Originally posted by dadudemon
How would we accomplish destabilizing anything unless that was our direct goal?
we bring too much of the moon's mass to earth, thus changing the gravitational balance we have that dictates a lot of our whether and climate, afaik.
Its not like resource exploitation hasn't gone ahead of reasonable sustainability at pretty much every step of human history.
Re: Re: Re: NASA - Get yo ASS to MARS
Originally posted by Robtard
What about turning it into a prison colony, like the British did with Australia.This is a great idea. Obama will make it happen.
I would support that, as long as they didn't terraform the planet. The prisons should be in pressurized containment bubbles. So if an inmate escaped, they would die like in Total Recall.
Originally posted by dadudemon
The fuel? Yes. The chassis and frame? Yeah, there's plenty of good stuff...but not all of it would be available at first.I am all for mining operations on the moon. With manufacturing and processsing, to boot. Would be easier to do things: less energy required with solar being pretty much the best choice for power, lower gravity, bla bla bla. Even processing.
I was under the impression that Luna was very poor in resources.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Carbon nano-tube tether and make an elevator?
That does seem like the best method for cheaply getting material into space.
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosExcellent point.
How can your fire a gun at a bad guy and hit a bystander?
Cept, the difference is aiming for a human and accidentally hitting another object that weighs 1051428571428571428571 kilograms (the mass of the moon divided by 70kg).
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was under the impression that Luna was very poor in resources.
No, there's plenty of resources. Lots of what the Earth is, is what he moon is. Also, the Moon has stuff in different ratios that we do not.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That does seem like the best method for cheaply getting material into space.
Indeed. And mix it up with a futuristic superconductive material, badda boom, we have a very efficient and cheap way to get out of escape velocity requirement.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Excellent point.Cept, the difference is aiming for a human and accidentally hitting another object that weighs 1051428571428571428571 kilograms (the mass of the moon divided by 70kg).
Why did you divide the mass of the moon by 70kg? How did you divide kg by kg and get an answer in kg?
Anyhow, my point is that you don't have to intend harm to your victim in order to harm him.
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, there's plenty of resources. Lots of what the Earth is, is what he moon is. Also, the Moon has stuff in different ratios that we do not.
w00t Stripmine away!
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The technology to get to Mars has existed for decades. If you can put something in orbit you can send it where ever you want in the universe, allowing for some patience.That's not practical. The moon doesn't have any resources to build a spaceship with so you'd have to launch everything from Earth, land it on the moon and then launch again from the moon to Mars.
The technology to fly something to mars yes obviously seeing as probes have been there, but the technology to fly PEOPLE to mars does not exist, FACT!!
Of course you have to fly stuff to the moon, but maybe not as much as we would have to fly from the earth. Especially water which is a big problem because of the weight and so much of it is needed for human survival, or even for use as fuel. There may be minerals and metals on the moon as well for all we know, so we can´t rule out production.
One step at a time is a good idea. (sorting out earths problems might be a good idea first)
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why did you divide the mass of the moon by 70kg? How did you divide kg by kg and get an answer in kg?
Freudian slip. Answer is not supposed to be in kg. It's a factor.
Think about it for a bit.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Anyhow, my point is that you don't have to intend harm to your victim in order to harm him.w00t Stripmine away!
I know exactly what your point was. I countered with mass logic that I apparantly butchered because of a flying rogue "kg".
Originally posted by dadudemon
I know exactly what your point was. I countered with mass logic that I apparantly butchered because of a flying rogue "kg".
well, yes, but that really doesn't change anything
there is a risk
regardless of how probable or avoidable, it is a non-zero probability, and an eventuallity if we never acknowledge the problem
I'm sure we could do the math, but I'd imagine moving 1/70 of the moon's mass to earth would probably do terrible things to our climate just because of the gravitational forces. Mind you, a moon with less relative mass would also begin to decay in orbit, possibly compensating for the reduced gravitational forces by finding a closer equilibrium (so long as its mass is above whatever orbital threshold there is).
which is sort of all that I, and I assume Sym, are saying. Maybe before strip mining, we assess the long term impact of strip mining, which is something humans are notorious for not doing.
Sending people to Mars is useless at the moment. The risks are to high.
Why use humans when robots are getting it done? Sure Humans will be a lot more resourceful and get the job done a lot quicker but sending rovers has rocked and if one of these rovers fails no biggie.
Can you image a incident where say we try to sent a crew to mars and they all die. Won't be good for future mission.
Humans will go to Mars around the year 2060-2080 if the advancement in space technology is at a constant rate.
NO NEED TO RUSH.
Originally posted by inimalist
well, yes, but that really doesn't change anythingthere is a risk
regardless of how probable or avoidable, it is a non-zero probability, and an eventuallity if we never acknowledge the problem
I'm sure we could do the math, but I'd imagine moving 1/70 of the moon's mass to earth would probably do terrible things to our climate just because of the gravitational forces. Mind you, a moon with less relative mass would also begin to decay in orbit, possibly compensating for the reduced gravitational forces by finding a closer equilibrium (so long as its mass is above whatever orbital threshold there is).
which is sort of all that I, and I assume Sym, are saying. Maybe before strip mining, we assess the long term impact of strip mining, which is something humans are notorious for not doing.
We wouldn't even come close to mining 1/70th of the moon's mass for quite some time. At that point, we'd make way for Prince Ali. We'd definitely ring the bells and bang the drums.
Just because something affects a gravitational system (a non-zero probability, as you put it), does not mean the the system is impacted on a time scale relevant to humans. Remove 100,000,000,000 tons from the moon and bring them to Earth: the change in the gravitational system would be negligible for tens of millions of years.