LETS NUKE THE MOON TO FIND WATER.

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
StarRider1701":1v62jzat said:
And what's up with the "Holier than thou" attitude that this one little thread in the Unexplained area somehow upsets the credibility of the entire SDC post! OK, so you're a Mod, MW. But people are entitled to thier opinions whether you like or agree with them or not. How about taking a few steps down from that way too high horse, dude?

Just to be clear, when I post as a user, I have the same rights to my opinions as you or any other user do. Many users have horses of various sizes that they ride on. If you don't like it, you are free to disagree. As is anyone else.

When I post as a moderator, I always make that clear. Being a moderator is a totally different function than being a user. As a user I can be just as opinionated and assertive, and annoying as anyone else :)
 
S

StarRider1701

Guest
MeteorWayne":18txqtso said:
When I post as a moderator, I always make that clear. Being a moderator is a totally different function than being a user. As a user I can be just as opinionated and assertive, and annoying as anyone else :)
Fair enough, MW. I appreciate that you can accept disagreement with you the poster without pissing off you the Mod!
 
H

highdobb

Guest
Nuking the moon provides no new information. So why again would that be a good idea to fight and pay for? Because one person "thinks" it's a cool idea?! WOW, thank god they aren't the ones calling the shots at NASA :D
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
highdobb":1p3123tv said:
Nuking the moon provides no new information. So why again would that be a good idea to fight and pay for? Because one person "thinks" it's a cool idea?! WOW, thank god they aren't the ones calling the shots at NASA :D
Again nuking the moon at the right location would make a BIGGER DEEPER crater and perhaps hit an aquafer that may fill in the crater with liquid water which will then quickly freeze. Any thoughts?
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
StarRider1701":vk5uvhzr said:
OH come on MW, lets stop forgetting that we already have bombs and missiles capable of burrowing into the ground prior to detonation. Totally no need to land anything, just pick a nice soft spot in the regolith and fire a missile.
I too think this "nuke the moon" idea is a stupid waste, but lets not totally ignore our weapons capabilities and go out of the way to make the idea artificially too expensive using lame excuses.
Of course, we don't know which are the soft spots in the regolith, in part because the best spots to find water are also the ones we can't see because they're pitch black. ;-) But I wonder how much better a nuclear bunker buster would be compared to the largest practical kinetic energy weapon we could muster? Kinetic energy weapons would be much more effective on the Moon, which of course lacks an atmosphere to slow them down prior to impact. My uneducated hunch is that we'll get more absolute bang (to say nothing of bang for the buck) with the kinetic energy impactor, especially if we can spend a lot of time getting it up to a good speed, with ion drives *and* gravity assist maneuvers.
 
E

Eman_3

Guest
The outer space treaty is very specific.

the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;

outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;

outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;

States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;

the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;

astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;

States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental activities;
States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and

States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.
THis treaty was ratified by the US on Jan21, 2005. Sure, go ahead and break this treaty for a non-essential project. Thus, the USA cannot be trusted in it's promises, and shall not receive reciprocal treatement by other nations. For instance, on the Convention on the High Seas treaty, Article 8 states
1. Warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag
State.

In other words, if the USA breaks treaties, then anyone is allowed to sink a US registered ship and get away with it. Imagine some Cuban gunboat sinking a cruise liner fresh out of Miami...
Or the second a nuclear warhead lifts off the ground, Russia, China, and other would quickly install battle satellites in space, and that means nuclear weapons pointed at the USA, and all just orbiting just a few hundred miles up.

Or.. since the US breaks treaties, then US soldiers are not subject to the Geneva convention and can be tortured or killed by anyone who captures them.
 
S

Smersh

Guest
MeteorWayne":s7dtanvy said:
... As a user I can be just as opinionated and assertive, and annoying as anyone else :)
And you usually are. :lol: ;)
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
"Or.. since the US breaks treaties, then US soldiers are not subject to the Geneva convention and can be tortured or killed by anyone who captures them."

They do that to us anyways don't they?
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
If we are going to focus on the treaty aspects, this will wind up in politics..trust me, you don't want to go there.
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
Mee_n_Mac":18oluyu7 said:
I'm wondering of what use the radioactive water will be ?
We don't need to use this contaminated water. The large deep crater would prove the existance of aquafers on the moon. We can then drill into other aquafers and tap into the cleaner water.
 
S

Solifugae

Guest
Why not set up a giant accelerator on the moon that can create anti-hydrogen? When we have enough, we can crack the moon open with a giant anti-matter bomb and see if any water spills out. I estimate this will cost, ooh, 500 Thousand Septllion Dollars, but I'm sure the data and horrible planet bombarding debris will make it worth while.

My next proposal involves a giant airship which a three man crew can pedal to Gliese 581d.
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
Solifugae":e1utn7hf said:
Why not set up a giant accelerator on the moon that can create anti-hydrogen? When we have enough, we can crack the moon open with a giant anti-matter bomb and see if any water spills out. I estimate this will cost, ooh, 500 Thousand Septllion Dollars, but I'm sure the data and horrible planet bombarding debris will make it worth while.

My next proposal involves a giant airship which a three man crew can pedal to Gliese 581d.
ummm......water is not going to come spilling out of the moon, trust me.
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
quantumnumber":3euwlazl said:
Solifugae":3euwlazl said:
Why not set up a giant accelerator on the moon that can create anti-hydrogen? When we have enough, we can crack the moon open with a giant anti-matter bomb and see if any water spills out. I estimate this will cost, ooh, 500 Thousand Septllion Dollars, but I'm sure the data and horrible planet bombarding debris will make it worth while.

My next proposal involves a giant airship which a three man crew can pedal to Gliese 581d.
ummm......water is not going to come spilling out of the moon, trust me.
It may seep into the bottom of the nuked excavated crater though!
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
quantumnumber":1tpr9pvg said:
ummm......water is not going to come spilling out of the moon, trust me.
I believe Solifugae was going for comedy. ;-)
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
Hey brother, don't feel bad! At least you're thinking about something! :) :cool:


Keep onnnnnn thinking! :!: ;)
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
CalliArcale":152p1l3j said:
quantumnumber":152p1l3j said:
ummm......water is not going to come spilling out of the moon, trust me.
I believe Solifugae was going for comedy. ;-)
... Oh...

:(

OK..

<turns around>

Hey guys, lose the blimp. It's a no-go.
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
Though I admit, I do like the idea of peddling a blimp to Gliese 581d. Rather steampunk. :cool:
 
C

cyclonebuster

Guest
How about setting the nuke off about a mile under the surface?
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Why not a kilometer. It's more scientific, and is just as unrealistic.
 
S

Smersh

Guest
MeteorWayne":11x1nt2c said:
Why not a kilometer. It's more scientific, and is just as unrealistic.
How about 2 leagues deep. Or 14 furlongs. It's both unscientific and unrealistic, but more entertaining to discuss. ;)
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
It's unrealistic, yes, but certainly not impossible.

At any rate, we found 220 gallons of life juice on the Moon today!!! Hooray!!!! Drinking water, oxygen, and hydrogen!!! Yippy-Yigh-Yay-K-O!!!

This should give a major kick in the rear and impetus to the new moon base efforts. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY