Moon exploration dead?

[tanstaafl76]

<br />Would it be theoretically possible to use microwaves to send energy to earth from the moon, say from a field of solar panels on the lunar surface? The panels would arguably be easier to service sitting on the lunar surface than they would in orbit, we wouldn't have to worry about orbiting space junk running into them, and it would provide a tangible benefit to having a permanent presence on the moon (as well as a good local power source for a lunar outpost).<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

The proposed GEO systems would always be over a specific location on Earth. However, your Moon base's location over Earth would constantly change. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Actually, I figure that rodents and disease will find their way to the moon quite readily once we have colonies there. Just wait. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[vulture2]

>>send energy to earth from the moon, say from a field of solar panels on the lunar surface<br /><br />Unfortunately night falls on the moon, as it does on earth, so the solar panels could just as well be here.

 

[tanstaafl76]

<br />Lack of atmosphere would make them way more efficient though.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[richalex]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>That's exactly the reason that hydrogen is the best shiled material - because it has a single proton so it can't split into multiple subatomic particles.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Hydrogen is no more immune to splitting into sub-atomic particles than other elements would be. Think about this; other elements have several protons stuck together, so it takes energy to break them apart, and it is unlikely they will be broken down to individual protons. Hydrogen, though, is already a single proton, so it is already broken down. <br /><br />When energetic radiation strikes something with hydrogen in it, it is like a pool stick hitting a billiard ball. Sometimes, it knocks the proton out of the material, just like debris from a bullet hitting a brick wall. That debris can cause damage, too.

 

[MannyPim]

Hi Rich, here is what NASA says about hydrogen as a shielding material:<br /><br />"Polyethylene is a good shielding material because it has high hydrogen content, and hydrogen atoms are good at absorbing and dispersing radiation. In fact, researchers have been studying the use of polyethylene as a shielding material for some time. One of several novel material developments that the team is testing is reinforced polyethylene. Raj Kaul, a scientist in the Marshall Center's Engineering Directorate, previously has worked with this material on protective armor for helicopters. "<br /><br />Source: http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/travelinginspace/radiation_shielding.html <br /><br /> <br />And here is a brief explanation as to why hydrogen (and low atomic weight elements) work better than higher atomc weight materials for cosmic radiation shielding:<br /><br />"NASA has an extensive program for investigating materials and techniques for shielding of spacecraft and shielding of people and materials that might be involved in future long-term missions. For deep space missions, beyond the influence of the earth's magnetic field, the major primary cosmic radiations of concern are positively charged atomic nuclei, protons, helium nuclei, and some heavier nuclei. Many of these are extremely energetic and too penetrating to be stopped by the modest thicknesses of wall material used in current craft. Generally high-mass density materials, usually of high atomic number, are not good choices for shielding the spacecraft because, when struck by the primary positive ions, the nuclei of these materials fragment and produce a shower of secondary radiation that includes more charged particles, photons, and neutrons, and the thicknesses of heavy shielding material necessary to stop these becomes excessive from a weight standpoint. <br /><br />NASA has spent and is spending considerable time and <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Does the hydrogen atom cease to exist after its proton gets kicked out? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>>All plans I'm reading about very definitely call for American taxpayers to fund the beachhead. </i><br /><br />Then you haven't read all the plans. Taxpayer-funded beachheads are so 20th Century. At the rate NASA is proceeding (putting off landing for another year for each year of "progress") then US corporations and the Chinese will be on the Moon first. My personal favorite concept is the issuance of "Frontier Company" papers that enable us to register and go in a reasonable manner. America's best product is paperwork and that would be an ideal use of it. <br /><br /><i>> Forget planets. It's about space colonies, baby!</i><br /><br />Can't disagree with that. The only issue is that space colonies will require the support of planetary resources to start up and thrive. There is no way around this except possibly asteroidal resources. The in-space economy will have to be multipoint and diverse to function.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[lampblack]

<font color="yellow">Taxpayer-funded beachheads are so 20th Century.</font><br /><br />Yeah... sort of like the federal interstate highway system. I still can't imagine why they didn't allow private industry the leeway to up and devise that one. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> Yeah... sort of like the federal interstate highway system. I still can't imagine why they didn't allow private industry the leeway to up and devise that one.</i><br /><br />We are discussing beachheads, not innovative infrastructure in developed areas. My point is that govt can succeed at exploration (Cheng Ho, Columbus, Lewis & Clark, Apollo) but terrible at establishing true colonies. Colonies require essentially private, mercantile goals to succeed, anywhere, anytime. An example is the Massachusetts Bay Company.<br /><br />Flags & Footprints is not a beachhead. That's all. It has nothing to do with highways.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

Unless you have colony in mind,none will agree to spend billions of dollar.

 

[MannyPim]

Attempting the impossible is the only way to find out what is possible. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

Ye we should have an alternative to earth.Mars that possibility.

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Ye we should have an alternative to earth. Mars [can be?] that possibility. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I agree. But we should not only focus on Mars but add more chapters to the fabled "Living In Space" handbook. That is learn how to live in a ship in the inner solar system and the outer solar system. ISS only tells us how to live in low Earth orbit. Thus giving people the option to live on a planet or in space.<br /><br />Funny thought:<br />Winnebago in Space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

ou can terra form esily and live there at home.

 

[3488]

Hi alokmohan,<br /><br />Just asking, Terraform what easily??? Certainly not the Moon & Mars.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Perhaps he is talking about our success in terraforming Earth. Global warming appears to be rather successful. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Depends on how you define success. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> Unless you have colony in mind,none will agree to spend billions of dollar.</i><br /><br />The truly sad thing is that "we" are spending billions now and not getting colonies. <br /><br />For you guys asking if global warming is successful terraforming: we are more accurately venusforming the Earth. The Venutians are going to love it here when we are done. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /><br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Were they the ones with the extra arm, or the extra eye?<br /><br />{answer later} <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[3488]

The ones with the extra leg perhaps <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /><br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

jsmoody:<br />I don't think we should stop looking for microbes on Mars and in other places, but the robots can do that pretty well.<br /><br />Me:<br />There were two robots, the only two to ever specifically be tasked with finding life on mars. There were plenty of folks who just knew they would answer that question. The robots were the Viking landers and the results were largely considered to be negative despite initial optomism over some early experimental results.<br /><br />The conclusion sealed the door shut for the next twenty years on American Mars exploration. Viking 84 (1984 that is) never saw the light of day once the Viking 76 results were committed to.<br /><br />If this is a good example of robotics only exploration answering the question of life on another world...well, its no wonder I'm an advocate of both robotic and human exploration where both can be served effectively.<br /><br />The question of life on another world is too important to leave to robotics alone. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[BReif]

I think that the article is right on the money. I certainly think it is VERY likely that the next administration will be a democrat, and that the VSE will be cut and/or killed within the first 6 months on the new president's term. I believe that STS will retire on time, and Orion and ESAS will be scrapped leaving the US with no manned space program. By 2010, I think the US will be out of the manned space flight business permanently. Then, after the US retreats from manned space, the other spacefaring nations will follow suit, and quit manned flight too, leaving humanity as an Earth-bound civilization. I don't believe another attempt to get into space will happen again for 200 years after this. There is just no political support for this, nor is there any hope of any given the up-coming elections, and where many of the candidates stand on the issue. Then, too, the VSE is doomed simply because its a Bush idea and Bush program. It will be killed simply because nothing GWB started will be continued. This is also political, but it is where the US is right now.

 

[qso1]

I can easily see this happening to taxpayer financed human space exploration. However, if private industry can take over, we may not be outa the space game yet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>