NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes, return to the Moon. Why would we ever do a thing like that? you might ask. We'd do it for a number of reasons. Lunarpedia (http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Lunarpedia:About) is a great resource if you're interested in information as to why we'd go back.

The main reason would be to mine Helium-3, an isotope so rare that it sells for $1.5 million per kilo.

Please, if you have any other ideas as to why we should go back, post them here.

Yes, so I can play canball. On the moon.

Pointless waste of money.

It is the gateway to the rest of the solar system. To reach out to the other planets, we must first colonise the Moon.

Pointless waste of money.

Only if you wish humanity a swift extinction.

Finally going to make that "Up Yours Russia" carving?

I'm into it.

Please, if you have any other ideas as to why we should go back, post them here.

To practice our space travelling for one thing - we can't get it right just by guessing. As for the cost - that's one thing that will go down the more space exploration we do. The arrival of private spacetravel ought to help with that.

Helium 3, makes energy a whole lot cheaper than it currently is.

There was an article in Time about that a little while ago. I don't see any reason for going, unless we're actually going to do something, like buildings or something.

Pointless waste of money.

Actually it's really cheap. We could go to Proxima Centauri on what we've spent in Iraq.

Only if you wish humanity a swift extinction.

Helium-3 will save humanity from extinction?

Finally going to make that "Up Yours Russia" carving?

what else? :D

It is the gateway to the rest of the solar system. To reach out to the other planets, we must first colonise the Moon.

If I'm not mistaken, most of the energy used is just to get out of our atmosphere-once a craft is in space, I think it continues on at a constant speed with little energy needed to make corrections.

So yeah- if we were able to establish a base on the moon, maybe that would become a launch/command center for future space missions,satellites.
Probably can get clearer images of distant targets if we did observation from the moon.

Also-most of the catastrophies seem to happen within our atmosphere-maybe the incidence of those would be reduced too.

Helium-3 will save humanity from extinction?
No, drinking games like canball will. On the moon.

Pointless waste of money.

Care to be a little more in depth?

Helium-3 will save humanity from extinction?
No, but if we colonise the solar system, at least we won't have all our eggs in one basket ;)

If I'm not mistaken, most of the energy used is just to get out of our atmosphere-once a craft is in space, I think it continues on at a constant speed with little energy needed to make corrections.

So yeah- if we were able to establish a base on the moon, maybe that would become a launch/command center for future space missions,satellites.
Probably can get clearer images of distant targets if we did observation from the moon.

Also-most of the catastrophies seem to happen within our atmosphere-maybe the incidence of those would be reduced too.

Yeah...but we'd have to get people to the moon first. :\

If I'm not mistaken, most of the energy used is just to get out of our atmosphere-once a craft is in space, I think it continues on at a constant speed with little energy needed to make corrections.

So yeah- if we were able to establish a base on the moon, maybe that would become a launch/command center for future space missions,satellites.
Probably can get clearer images of distant targets if we did observation from the moon.

Also-most of the catastrophies seem to happen within our atmosphere-maybe the incidence of those would be reduced too.

Thank you for spelling these things out. I'm so immersed that I take such points as given :)

Why don't we focus on Mars instead?

Why don't we focus on Mars instead?

We need the Moon as a stepping stone and practice for that.

Why don't we focus on Mars instead?

I think that is one of the reasons why we focus on the moon first.

Why don't we focus on Mars instead?

Moon is first step to Mars *nods*

No, drinking games like canball will. On the moon.

I like the way you think. You should run for VP with Cthulhu.

But can you imagine the journeys?!

"Are we there yet?"

"No."

"How about now?"

"No."

"Now?"

"NO!"

And plus sending NSGers back to the moon isn't a good idea. Last time we ended up causing tidal waves in South East Asia :/

Actually it's really cheap. We could go to Proxima Centauri on what we've spent in Iraq.

I didn't say Iraq wasn't a waste of money either. Anyway this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9355479/) doesn't sound cheap.

We need the Moon as a stepping stone and practice for that.Yep. With the earth in sight, there is always a, um, fallback ;) ...

No, but if we colonise the solar system, at least we won't have all our eggs in one basket ;)

well said!

The Earth won't be a safe-heaven forever. The human race needs to learn how to live without the Earth, if it intends to continue thru the ages. The moon would be the next step, after the space station being the first.

well said!

The Earth won't be a safe-heaven forever. The human race needs to learn how to live without the Earth, if it intends to continue thru the ages. The moon would be the next step, after the space station being the first.Terok Nor?

Thank you for spelling these things out. I'm so immersed that I take such points as given :)

I wasnt correcting you, just expanding on your comment.


Although it is a huge cost, I think having a presence of some type on the moon is beneficial to mankind.

From time to time,they discuss the impending threat of Earth taking a direct hit from an asteroid that would either drastically change life the way we know it,or end it altogether.

Maybe having a base of operation on the moon could help us determine a threat sooner and give us an advantage on dealing with it.

That would make the costs associated seem trivial.

well said!

The Earth won't be a safe-heaven forever. The human race needs to learn how to live without the Earth, if it intends to continue thru the ages. The moon would be the next step, after the space station being the first.

For the record, the full list of steps:

Space Travel->Near-Earth Station -> Moon -> Moon Base -> Mars -> Station -> Rest of Solar System

I wasnt correcting you, just expanding on your comment.


Although it is a huge cost, I think having a presence of some type on the moon is beneficial to mankind.

From time to time,they discuss the impending threat of Earth taking a direct hit from an asteroid that would either drastically change life the way we know it,or end it altogether.

Maybe having a base of operation on the moon could help us determine a threat sooner and give us an advantage on dealing with it.

That would make the costs associated seem trivial. Exactly!

For the record, the full list of steps:

Space Travel->Near-Earth Station -> Moon -> Moon Base -> Mars -> Station -> Rest of Solar SystemWhat about a mobile space station?

What about a mobile space station?

What about a mobile moonbase?

Or a mobile moon for that matter?

What about a mobile moonbase?

Or a mobile moon for that matter?

Mobile space goats!

Helium-3 will save humanity from extinction?

Eventually we have to leave this rock for another home. Apparently after just a billion years or so the Earth will be to hot for us humans to handle. The projected heat output from the sun will evaporate the oceans. We could live on Mars for another 500 million years before we need to move it out all together. Why not get started on the project now. Times a wasting....

What about a mobile moonbase?

Or a mobile moon for that matter?

Heh, you move the moon just a bit out of its orbit with Earth and you can say goodbye to the stability of Earth's climate.

Or a mobile moon for that matter?Like this??

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/death-star-1.jpg

Heh, you move the moon just a bit out of its orbit with Earth and you can say goodbye to the stability of Earth's climate.

I've always said that the moon and Mobil-Exxon were in bed together.

Please, if you have any other ideas as to why we should go back, post them here.

I'm against the idea; I believe it will threaten our traditional dairy farmers and may force them out of business. We have enough cheese here already, thank you very much.

Like this??

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/death-star-1.jpg

I think we should build a "Deathstar". Maybe then the Aliens will think twice about abducting people and cows and making those damn crop circles. :D

I think we should build a "Deathstar". Maybe then the Aliens will think twice about abducting people and cows and making those damn crop circles. :D

Seriously. The larger one builds a space vessel the farther is a possible range of operation. With a ship/station that size it would be safe to reach Mars, Jupiter moons, or even near star systems.

Like this??

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/death-star-1.jpg

That's no moon! That's a battlestation!

Seriously. The larger one builds a space vessel the farther is a possible range of operation. With a ship/station that size it would be safe to reach Mars, Jupiter moons, or even near star systems.

Joking aside I think we should build a large station like that and most likely we will. I would imagine that Star Wars will have a bigger impact on our future then we think. However could you imagine the cost of such a project?

Joking aside I think we should build a large station like that and most likely we will. I would imagine that Star Wars will have a bigger impact on our future then we think. However could you imagine the cost of such a project?

3 Iraq wars and a Vietnam?

3 Iraq wars and a Vietnam?

If we could all agree to get along on this planet then we may be able to spend some money on the "mothership".

If we could all agree to get along on this planet then we may be able to spend some money on the "mothership".

I'm one of those guys who buys the theory that space travel might smooth up things between nations.

I'm one of those guys who buys the theory that space travel might smooth up things between nations.

I agree and in fact if I were the president I would release any and all information on UFO's to make it appear that we have an outside threat. Regardless if it is a threat or not it should be perceived as one for the simple fact to unite humans together. Kind of like when police come to a domestic disturbance. Nine out of ten times they all turn on the police. Same principle but use it against a perceived alien threat. Might just work....

One day I want to visit this place on Mars:

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3448/saganmarske3.jpg

I agree and in fact if I were the president I would release any and all information on UFO's to make it appear that we have an outside threat. Regardless if it is a threat or not it should be perceived as one for the simple fact to unite humans together. Kind of like when police come to a domestic disturbance. Nine out of ten times they all turn on the police. Same principle but use it against a perceived alien threat. Might just work....

So... kind of take how we went into the Iraq War but use it so that we can see cool space shit and maybe bring about world peace? You, sir, are a genius.

One day I want to visit this place on Mars:

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3448/saganmarske3.jpg

Cool pic :)

I agree and in fact if I were the president I would release any and all information on UFO's to make it appear that we have an outside threat. Regardless if it is a threat or not it should be perceived as one for the simple fact to unite humans together. Kind of like when police come to a domestic disturbance. Nine out of ten times they all turn on the police. Same principle but use it against a perceived alien threat. Might just work....

Been done (http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/0,24459,watchmen,00.html), yah?

The US simply doesn't have the money for the basics much less a major project. After the election of Nixon and the tilt to "conservative" the economy has never been strong enough to support and large programs (or smaller for that matter).

In the 40s we fought WW2, In the 50's we fought Korea, helped rebuild Europe and started the Interstate Highway system, In the 60s we fought Vietnam, went through civil rights, finished the Interstate and went to the moon.

In the 70s the space shuttle but little else........In the 80s the debt went out of control.......In the 90s money disappeared but no projects started or completed.......In the 00s we went to Iraq and, well...........Over 30 years of '"conservative" leadership or legislative control and an entire generation has grown up without the US doing anything or even proposing any great ideas. An entire generation that thinks this economy is "good". An entire generation without the ability to dream dreams.

I grieve for those who are too young to remember when the US was a great nation that led the world to a better vision.

A lunar base is required for any deep space exploration as a long distance space craft has to be launched from the moon because the escape velocity is low enough that it wouldn't cost a large amount of fuel.

It should be noted that much of our technology today was originally developed for NASA. Any spending for lunar missions will lead to scientific breakthroughs in computers and medicine.

An entire generation that thinks this economy is "good". An entire generation without the ability to dream dreams.


Eh, take a look at educational standards in the US. And ask your average school grader if he thinks his educational level, especially math, is above that of the rest of the world. Apathetic pride starts young.

It should be noted that much of our technology today was originally developed for NASA. Any spending for lunar missions will lead to scientific breakthroughs in computers and medicine.

I'm sure you aren't surprised that when I try to explain this very fact(as NASA is responsible for much of the technology we have today, which has payed itself back several times over) to some people who think we spend to much on NASA. And in actuality, the funding that NASA gets is tiny, relatively.

Oddly enough, I have found that many of the same people who say this are also ardent supporters of the Iraq war, which is basically similar to throwing a wad of money into a bottomless pit.

Why would you bother going to the moon for a small supply of heliul-3 when there isn't a fusion reactor on Earth that can use it to produce more power than it consumes?

A base on the moon is also a pretty dumb idea because anyone who stays there for too long will be weak as fucked fuck and die in a higher gravity environment like Earth. You'd need some way to simulate stronger gravity on the moon and there are just 3 ways of simulating gravgity: acceleration, large mass, and spinning. You can't move the moon and it'd be pointless to try to increase its mass to equal Earth's gravity. That leaves the grav ring, whic would have to be big, really big. It'd probably be cheaper to just tow a medium asteroid close to earth, hollow it out and fit it with a grav ring inside, and use it as a station and shipyard.

Deep space exploration does not require a lunar base, what it needs it a new kind of engine and fuel source. There were 2 main approaches being developed in the 50's and 60's that involved riding a string of explosions (NPR) or super-heating gas with waste heat from a reactor core (NERVA). The latter never got out of engine testing and the former never got that far. Phear is to blame. Phear of nukes. Phear of the environmental damage (there was practically no risk with a capped core NERVA). Those technologies could have made travel to the moon cheap enough for a middle class family to do it as a vacation.

Rocket science is simple physics and engineering. A child could understand it. some of us built functional scale models and designed whole rockets in HS.

Actually it's really cheap. We could go to Proxima Centauri on what we've spent in Iraq.

That doesn't make it cheap so much as it underscores just how mind-blowingly sad the last five years have made me feel.

Why would you bother going to the moon for a small supply of heliul-3 when there isn't a fusion reactor on Earth that can use it to produce more power than it consumes?

A base on the moon is also a pretty dumb idea because anyone who stays there for too long will be weak as fucked fuck and die in a higher gravity environment like Earth. You'd need some way to simulate stronger gravity on the moon and there are just 3 ways of simulating gravgity: acceleration, large mass, and spinning. You can't move the moon and it'd be pointless to try to increase its mass to equal Earth's gravity. That leaves the grav ring, whic would have to be big, really big. It'd probably be cheaper to just tow a medium asteroid close to earth, hollow it out and fit it with a grav ring inside, and use it as a station and shipyard.

Deep space exploration does not require a lunar base, what it needs it a new kind of engine and fuel source. There were 2 main approaches being developed in the 50's and 60's that involved riding a string of explosions (NPR) or super-heating gas with waste heat from a reactor core (NERVA). The latter never got out of engine testing and the former never got that far. Phear is to blame. Phear of nukes. Phear of the environmental damage (there was practically no risk with a capped core NERVA). Those technologies could have made travel to the moon cheap enough for a middle class family to do it as a vacation.

Rocket science is simple physics and engineering. A child could understand it. some of us built functional scale models and designed whole rockets in HS.
Thank you, Dosuun, for once again injecting some sense in this matter...

Except for one thing: we'd need at least a temporary moon base to be able to launch the kind of ship necessary to tow said asteroid in the first place. We don't need it to be there too long, just long enough to give us a stepping stone till we have our real stepping stone in place.

Other than that, I agree with you.

Pointless waste of money.

Agreed.

Agreed.

No, it isn't. Do you realize how much raw metal alone is sitting out there in the asteroid belt waiting to be harvested? Not to mention the countless other resources we could gain from the other planets/moons/what have you in this solar system alone, PLUS the benefits of interstellar travel--when developed--in terms of not only preserving our species, but discovering even more new resources. We might discover an energy source derived from some kind of crystal or material that is non-existant in our own solar system, for instance.

Fact is, space travel can bring a hell of a lot more benefits than pretty pictures and general knowledge...it can ease the resources problems we will be having substantially, if not eliminate them entirely.

Agreed.

Please dont spam threads with your pointless trolling.





And I think those who are against building a moon base are against progress. They want humankind to perish just so they can say I told you so. Well to these vile people I say FUCK YOU we will one day colonise the moon and the stars and in 300 years time you naysayers will be a distant memory. So enjoy your self-hating existence now while you still can.

Please dont spam threads with your pointless trolling.

I'm entitled to my opinion.

And I think those who are against building a moon base are against progress. They want humankind to perish just so they can say I told you so. Well to these vile people I say FUCK YOU we will one day colonise the moon and the stars and in 300 years time you naysayers will be a distant memory. So enjoy your self-hating existence now while you still can.

Hmmm? I'm all-for a Moon-base, but to just spend billions to go to the Moon, like a vacation, or something is a waste of money. "Whoopee, we, uh, went to the moon! Wave at the camera, let's go home now..." if it's anything other then that, I'm pro, but otherwise, *thumbs-down*.

I'm entitled to my opinion.



Hmmm? I'm all-for a Moon-base, but to just spend billions to go to the Moon, like a vacation, or something is a waste of money. "Whoopee, we, uh, went to the moon! Wave at the camera, let's go home now..." if it's anything other then that, I'm pro, but otherwise, *thumbs-down*.


Oh, sorry, I thought you were against the whole idea. :D

Oh, sorry, I thought you were against the whole idea. :D

Oh, NO! If I were alive during the original Moon-landings, I'd be behind them all-the-way. I just want progress. Why spend so-much money to repeat break-thoughs?

Oh, NO! If I were alive during the original Moon-landings, I'd be behind them all-the-way. I just want progress. Why spend so-much money to repeat break-thoughs?

It would be progress, we'd be COLONISING the moon.

A large scale space travel project would be a peaceful impetus to scientific/technological innovation.

It would be progress, we'd be COLONISING the moon.

The OP just mentions going back.

Of course we should go back, it's the stepping stone for so much more - this quote puts it far more gracefully than I could:

"Is it worth it? Should we just pull back, forget the whole thing as a bad idea and take care of our own problems at home?"
"No. We have to stay here and there's a simple reason why. Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe and Lao-Tzu and Einstein and Morobuto and Buddy Holly and Aristophenes .. and all of this .. all of this was for nothing unless we go to the stars."

-- Mary Ann Cramer interviews Cmdr. Sinclair in Babylon 5:"Infection"

The OP just mentions going back.
... how else are we going to get there?

Yes, return to the Moon. Why would we ever do a thing like that? you might ask. We'd do it for a number of reasons. Lunarpedia (http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Lunarpedia:About) is a great resource if you're interested in information as to why we'd go back.

The main reason would be to mine Helium-3, an isotope so rare that it sells for $1.5 million per kilo.

Please, if you have any other ideas as to why we should go back, post them here.

Ummm errrrr ohh yeah ohh ohh coz it's there, and we can!

... how else are we going to get there?

Yes, but I mean just going-back, for no-other reason then just to go-back, is stupid.

Yes, but I mean just going-back, for no-other reason then just to go-back, is stupid.

Sooo exploration just for the sake of exploration is stupid?

Please, if you have any other ideas as to why we should go back, post them here.

So Dubya can tell his wife "Bang, zoom, straight to the moon" and mean it?

The main reason would be to mine Helium-3, an isotope so rare that it sells for $1.5 million per kilo.


Helium-3 will be as common as gold, once we crack hydrogen fusion. Which seems much more worthwhile, frankly.

Plus, how much He3 can the market bear? Got a lotta uses, does it?

No, I didn't read your link. No I don't care. The great space fuck has been done already.

:p

For now, He3 has 2 main applications. It can be used as a short lived radio isotope for NMR imaging, especially of the lung. http://www.phys.ens.fr/enseign/fip/seminaires/rapports/nacher.pdf

Or it could be used in fusion research.

Technically, it could be used to make newer H-bombs, but that's unpleasant to consider.

Just this afternoon, I saw a piece on the History Channel in which scientists seemed to agree that a base on Moon (check your style manuals, it's not "the Moon" anymore) is our best bet for launching fast, effective solutions against the possibility of an approaching planet-killer.

An extremely large asteroid hitting our planet (again) may not be the most likely circumstance in the universe, but the consequences are dire enough that we should be prepared.

We'll I guess I'll see you guys on the dark side of the moon...

We'll I guess I'll see you guys on the dark side of Moon...

BAD! *Hits with rolled-up newspaper*

Read the post above you...

BAD! *Hits with rolled-up newspaper*

Read the post above you...

Hits you with a shovel...I have Brain Damage! :(

BAD! *Hits with rolled-up newspaper*

Read the post above you...

You tell him, The Minaris!

People, please. Perfectly symmetrical violence never solves anything.

Like this??

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/death-star-1.jpg

That's no moon.... it's a space station!

Hits you with a shovel...I have Brain Damage! :(

*Grabs bat*

Brain damage? Ok then...

*Hits in liver/kidney/gut area*

*Grabs bat*

Brain damage? Ok then...

*Hits in liver/kidney/gut area*

My original post was a refrence to Brain Damage by Pink Floyd, I was sure I was being obvious