regarding the recent discovery on the moon

[Cpickens89]

sorry if this is in the wrong area


im sure just about everyones seen this but got a few questions
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0 ... -moon.html

1. how did we not detect this back in the 60's when we collected rocks from the moon ?

2. how many years does this put us ahead with the possability of colonizing the moon or does it affect it at all?

3. do you think well have at least a small colony on the moon by say possibly 2050 or before

what would make that cool is that by that time id be hitting 61 so i would be able to be apart of seeing the beginning's lol kinda exciting to me at least ... that is if i make it that far knowing my crazy self lol

 

[MeteorWayne]

BTW, here's what the story is about:

Uranium exists on the moon, according to new data from a Japanese spacecraft.

The findings are the first conclusive evidence for the presence of the radioactive element in lunar dirt, the researchers said. They announced the discovery recently at the 40th Lunar and Planetary Conference and at the Proceedings of the International Workshop Advances in Cosmic Ray Science.

The revelation suggests that nuclear power plants could be built on the moon, or even that Earth's satellite could serve as a mining source for uranium needed back home.

The Japanese Kaguya spacecraft, which was launched in 2007, detected uranium with a gamma-ray spectrometer. Scientists are using the instrument to create maps of the moon's surface composition, showing the presence of thorium, potassium, oxygen, magnesium, silicon, calcium, titanium and iron.

"We've already gotten uranium results, which have never been reported before," said Robert Reedy, a senior scientist at the Tucson-based Planetary Science Institute, and a member of the Kaguya science team. "We're getting more new elements and refining and confirming results found on the old maps."

Regarding your questions:

1. We only brought back a few hundred pounds of moon rocks from 6 specific locations. Without details of how widespread the U is, it seems quite likely there just was none where we sampled. Most (really all but the last mission) were in flat, safe areas. In the Uranium on the surface, only in disturbed areas, only in a few spots? We don't know from this story.

2. Well it certainly helps for long range planning. What isotope of Uranium is it? Will we need to create centrifuges to collect the right isotopes for reactor fuel? If so, that's a huge project on earth. SO it's hard to say for sure.

3. Before 2050...I wish it, but 2050 might be the earliest I could imagine a "colony". We might have long term labs (like Antarctica) before then, though.
MW

 

[Cpickens89]

i guess i should of made this more of the question

since the moon is reletively safe((using this word loosley)) to visit and that we can put humans on the surface would you think they would want to get back up there to survey first hand sooner rather than later or are they able to do it better by satalite at this time ?


in what i was saying about colony's i wasnt thinking crazy like cities :shock: an all but more of somthing like labs where we could stay short term like the space station in orbit we have now im not that cooky yet :?

i dont remeber when they did this but i learned that its possible to create oxygen from rocks , couldnt that serve as a possible part to a life support system's that would be needed for distant future stays?



im definatelty keeping my eyes open for more developments in this its pretty interesting
MeteorWayne you are one smart man sure ya been told that billions of times lol :geek: thanks for the help on my goofy out there questions i post around here

 

[MeteorWayne]

LOL, First of all, I'm not necessarily smart, just a reading addict

Second, your questions aren't goofy, they're quite good!

 

[neilsox]

I agree mine-able uranium deposits on the moon is a plus for far future colonies. Likely the isotope mix is only slightly different than Earth typical, so a separation plant (especially a highly automated separation plant) is a big project that requires lots of energy and wide variety of materials and chemicals. Lots of solar energy is available about two weeks out of each 27? day period, so I suppose this and most other projects could shut down for each long cold night.
After completion of some nuclear power plants, projects not too sensitive to the cold could run both day and night. Instead of running power lines, power could be beamed by laser from one mountain peak or ridge to another. What are the disadvantages of moon colonies near the tops of mountains, instead of on level ground? Neil

 

[MeteorWayne]

A lot of it depends on where the Uranium (and the isoptopic composition) of the deposits are.
That is not clear from the article, hopefully we can find some more scientific data, rather than hype.

 

[BuzzLY]

Regarding 2050 ... a "colony" might be too strong. I would think that by 2050 we could have an outpost much like those on antarctica of maybe 6-8 scientist ... growing to maybe several of about 15-20-each by the end of the century. I would be pleased with that.