Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nadaka]

The real reason newt wants a moon base is to get access to all that glorious rich whale oil.

[Karlito]

Has anyone besides me read Arthur C. Clarke's The Last Theorem? He hypothesizes that since the Moon was once actively volcanic, that there would be lava tubes beneath the surface, and because of the Moon's low gravity, these lava tubes would be enormous. So the governments in the book find one of these tubes, dig down to it, seal it off, fill it with air, and build a moon base inside of it and hold the Space Olympics.

I don't know how plausible all that is, but it's a cool idea none the less.

[Starver]

Not even mentioning the enormous boon to nanomaterials, metallurgical, and other such research. Certain materials and components have already been established as much easier to make in low gravity. Engineers are pretty much guaranteed to come up with more.

Can I try to hold you back from such a red-herring?

There are processes that are easier to deal with in zero (or near-as-makes-no-difference-zero) gravity conditions, and there are actually a lot of things that (through past expertise at least) we find gravity useful for.

Lunar industries are subjected to gravity big enough to make a lot of the former advantages go away and not big enough to necessarily allow a full shift of equipment from Earth to Moon.

For examples, you can separate items of different densities by a fractional column, on Earth, and a simple centrifuge in space.  (In space, the fractional column wouldn't separate, and while centrifuges are used on Earth they're usually mounted axis up/down and gravity is actually part of the "take from the centre, take from the edge" removal method, but is intentionally neutral insofar as how far from the axis the particles flow.)

Also glass-making in space (or similar extrusions to flat planes) might be doable, but the method of creating flat glass on Earth (floating over a bed of molten tin, IIRC) might not work quite so well on the moon if the liquid doesn't flatten so quickly...

Not that there aren't things that would work in 1/6th Earth normal, and some maybe a bit better (the kind of manufacturing process that needs supportive components to prevent the piece-in-formation bowing under gravity could be done on the moon with less supports... handy if the supports create weak-points/deformities in the finished piece), but space factories are probably the 'big catch' for most of the exotic manufacturing processes.  Moon-base industries, I foresee, will mostly be supplying the building moon-surface infrastructure, with a second line in building components from the raw materials that will eventually form the structures of space-going vessels.  (Rather than hoist the unrefined ores to space from the Moon or doing the initial fabrication at the bottom of Earth's gravity-well.)  And this latter industry may well be usurped by asteroid sources, when we're reached out that far...

There are some things (the vacuum of space, perhaps near enough total 'for government work') that are almost attainable on the moon, so maybe a combo of "need gravity, need vacuum" industry could be best done there.  Better than trying to make gravity (sans significant Coriolis forces) in space or vacuum (to the best ability of our air-pump technology to extract the significant proportion of free-floating gas, in vessels of sufficient size and also strong enough to withstand the forces, and dealing with the introduction/extraction of materials if it's intended to be a continuous process) down here on Earth.  For those, I say: The Moon Is Where It's At!  (Probably!)

[Valid_Dark]

The real reason newt wants a moon base is to get access to all that glorious rich whale oil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60BjkUtqxPE

[Starver]

there would be lava tubes beneath the surface, and because of the Moon's low gravity, these lava tubes would be enormous. So the governments in the book find one of these tubes, dig down to it, seal it off, fill it with air, and build a moon base inside of it[...]

If it doesn't have sufficient gas pressure in it already, I'd want to line the walls with copious amounts of sealant (vacuum-setting liquid, impermeable membrane, more compound, and then some hard-shell removable and replaceable inner-bulkhead to prevent the inhabitants accidentally punching the wall with their fists, forklifts, tactical war-walker heavy-weapons platforms/whatever).  And in fact even if there's a comparative lot of gas (even up to Earth sea-level pressures), I think I'd not put my trust on such an ancient seal remaining so under whatever disruptive use I'd be now putting the volume to and (re-)filling it with gas suitable for our breathing...

But then that's what I'd be doing with the artificial rock caverns I'd have been wanting to blast out from scratch, too, so no change there.

(Additionally, saves against silicosis-like problems.)



No, I haven't read the book, but I have been tempted to get it, when I've seen it but didn't have quite enough money burning a hole in my pocket to make it seem like a wise purchase.  Recommended, then?  I may seek it out.

[jester]

Id rather see humanity working on (or at least making some sort of start) a space elevator or some kind of giant solar panel up in space to beam energy down to earth.  Both methinks are a better idea than cramming the moon full of yankees.

[MonkeyHead]

So who did you have in mind to build your elevator or big 'ol solar panel? The Swiss?

[Eagleon]

Starver: True enough. I was going to mention biotechnology, but the kinds of biotechnology research you'd want to do on the moon is for the most part easily argued to be too dangerous to pursue. It'd have been nice if we could have moved those researchers developing super-avian-flu to off-world labs, though, you can't deny that. There's also the disturbingly not-so-far-off introduction of nanoassembly research and design that would be a lot more reassuring located very far from Earth, even when we're just starting out. Despite the moon being an international treasure, any seriously dangerous research would be best done outside of GSO, and the moon is an easy place for that.

There's also the insulation factor that has to be considered, for space or moon foundries - it's simply much easier to concentrate heat when there's nothing around to take it away. It changes the equation for heat-based processes significantly, and if a mass shipment facility could be built, would alter the prices for a whole host of materials. Even if you discarded the advantage for lowered gravity on the moon, a lot of the advantage space has for materials like glass for fine optics is that controlled cooling is quite expensive. It'd be more expensive on the moon because inevitably you have heat loss through the ground, but close access to raw materials and the comparatively low cost for magnetic or air-cushion levitation might make up for that.

Id rather see humanity working on (or at least making some sort of start) a space elevator or some kind of giant solar panel up in space to beam energy down to earth.  Both methinks are a better idea than cramming the moon full of yankees.

Both could be greatly facilitated by a moon base, especially the latter if you can work out a relatively efficient solar panel you can build from moon materials.

[jester]

So who did you have in mind to build your elevator or big 'ol solar panel? The Swiss?

Hey, I have no problems with the americans building them, more that im fairly sure if you established and american state on the moon, secession would ensue.

  Without some more efficient way of transporting stuff into/out of orbit, I would have thought that a moonbase was either a)  A really, really expensive proof of concept for mars/asteroid bases (though I guess we have to do it eventually) or b)  A really, really, really, really expensive lab for fiddling with stuff in low gravity

[mainiac]

Id rather see humanity working on (or at least making some sort of start) a space elevator or some kind of giant solar panel up in space to beam energy down to earth.  Both methinks are a better idea than cramming the moon full of yankees.

Why not build that space panel on the moon?  Plenty of silicon for the panel and low gravity for the getting it into space.

[Tellemurius]

Id rather see humanity working on (or at least making some sort of start) a space elevator or some kind of giant solar panel up in space to beam energy down to earth.  Both methinks are a better idea than cramming the moon full of yankees.

Why not build that space panel on the moon?  Plenty of silicon for the panel and low gravity for the getting it into space.

once again though, those panels will be chewed by micrometeorites, solar wind collection on the other hand.....

[sneakey pete]

Except your talking about digging stuff up on the moon. I really don't see why you think that making occasional adjustments to dodge things in LEO is harder than... flying all the way to the moon. landing on it, and then digging a hole.

(You're.  Sorry.)

I was sure i'd fixed that.

Anyway, i wasn't talking about if it was possible to do stuff on the moon or not, my entire point is that there's really no reason to go there (unless what you're doing needs no atmosphere and gravity?). If you just want vacuum, its way, way easier to just go to LEO. If you want minerals, your better off going to an asteroid with an orbit between the earth and mars, as there's less change in velocity to get to the surface of one than to get to the moons surface, and getting back is also quite easy (change in velocity of ~60m/s) if you're prepared to wait a few years for a launch window (human trips would probably be more difficult obviously)

[Tellemurius]

Except your talking about digging stuff up on the moon. I really don't see why you think that making occasional adjustments to dodge things in LEO is harder than... flying all the way to the moon. landing on it, and then digging a hole.

(You're.  Sorry.)

I was sure i'd fixed that.

Anyway, i wasn't talking about if it was possible to do stuff on the moon or not, my entire point is that there's really no reason to go there (unless what you're doing needs no atmosphere and gravity?). If you just want vacuum, its way, way easier to just go to LEO. If you want minerals, your better off going to an asteroid with an orbit between the earth and mars, as there's less change in velocity to get to the surface of one than to get to the moons surface, and getting back is also quite easy (change in velocity of ~60m/s) if you're prepared to wait a few years for a launch window (human trips would probably be more difficult obviously)

problems with asteriods again is their erratic gravity field and sudden terristrial shifts. plus most of the orbits are very elliptical leaving a short time between earth and mars to the point of darkness for some months, it be worse than Antarctica during the winter season. If anything use the moon as a Space Port, be cheaper and provide enough resources for farther destinations.

[sneakey pete]

Terristrial shifts? what?
We've orbited asteroids before. Its not impossible to do, and if you're sending robotic mining probes, its way easier to get them to an asteroid than it is to get them to the surface of the moon.

[Tellemurius]

Terristrial shifts? what?
We've orbited asteroids before. Its not impossible to do, and if you're sending robotic mining probes, its way easier to get them to an asteroid than it is to get them to the surface of the moon.

Wut? How is it any different?