FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Back to the moon





davorin
Hi.
I am new here, and I am apologize for my bad English.

What do you think, when we will be back on the moon?

P.S.
And I beleve that we vere there in 1969.

Thanks
ocalhoun
There have been several more unmanned missions to the moon, some recently.

But a manned mission to the moon again...
The question to ask is:
Why?
davorin
For Helios 3
It is a compound that does not occur on the earth or is very rare and is used to achieve fusion.
Simply put, the ideal fuel.

On the moon it is occurs naturally, and on the earth can not occur due to the Earth's atmosphere.

Chinese and German people trying to get there because of that.
ocalhoun
davorin wrote:
For Helios 3
It is a compound that does not occur on the earth or is very rare and is used to achieve fusion.
Simply put, the ideal fuel.


Well, once they figure out how to get a useful fusion reactor working, then I'd see trips to the moon to mine for fuel as worthwhile.
...But for the time being, there's no use in gathering fuel for a reactor we can't get to work yet.


Also... "helios 3"?
A google search for that comes up with nothing but consumer electronics that happen to share the name... and it doesn't sound very scientific to begin with... much more science-fiction sounding, actually.

Do you mean helium 3, perhaps? ... Still doesn't make sense. Fusion reactors would use hydrogen for fuel, and give off helium as a waste product.
I must assume you mean hydrogen atoms with extra neutrons and protons. And while that is extremely rare to completely nonexistent in nature on Earth, it would be easier to make that in a lab than to go to the moon and back to get it.
Naxela
ocalhoun wrote:

Do you mean helium 3, perhaps? ... Still doesn't make sense. Fusion reactors would use hydrogen for fuel, and give off helium as a waste product.
I must assume you mean hydrogen atoms with extra neutrons and protons. And while that is extremely rare to completely nonexistent in nature on Earth, it would be easier to make that in a lab than to go to the moon and back to get it.


There is 3 reasons as why you would use the D-3He (Deuterium-Helium 3; Hydrogen and Helium atoms) fusion instead of the conventional (Deuterium-Tritium; Both hydrogen atoms) is that the first (D-3He) combination produces the highest teoretical fusion output available per unit mass (except for an matter-antimatter product, but antimatter is extremely rare, and not naturally occuring.)

So, the first reason is of course the increase in gained power versus the conventional method. I'm not sure how much more of a power gain there is, but seemingly, there is enough power to gain, and enough Helium-3 to mine (estimated at around 1.1 million metric tonnes) so that at least 3 of the largest governents (Russian, USA, China) have displayed great interest in returning to the moon. NASA have pinned 2024 as the year of a permanent base. China have plans for a manned landing 2025. Russia have also mentioned a base around 2020's. - In any case, there is an answer to the original question. - EU, Japan and India have also displayed interest, but nothing specific there.

The second reason is that it requires a less temperature than, say...a Hydrogen-boron fusion (which due to the heavy elements would require an immense fusion temperature (around the same magnitude of the suns core temperature), where as D-He3 would require less than Hydrogen-boron, but a bit more than D-T, whilst still remaining within whats possible with cold-fusion.

The third reason is that it's aneutronic (no excess neutrons produced) in contrast to the D-T reaction, where both the reactant (Tritium) and thereby it's product is radioactive. A D-He3 reaction would fuse the non-radioactive atoms: Deuterium atom (1 proton + 1 neutron) with Helium-3 atom (2 protons + 1 neutron) to create normal helium with an excess proton. The excess proton can be converted to clean energy using an electrostatic field. The helium product can be used for other industrial purposes...or wasted party balloons Very Happy. - This doesn't make it entirely clean tho'. Whilst it doesn't create an radioactive waste that needs buried, it does create fast-neutrons through it's D-D reaction, but if the scientists will keep their pace, the current generation of electrostatic entrapments should possibly be perfected enough to capture most if not all of these neutrons.

[hr]

As for the actual purpose of getting to the moon. The moon would act as a fuel-supply station for scientific space-faring vehicles, space stations, space tourists or other stuff. One thing is for sure, it won't happen if there isn't an either an economic or power-display benefit to it.
welshsteve
I think one reason to go back there would be as a launchpad to go to Mars. Less gravity to escape etc.
davorin
According to current information, the the moon will not be the starting point for the conquering of Mars
IndieCthulhu
I think we need to look into travelling back into space more often, people are still unsure if we have ever been to the moon, we should prove these doubts wrong...
davorin
Here is the first step for ordinary people to go to the space

http://www.spaceadventures.com/

So, lets go Razz
Dennise
Quote:
I think one reason to go back there would be as a launchpad to go to Mars. Less gravity to escape etc.


Why expend energy to escape gravity twice:

    first to escape Earth gravity, then again to escape Moon gravity


Once you/re free of Earth's gravity, the only reason to approach (not land on) the moon or another planet would be to use that body's gravity as a 'swing around' boost to the final target ... e.g. Mars? Little would be gained by landing on the moon and then taking off again unless it was for refueling, maintenance or emergency reasons.
ocalhoun
Dennise wrote:
Quote:
I think one reason to go back there would be as a launchpad to go to Mars. Less gravity to escape etc.


Why expend energy to escape gravity twice:

    first to escape Earth gravity, then again to escape Moon gravity


Once you/re free of Earth's gravity, the only reason to approach (not land on) the moon or another planet would be to use that body's gravity as a 'swing around' boost to the final target ... e.g. Mars? Little would be gained by landing on the moon and then taking off again unless it was for refueling, maintenance or emergency reasons.

If it were possible to build spaceships using mostly lunar-mined materials, then it would make a lot of sense to have the moon be your launchpad/shipyard.


...Just thought of another good reason to establish a moon base though.
The side of the moon farthest from Earth (the 'dark side', though it's not always dark), would make a great place for an observatory -- a great place for both traditional and radio telescopes. There's no atmosphere and the bulk of the moon would block out all (or at least the vast majority) of the interference from Earth.
davorin
Yes, you are right.
It is much sense to build mool lunar base as a shipyard.
davorin
All right. In fact the main reason that I would like to dwell on the moon, is the base for construction of space ships and bases for fuel. As for the earth and for the spaceships. So there is a lot of helium 3, which is necessary for fusion.
Maybe they're already up people, we are just not saying anything about it.
jajarvin
In the year 2026 we e will be back on the moon.
davorin
If the Chinese decide that they could get there earlier, it might even earlier.
Too much money is spent on weapons and not on researching.
spinout
The Finnish movie Steel sky? there is a president of the US (female) that send 2 people up to the moon for her new election commersial. One white and one colored... The white gets shot and the black one is taken in for examination Laughing and they try to make him white against his will. Actually funny, see it!
davorin
Yes, I see that movie.
I would not be surprised if there is that helium 3, for whom at the end of the movie all kill each other
davorin
Water on the moon.
It is possible that there is water on the moon. Last crashing probe into the moon, it is also partially proved.
davorin
A conspiracy theories suggest that the dark side of the moon, but there is complex, which is not visible from the ground.
Basically, we all know in a few years when the private owners of start to fly into space.
ocalhoun
davorin wrote:
A conspiracy theories suggest that the dark side of the moon, but there is complex, which is not visible from the ground.

...A conspiracy that would require the complicity of the USA and USSR during the cold war.
No, if there was an American secret there, the Russians would have outed it, and vice versa.

Or is it the location of the secret base of the lizard people who are secretly controlling all governments on earth, and that's why nobody says anything about it?
davorin
I think people are lizards taken from the series "V". And maybe those old versions of 80 years. And that David Ike based his book.
Otherwise, as far as I understood from his biography, he was a sports commentator, before he began to write books.
And when he was fired (or quit, I'm not sure) started earning by writing this book.
Otherwise, it is my opinion that these books and the people who control the little lizards, general stupidity
Pippo90
I hope the Chinese people or some private company spend something on this matter. It's too much time we don't go back there with a human being.
the_emissary
@Pippo I agree, mankind needs to make the great leap once more.
jajarvin
I think it will take about 20 years before man is again on the ground of moon.
Insanity
I think that for the most part we have found most of what we want on the Moon, and that the return on investment in terms of scientific knowledge and experimentation that could go on on the Moon would not be worth it, especially when you consider that going to other planets or exploring the solar system and the univerise some more would yield much more than going to the Moon again, since it has been done many times before.
lemonedia
We're going back very soon. There's corporations looking to set up residence / resorts on the moon and supply transportation!

Hand in hand with asteroid mining, this is going to be a lucrative business for those involved... given the whole poverty thing on earth is solved in time.
Related topics
Taking Back Sunday
DOUBLE HDD AND FTP
The Poet And The Scientist
Harvest Moon
Was there any point to sending men to the moon?
Japanese Sailor Moon
Man to be living on the Moon from 2024
First Moon Landing Is A Fake?
Did Man Really Land on the Moon???
Harvest Moon: Tree of Tranquility
Is Really Indian did find water on Moon ?
Full moon coming, more crazy stuff, coincidence?
Super Moon this weekend :)
Communion on the Moon
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> The Universe

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.