The Astronomy Thread

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,506
572
1d 23h 2m
Utterly pointless in the grand scheme of things.
Lol. A manned permanent outpost on another planetary body? I'd say that's quite something. We should have had one twenty years ago if it weren't for all those fucking entitlements. Kennedy started the Space Race, Johnson ended it with the War on Poverty - it just took a little while to die. I'd happily give up $100 billion in mixed spending (50/50 defense/entitlements) to get back into the race back to the moon. Perhaps China can inspire Washington - but it seems doubtful when priorities are so fucked.

A big shame.
 

Maec_sl

shitlord
5
0
0
A self sustaining base on the moon would allow many various sciences to have gigantic leaps forward. You also reduce the amount of expenses not having to eject rockets out of the atmosphere. The initial cost would be staggering, but as soon as you can start mining asteroids it would easily be made back up.
 

Mudcrush Durtfeet

Hungry Ogre
2,117
-877
A self sustaining base on the moon would be great if it could manufacture useful things that would otherwise need to be lifted to orbit from Earth.
 
922
2
0
A self sustaining base on the moon would be great if it could manufacture useful things that would otherwise need to be lifted to orbit from Earth.
I can't see a manned base on the moon being necessary.

They can do asteroid mining / processing at a Lagrange Point Orbit and save energy from take off and landing. Then just deliver the resources where they are needed.

The actual need for a moon base is small though. A moon base might be constructed at some point in the future for tourism or as a "hey look what we can do" kinda thing when the price of such a venture drops.

Asteroid mining would be essential to lower the price of such an endeavor and should be the focus of any serious manned space exploration projects imo.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,506
572
1d 23h 2m
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...224525825.html


So how, precisely, can we test whether we exist? Put simply, researchers are building their own simulated models, using a technique called lattice quantum chromodynamics. And while those models are currently able to produce models only slightly larger than the nucleus of an atom, University of Washington physics professor Martin Savage says the same principles used in creating those simulations can be applied on a larger scale.

"This is the first testable signature of such an idea," Savage said. "If you make the simulations big enough, something like our universe should emerge."

The testing method is far more complex. Consider the Cornell University explanation: "Using the historical development of lattice gauge theory technology as a guide, we assume that our universe is an early numerical simulation with unimproved Wilson fermion discretization and investigate potentially-observable consequences."

To translate, if energy signatures in our simulations match those in the universe at large, there's a good chance we, too, exist within a simulation.
 

Blide_sl

shitlord
188
1
0
Wouldn't a lunar base be necessary if we ever wanted to get helium-3 off the moon? Of course, we'd need to develop fusion first for that to really be needed.
 
922
2
0
Earth is a gravity well, leaving every one in space all the time means bone loss. Solution = Moon.
One solution, but there are also designs for rotating space craft that can use Centrifugal force to provide a downward force simulating a force similar to gravity. I'm sure when our society reaches the point where this is potentially worthwhile there will be a cost / benefit analysis performed on all options with a moon base being one of those options. Personally, I can't imagine a moon base being established cheaper than some rotational space craft which has the added bonus of being mobile. Either way, I'm sure the brains at companies like SpaceX have models for such things and if it was ever viable would release plans in search of investors.

Besides, I'd imagine a lot of mining / processing can be automated. I very much doubt it would take a large portion of any asteroid mining complex for human operators meaning the entire thing would no.



TL/DR

A moon base isn't something required for early space exploration efforts.
 
922
2
0
Wouldn't a lunar base be necessary if we ever wanted to get helium-3 off the moon? Of course, we'd need to develop fusion first for that to really be needed.
They can process water from asteroids into fuel also. Which option is more cost effective comes down to that cost / benefit analysis performed by somebody when the time is right.

Either way, private companies are starting with asteroids and pulling them into orbit to mine them. Even if you were to set up a base on the moon it would be tricky to mine the asteroids on the moon because you'd have to pretty much crash them into the moon then collect them.

They can get fuel from asteroids, but if asteroid mining / manned space exploration does become big, then the need for a moon base as a fuel station would grow.

I don't think this is a situation where there should be people/countries investing crazy amounts of money on a moon base before there is a demand for asteroid mining / manned space exploration. We might end up failing at mining so bad that the moon base will not currently be necessary.
 

Eomer

Trakanon Raider
5,472
270
10m
Earth is a gravity well, leaving every one in space all the time means bone loss. Solution = Moon.
Build large spacecraft that rotate, giving them artificial gravity. Bam, problem solved.

As far as I'm aware, the main argument for a moon base is that it's a convenient radiation shield as compared to having bases at lagrange points or on asteroids.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,506
572
1d 23h 2m
Build large spacecraft that rotate, giving them artificial gravity. Bam, problem solved.

As far as I'm aware, the main argument for a moon base is that it's a convenient radiation shield as compared to having bases at lagrange points or on asteroids.
Fuck you guys. I want my mother fucking moon base.

Also
http://www.space.com/18904-white-hou...-petition.html

The Obama administration will have to respond to a petition to begin construction of a Death Star by 2016, now that the appeal has gathered a critical number of signatures.

The "Star Wars"-inspired petition was posted on the White House's "We the People" site on Nov. 14, and today it passed the 25,000-signature threshold required for an official reply.

"Those who sign here petition the United States government to secure funding and resources, and begin construction on a Death Star by 2016,"
 

gogusrl

Lord Nagafen Raider
1,346
79
4d 20h 38m
EGWGQ.jpg

EGWGQ.jpg


EGWGQ.jpg
 

Gavinmad

Silver Baron of the Realm
34,462
32,442
298d 19h 23m
I'd be more interested in setting up permanent stations at Lagrange points than on the moon.

zAVMI.png


zAVMI.png


zAVMI.png
 

meStevo

I think your wife's a bigfoot gus.
<Silver Donator>
5,314
3,442
53d 8h 43m
New mastcam images from Mars today look cool.

rrr_img_5468.jpg