The affects of microgravity are what you're referring to, not simply reduced gravity. Freefall (or an absense of gravity) has detrimental effects on the body, but they are not insurmountable; current workarounds, either studied yet not applied in space or currently available systems on the ISS, include such things as a brief period of exposure to artificial gravity (such as in a centrifuge for one hour) to combat the effects of microgravity fluid shifting and bone density loss, supplemented nutrition plans with increase amino acids, specially designed resistance devices such as the new ARED on the ISS, lower body negative pressure (LBNP) such as in the Russian Chibis spacesuit, etc.

The presence of a permanent and relatively substantial gravity on the moon would significantly negate most of the effects observed on human physiology in microgravity environments.
My God, it's full of stars!
Last edited by Dreadnought at Jun 1, 2014,
#16
Quote by Dreadnought
The affects of microgravity are what you're referring to, not simply reduced gravity. Freefall (or an absense of gravity) has detrimental effects on the body, but they are not insurmountable; current workarounds, either studied yet not applied in space or currently available systems on the ISS, include such things as a brief period of exposure to artificial gravity (such as in a centrifuge for one hour) to combat the effects of microgravity fluid shifting and bone density loss, supplemented nutrition plans with increase amino acids, specially designed resistance devices such as the new ARED on the ISS, lower body negative pressure (LBNP) such as in the Russian Chibis spacesuit, etc.

The presence of a permanent and relatively substantial gravity on the moon would significantly negate most of the effects observed on human physiology in microgravity environments.


you're right, i conflated the two.

edit: about pollution:

for one thing, a massive amount of waste is generated in mining. it is not a clean process. in fact, the ecosystems that exist on earth assist in turning a lot of the trash back into regular soil.

and second, i haven't done the math, but surely gasses with a high enough molecular weight wouldn't fly off the moon, and at the current atmospheric pressure on the moon, many high molecular weight compounds could be gaseous. in small amounts these should be innocuous - they won't last long what with the whole giant spinning body in a tanning bed of solar wind thing. but pumping out a bucket load through mining could be real troublesome. this is speculation on my part. surely some people down at nasa have already figured this out for sure.
i don't know why i feel so dry
Last edited by Eastwinn at Jun 1, 2014,
#17
Quote by Dreadnought
*Here comes Dreadnought swingin the knowledge hammer.*

That's actually a good point. I was unaware of the Flexible Path. I still maintain that the moon worth more thorough investigation though, if for nothing other than proximity. Asteroids, even in the densest areas of the asteroid belt, are millions of miles apart, landing on one would be like threading a microscopic needle. If space mining is at all the goal, the moon seems like the best place to start. I look forward to seeing how the future of space exploration/living progresses.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
#18
Quote by robertito696
That's actually a good point. I was unaware of the Flexible Path. I still maintain that the moon worth more thorough investigation though, if for nothing other than proximity. Asteroids, even in the densest areas of the asteroid belt, are millions of miles apart, landing on one would be like threading a microscopic needle. If space mining is at all the goal, the moon seems like the best place to start. I look forward to seeing how the future of space exploration/living progresses.

Plus, a manned round trip to the asteroid belt would suffer even more from the problems which make Mars a logistical nightmare - the food and water requirements, radiation shielding, the at least doubled time in microgravity...
#19
^There's got to be an incredibly small window to get back too, before another planet gets in the way of the trajectory or is too far away to slingshot off. I remember reading how small the window was to get back from Mars, can't remember exactly of course, and if they miss it it's another hundred or so days before there's another opening. And the asteroid belt is even farther away.

I tell everyone that if aliens do come to earth they're not going to mutilate a few cows or abduct people, they'll be so far advanced that they'll have technology and some kind of mission that we can't possibly conceive, yet. Clarke said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic", if aliens do visit, they won't be little green men in saucers possessing technology that we dont have, but can imagine, they'll be like gods, able to do things we didn't think possible. A little off topic but somewhat relevant. Hopefully someday we'll be the aliens visiting some distant world.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
#21
Moon bases are much more practical than Martian bases at this point in time. It will be nice to see them landing on Mars, but I'd prefer a permanent presence on the Moon for scientific purposes.
#22
Space travel is awesome and probably necessary for the prolonged preservation of the human race so I'm all for it.
bawitaba a bang a bang diggy diggy diggy sed the boogie sed up jump the boogie
#23
Quote by slapsymcdougal
Plus, a manned round trip to the asteroid belt would suffer even more from the problems which make Mars a logistical nightmare - the food and water requirements, radiation shielding, the at least doubled time in microgravity...


No reason to go to the asteroid belt. Simply rendezvous with or redirect/capture a significantly large enough NEO.
My God, it's full of stars!
#24
Hold on The Cheat, we're going to take this concession stand TO DA MOOOOOON!
BOOM-SHAKALAKALAKA-BOOM-SHAKALAKUNGA
#25
Moon Wars: The Red, White and Blue Cheese.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all