Forget Mars: Let's get someone on the Moon – NASA veteran The retired NASA chief who sent the first American astronaut into space has said the agency should give up on Mars and focus on putting another astronaut on the Moon. Chris Kraft, who was NASA's first ever flight director before becoming a senior manager on the Apollo programme – the US project dedicated to "landing a man on …
Beaming power... from the Moon to the Earth... Yeah, that's going to happen in the next twenty years (not)...
Getting out of the solar system... words fail me... walk before you run?
The Moon instead of Mars? Well that's Bob Zubrin's next article written...
Can't wait for the next bungee boss in the upper levels of NASA to spout off...
And meanwhile it's the SENATE/CONGRESS that mandates funding SLS, the giant sucking hole in NASA's budget which will, at most make ONE FLIGHT.
[Begin head/desk interaction]
The needs of 'half the world' will be quite a bit greater, I would think, and losses in energy transmission will take a lot too, beamed or otherwise..
Given that they apparently can't protect existing infrastructure from determined hackers and terrorists, is it really a good idea to build a Terrawatt microwave or laser system pointed at the Earth?
The biggest problem with the technology is not making the panels - they've become what 10x cheaper to make in the past decade? - but 1) the fact the cost of installing them doesn't drop nearly so fast as making them and thus the installation cost now dominates for residential scale installs in high wage countries and 2) the fact the sun doesn't shine 24x7. Putting solar panels on the moon sounds great, except that the moon doesn't receive sunlight 24x7 either and even with multiple stations dispersed around the moon nor does a given spot on Earth see the moon 24x7
Not to mention that beaming power from space is not a proven technology. Maybe we should try orbiting a small solar power station and beaming the power to Earth to get the bugs out before deciding we need to go to the moon and set up a solar panel factory, only to determine too late that sending gigawatts of power on microwave beams from space has unintended consequences or difficulties we didn't fully appreciate.
# Not to mention that beaming power from space is not a proven technology. #
We've proven that beaming power from the edge of the solar system to Earth is a proven technology with the Voyager probes. The only difference is the operating frequency, the power level and the lack of modulation for data transmission. All of the concepts are EXACTLY the same.
Well Humans have harnessed and many times messed up the resources we have had on Earth.
On Moon we dont want that as our backyard of all the junk.
One way that is also sensible. Send all the junk tires and plastic e-waste to Moon, one good thing, there is no air or water to pollute and its not going to pollute its soil too! No interaction with life to create mutated beings.
Yes its a good idea put solar panels charge up batteries and bring to earth or use it to power satellites using lasers.
To me all toxic substances the world has can be put there to clean up earth. recycle and bring to earth.
After all 35+ years since our lunar expeditions I don't see what that science really helped human civilization.
We travelled we gained knowledge of how to reach there and I don't know other than stories of astronauts walking making experiments on zero gravity how much did it contribute to science than what we could have done all on earth itself.
Mars missions insane! and spending on Black holes and understanding distant stars which will be lightyears away imagining to travel using timewarps. - Will they be funded in our life time? Better think of cleaning up the toxic on earth rather than sending to 3rd world countries to polute them and expect them to clean our mess send them to moon keep them stocked there till we find a science solution to recycle without doing more damage on earth. IN 5 DECADES 1 THING WE KNOW ONLY 1 EARTH! No life anywhere else! Not even planets with Dinosaurs anywhere insight for a million lightyears away!
"One way that is also sensible. Send all the junk tires and plastic e-waste to Moon"
You do realize it costs at least $35,000 per POUND (~$77,000 per kilogramme) to lift stuff into low Earth orbit, expect that to at least double for a moon trip - Interesting definition of "sensible"
"Yes its a good idea put solar panels charge up batteries and bring to earth"
Same applies
"We travelled we gained knowledge of how to reach there and I don't know other than stories of astronauts walking making experiments on zero gravity"
Really there is no such thing as "zero gravity", there is no point in the universe that is not under at least some gravitational influence and there is plenty of gravity on the moon. In orbit the vehicle is in free fall so there is the appearance of no gravity as the vehicle and contents are falling at the same rate.
"Mars missions insane"
Oh well than, we better abandon it all then. I and many others would say that NOT having a Mars mission at some point would be really insane.
"No life anywhere else"
Proof please. Mathematically the odds of there not being life anywhere else are so tiny that they can be disregarded. If the universe is infinite then not just life but exact duplicate Earths are guaranteed (It works like this: There are only so many ways that atoms can be arranged to form a galaxy, it's pretty huge number but it is finite, so if the universe is truly infinite then every arrangement must be repeated eventually).
"Not even planets with Dinosaurs anywhere insight for a million lightyears away"
Per-lease do you even read the crap you write, in order to resolve any detail on a planet even 20 LY out would require a telescope with a lens bigger than the Earth. Having said that soon we will be able to get spectrographs of the atmospheres of distant planets, then we will start to see evidence of alien life. (or not).
"imagining to travel using timewarps"
Our existing propulsion methods are purely Newtonian and are pretty useless for really long distances as demonstrated by the Voyager probes, the fastest man-made objects in existence, launched in 1977 and only just leaving the solar system. What's needed is Einsteinian propulsion, something that acts directly on spacetime but nobody knows how to do that yet and if we don't do the research nobody ever will.
... for a Guaranteeing Absolute Immunity with HyperRadioProActive Impunity.
Does anyone else virtualise and realise that establishing a moon base extraordinarily renders to space flight personnel and all who be also Great Game Virtual Terrain Team Leaders, Astute Active Autonomous AI Command and Remote Ambiguous Control of Anonymous Lunacy on Earth and in Dumb Warring Machine Machinery ...... Idiot Infrastructures with Crazed Humanised Networks into Madness and Mayhem for Conflict and CHAOS*?
And as such, is IT more likely a Type NSA/GCHQ/FSB/MSS Program for Civilised Pogroms and Future Planning than NASA/ESA/Roscosmos/CNSA Operation?
*Cloud Hosting Advanced Operating Systems.
Dr Bostrom believes we've entered a new kind of technological era with the capacity to threaten our future as never before. These are "threats we have no track record of surviving".Likening it to a dangerous weapon in the hands of a child, he says the advance of technology has overtaken our capacity to control the possible consequences.
Experiments in areas such as synthetic biology, nanotechnology and machine intelligence are hurtling forward into the territory of the unintended and unpredictable. …. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22002530
The SMARTR money ensure and assures one that the technological capacity changes the future as never before, with ITs Command and Control in the hands, hearts and minds of those and/or that which can handle it surprisingly easily.
Methinks though, that such be a quite alien concept to those and/or that which is earthed and grounded in past establishmentarianism ….. status quo maintenance.
And yes, there is no questionable doubt at all that IT can be dangerously weaponised as well, and way beyond anything which can be earthly controlled by present systems of SCADA provenance and intelligence service.
And how very odd for the BBC to be sharing some real news for a change.
Do those who suggested cables even humorously; realise the moon orbits the Earth?
As it goes round and round it will wind itself in and collide with us!
Beaming Gigawatts of power back here is going to need more than a tinfoil hat to stop your brains frying, you'll have to have a mirror on your head and a Faraday suit.
Sign me up for a guided tour given by a 3 foot Grey but I would like to opt out of the probing please.
if you connected the cable to one of the poles with a swivel connector then it would work.
It's crazy really, putting a solar power station in orbit would be a much better bet as the death ray collimated energy beam would have a shorter distance to cover. Ideally we would build a space elevator and the power could run down cable connected to that.
Some of the ones who do have actually suggested hanging such cables in orbit as a power generating method.
Frankly, if we can't deal with the NIMBYs over the practicality of earth side production, I don't see any way to deal with it in space. Because it's fundamentally the same issue even if you do change the color of the clothing the "bad" guy is wearing.
Not sure about his choice though.
And beaming solar power from the Moon was evaluated in the 1970's as well.
It was viewed as a turkey, however I'm not sure if the study thought you'd bring the panels from Earth or mfg in situ. In principle the latter lowers the input mass considerably.
Helium mining: Yes, we need lots of helium on earth, because we are running out. But we have no way of transferring electricity generated on the moon to earth. The only thing that should be solar powered on the moon are helium factories.
Also: The "dark side of the moon" is more viable for solar power than the earth oriented side. The earth oriented side will go dark every month for half a month PLUS everytime the shadow of earth covers the moon up, this may not be very often but it happens. The dark side of the moon will only be dark for half a month, but because its always facing away from earth, it won't be blocked by earths shadow ever.
I agree in principle that going to the Moon makes much more sense than Mars:
1. Do we really want China to have a monopoly on the moon?
2. Astronomy - rather easier to do a Hubble type telescope repair/upgrade if it (and other Astronomy satellites) were at a moon base. You could also use/reuse/adapt them for much longer instead of burning them up in the atmosphere when they run out of fuel.
3. Learning to survive off-planet without going all the way to Mars where you are probably beyond rescue if things go badly wrong.
4. Nuclear waste dump anyone?
But moon dust may be a barrier. It seems to be a bigger problem than most people realize, not sure if Mars dust would also present issues?
# 4. Nuclear waste dump anyone? #
Launching nuclear waste to the moon on rockets built by the lowest bidder could be a very bad thing.
Look for "thorium remix" on YouTube. It may turn out to be possible to "burn up" a large percentage of current radioactive material in spent reactor fuel rods which are only 5% byproducts anyway. It will have to be proven if that's viable, but the prospect is certainly worth looking into as the lace panty crowd is trying to shut down all nuclear reactors everywhere.
I agree that leaving China alone on the moon with their own bases is a frighting thought. Sun Tsu. The moon is the ultimate "high ground".
1) China is in no position to monopolize anything, and even if they did there is probably no celestial body they're more welcome to than the moon. It is uniquely low in raw materials in the entire solar system, due to the way it formed. The only thing it has is location, ie it's close to Earth and easy to reach.
2) An optical telescope doesn't like dust, vibrations or gravity, and so is better off in free space. A radio telescope could be useful, but it'd have to be built on the "dark" side of the moon.
3) If the object is to learn to survive on Mars, you'll get better training in the dry valleys of Antarctica, as Antarctica is far more similar to Mars than Luna is, and at a tiny fraction of the cost.
4) Nuclear waste is easy to safely store here on Earth too, just bury it in bedrock. The only problem is irrational anti-nuclear hysteria (we've got people actively worrying about what happens in 100 000 years, compare that to the inability to care about what happens NOW with all other forms of pollution!). That same hysteria makes it impossible to fly nuclear waste to Luna even if there was any point of doing so, and it could be done economically.
It's a dead rock with very little raw materials and no interesting science. And if you put solar panels on it, they're going to be in darkness 50% of the time.
By all means put solar panels in space - but that should be open space, where they get 24/7 sunlight.
Solar panels on the moon? They seem to have overlooked the fact that it rotates once a month, therefore a 14x greater night backup problem than here on Earth. I don't say that solar panels are economic anywhere, but in space at a distance where sunlight isn't obscured would be the sensible option.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
