We Finally Know How Much Radiation There Is on The Moon, And It's Not Great News

a reply to: Blue Shift

I suppose that would depend on the reason for them to be there.

One crazy thing about living on the moon, on Mars, or in outer space without artificial gravity, is that the health limit is only about a year due to muscle and bone loss. Doesn't matter if you live underground or not. Unless it's a secret, no one has done more than about ~400ish days in space, and that was all the way back in the 90s when the former Soviet Union couldn't afford to go get a guy from Mir. No one has done more than about 800ish days total across multiple missions. The medical stuff is the most important limit so far but supposedly it hasn't advanced much since the 90s.

But that's not the crazy thing.

The crazy thing is how it might be or might have already been solved. Superman drugs. They basically have to come up with drugs that give you full muscle growth and stronger bones without exercise. And they already have them for mice.

Think about that. If they have already succeeded at solving this problem it means they are withholding those drugs from thousands and thousands of children world wide who were born with crippling diseases of bone and muscle growth.

It also means all the senior citizens of the world could/should be as physically healthy as any 25 year old pro athlete and stay that way until they die.

But yeah, the f$#*ing moon is totally worth it, right? Seriously, if the space program tech is no longer going to benefit the lives of ordinary people then screw it.

Really while it would NOt be easy or cheep first send 100s of mining robots then send robot ships to use MINED stuff turned into stuff humans can Use .
Then send humans long term say 20 years from start a stable NICE colony set up that could hold 10,000 people .
the difference from the earth biodome is they tried with NO out side help DAAA the moon is all around you with every thing you need INCLUDING water and yep H3 .

so why bust our self tiring to make 100 % recycled envirments ?
That is sill even for say a Mission to Jupiter . In that case a nice mid sized asteroid would do just fine and saves time and money and gives EXTRA resources for long rides .

We already have the teck the only question is can we stop fighting long enough to do any moon base mars base or long voyage ships ?

My guess is NO a resounding NO maybe in a few 100,000 years when we grow up enough but for now we cant go a week without starting to kill each other and on any ship or colony that spells disaster .

My finly advice to Humans Including My self GROW UP we are not ready for any galactic government we cant even control our self on this one tiny speck of dust we already live on .

a reply to: Blue Shift

The moon dust just sits there being irradiated and negatively charged. Any equipment that is not treated will have it stick. And you can’t just blow it out the airlock. You have to vacuum and use a static spray. What you cannot see gets everywhere so all areas will to be filtered (requires energy) adding to the logistical nightmare.

Your space suit is a mini spaceship. And it is then like washing your car. A chore. And anything on the surface becomes like that. Then, instead of playing golf on the moon you are working at the moon wash just to wander around!



PS - Not “pessimistic” but trying to keep it real!! This will not be easy. And this is just one. A big problem too!

originally posted by: 11andrew34
If they have already succeeded at solving this problem it means they are withholding those drugs from thousands and thousands of children world wide who were born with crippling diseases of bone and muscle growth.

That's a big if.

It also means all the senior citizens of the world could/should be as physically healthy as any 25 year old pro athlete and stay that way until they die.

No, degeneration of muscle and bones is not the worse thing that happens with old age, and that's something that can be controlled with exercise, which also brings other positive things.
Any hypothetical drug to keep bones and muscles as new wouldn't do a thing for the ageing of all the organs, like veins, kidneys, heart, etc. Exercise helps in all of that.

But yeah, the f$#*ing moon is totally worth it, right? Seriously, if the space program tech is no longer going to benefit the lives of ordinary people then screw it.

That depends of how much people are paid to go there, I'm sure many people would go happily even knowing about all those problems if they gave them enough money.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: 11andrew34
If they have already succeeded at solving this problem it means they are withholding those drugs from thousands and thousands of children world wide who were born with crippling diseases of bone and muscle growth.

That's a big if.

Consider that if it hasn't been secretly solved already than all the new Mars initiatives will hit a brick wall instead of proceeding along their time tables. For example NASA recently sent and retrieved some Superman mice from the ISS and it was basically successful. That to me said they may very well be just playing out a public performance of doing the science according to a timetable as they've had 20-30 years to get it done. It was probably done before they even really started talking seriously about Moon and Mars missions again.

So they just recently sent and retrieved some superman mice from the ISS. Preliminary, step-one promising results that prove the idea should work whether they can make it happen in humans or not. Don't worry, I'm sure they have plenty of time to solve the problem of muscle and bone loss in space. Their mission time table has plenty of time built in, I'm sure. Let's look it up...ok, currently they are in the "earth reliant" phase of NASA's new moon program and they have budgeted in plenty of time to get it done. Four more years! The "earth reliant" phase is scheduled to end in 2024.

en.wikipedia.org...(2015%E2%80%93present)

So even if you're skeptical that they already have it done, don't worry, the timetable says it'll be done in just four more years or less. So personally, I wouldn't call it a "big if" at all that it's already done. It's clearly either already done or already mostly done.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: 11andrew34
It also means all the senior citizens of the world could/should be as physically healthy as any 25 year old pro athlete and stay that way until they die.

No, degeneration of muscle and bones is not the worse thing that happens with old age, and that's something that can be controlled with exercise, which also brings other positive things.
Any hypothetical drug to keep bones and muscles as new wouldn't do a thing for the ageing of all the organs, like veins, kidneys, heart, etc. Exercise helps in all of that.

Well that's bad reading on your part because if you look again you'll find that I certainly didn't say it was the "worst thing" as you put it, about aging. Although even with that wording you are I think wrong in that many seniors would disagree that losing their body's physical youth is the worst thing about aging.

And really, before you can say 'telomeres' etc, I'm doing you a favor when I tell you it was also really ridiculous and condescending of you to assume I didn't know anything at all about any of the other physiological processes of aging. Are you used to talking down to people? People will ignore you over time. Anyways, yes, superman drugs would not likely increase total potential lifespan although they would actually increase life expectancy.; completely obvious to anybody with a minimal education and awareness of this topic, thank you very much.

Anyways, your prescription for simple exercise by itself for old age is laughable. Not that it's bad to exercise and be active; I'm just saying that if that's all you get, then you are taking away all of the already very significant publicly existing medical support for higher quality of life for seniors. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stalone and Madonna are not doing it all merely with 'exercise' even though they are all very active people. And beyond their expensive and cutting edge medical treatments, there's plenty of less expensive stuff in general use.

You'd be taking away stuff like ordinary hormone replacement therapy from, what a little simple google research is now telling me, is actually at somewhere between 22-44%+ of all post menopausal women, and has been around since the 80s, and which also helps a lot directly with muscle and bone loss which happened regardless of whether women exercised or not. There is also an increasingly popular male version.

And obviously, most successful pro athletes retire in their 30s from physiological decline even though their exercise habits are generally much better than when they were younger. Many pro athletes are already 'naturally gifted' people who never had to exercise much to make themselves strong enough fast enough etc to compete. They had to develop skills like anyone else(i.e. motor neuron learning), but not their bodies beyond playing the sport they were good at.

So in the interests of public health, why shouldn't everyone have access to safe drugs that give them the muscles and bones of an athlete? I mean lol, I started by bringing up seniors and kids with disabilities (you ignored the kids) because most people have empathy and would find those cases the most compelling. But what about basically everybody in their teens and 20s and 30s and 40s and 50s? Why shouldn't all of our quality of life be better too?

As for secret longevity science in general, there's probably some, as it'd be a high priority for basically anybody with money given that a lot is in reach. We also know there are a bunch of openly Malthusian wealthy people like Bill Gates who would hate the idea of it being widely available. The pattern to look for is promising results which then mysteriously seem to not be much followed up on, like when the results are so promising that you might think they'd be big big news instead of just a little news story of the day, and then followed up on with big money government research, with the public eagerly awaiting amazing results. Those little 'news stories of the day' are all about a lab going fishing for big funding. The most amazing one I've heard of was about a drug that triggered the purge of senescent cells in mice and by itself basically safely made them more youthful in a bunch of ways.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: 11andrew34
But yeah, the f$#*ing moon is totally worth it, right? Seriously, if the space program tech is no longer going to benefit the lives of ordinary people then screw it.

That depends of how much people are paid to go there, I'm sure many people would go happily even knowing about all those problems if they gave them enough money.

Do you mean ordinary people taking trips for fun? Or private moon projects eager to take the funding offered? They can go happily all they want and I wouldn't disagree that they would, but they can't stay more than a year, and that means they can't even get to Mars and back in time. For Mars, consider that nobody has any idea how bad the bone/muscle loss issue is on Mars except for a guess, and I'd guess that it's almost as bad as zero-g because it's only ~1/3g.

It has to be way less than half as bad or they can't even get there and back without superman drugs. Also as far as I'm aware there is no plan to measure it ahead of time by doing something like sending mice to Mars first and bringing them back. Instead, I think these drugs are their workaround. They plan to moot the issue.

Trying again on the link to the current NASA Moon/Mars timetable

a reply to: 11andrew34

I would just like to point out the moon and mars have gravity. So as long as it doesnt take a year to get there youll be fine.

Since this thread was based on high levels of radiation on the moon...we have also injected other hazards par for the course. Mars is sprinkled in... so it’s fair to add the hazards of mars as well....since some of it’s hazards would be the same as the moon, I suspect.

Here is some info about radiation on mars....not only does it have typical solar radiation but apparently nuclear byproduct radiation.....




Source Link: www.jpl.nasa.gov...

“The atmospheres of Earth and Mars exhibit very different patterns of xenon and krypton isotopes, particularly for xenon-129. Mars has much more of it in the atmosphere than does Earth.”

Source Link:en.m.wikipedia.org...

“Xe is produced by beta decay of 129I (half-life: 16 million years); 131mXe, 133Xe, 133mXe, and 135Xe are some of the fission products of both 235U and 239Pu, so are used as indicators of nuclear explosions.”

originally posted by: 11andrew34
So they just recently sent and retrieved some superman mice from the ISS. Preliminary, step-one promising results that prove the idea should work whether they can make it happen in humans or not.

So even if you're skeptical that they already have it done, don't worry, the timetable says it'll be done in just four more years or less. So personally, I wouldn't call it a "big if" at all that it's already done. It's clearly either already done or already mostly done.

I wasn't aware of that experiment, so it does look like that "big if" is not that big after all.

But one thing I noticed on the article I read about those mice was that they started by being genetically manipulated to have more muscle mass than normal, probably to make it easier for the experiment. I would feel more comfortable about the "if" if they had used normal mice and the injection instead of genetically altered mice, but it sure is a step in the right direction.

Well that's bad reading on your part because if you look again you'll find that I certainly didn't say it was the "worst thing" as you put it, about aging. Although even with that wording you are I think wrong in that many seniors would disagree that losing their body's physical youth is the worst thing about aging.

It's not bad reading, it's just bad writing.

And really, before you can say 'telomeres' etc, I'm doing you a favor when I tell you it was also really ridiculous and condescending of you to assume I didn't know anything at all about any of the other physiological processes of aging.

I didn't assume any thing, as usual I was only basing my response in what was written on your post. Also, I don't know your age, so I don't know if you are old enough to be feeling the effects of ageing in loss of bone and muscle mass or not.

Are you used to talking down to people? People will ignore you over time.

No, although it may sound that way. Probably a side-effect of English being my third language and one for which I didn't learn how to structure a sentence properly, as I learned it by watching movies and TV series.

Anyways, yes, superman drugs would not likely increase total potential lifespan although they would actually increase life expectancy.; completely obvious to anybody with a minimal education and awareness of this topic, thank you very much.

I see how not losing bone and muscle mass may help the general health situation in people, but I don't see that making much of a difference in life expectancy, except for the consequences of falls and such like.
But I'm probably wrong, as I'm not a doctor.

Anyways, your prescription for simple exercise by itself for old age is laughable. Not that it's bad to exercise and be active; I'm just saying that if that's all you get, then you are taking away all of the already very significant publicly existing medical support for higher quality of life for seniors.

I didn't say that exercise was enough, I said (or tried to say that) exercise helps in bone and muscle loss and is also good for the general health. I know I started feeling much better when I started doing one hour or so walks after work, and it also helped controlling my cholesterol, blood pressure and sugar levels.

So in the interests of public health, why shouldn't everyone have access to safe drugs that give them the muscles and bones of an athlete?

Nobody needs to have the muscles and bones of an athlete unless they want to be athletes, and, personally, I'm against the use of drugs if not really necessary, but I think I understand what you mean.

I mean lol, I started by bringing up seniors and kids with disabilities (you ignored the kids) because most people have empathy and would find those cases the most compelling.

That doesn't work for me, I'm not much of an empathetic person except with people I know.

But what about basically everybody in their teens and 20s and 30s and 40s and 50s? Why shouldn't all of our quality of life be better too?

Better quality of life is good, but I, personally, don't like the possibility of people using any "body enhancing" scheme to make them what they are not, but that's just my personal opinion.

For real health problems, sure, it would be great, for everybody else, I don't think so.

The most amazing one I've heard of was about a drug that triggered the purge of senescent cells in mice and by itself basically safely made them more youthful in a bunch of ways.

I remember reading about that, but, although I'm in a forum dedicated mostly to conspiracy theories and alternative topics I'm not the kind of person that sees secrets everywhere, but I'm sure some exist.

Do you mean ordinary people taking trips for fun? Or private moon projects eager to take the funding offered? They can go happily all they want and I wouldn't disagree that they would, but they can't stay more than a year, and that means they can't even get to Mars and back in time. For Mars, consider that nobody has any idea how bad the bone/muscle loss issue is on Mars except for a guess, and I'd guess that it's almost as bad as zero-g because it's only ~1/3g.

I was talking about people seeing the opportunity of working on Mars for one year (with another two years spent in getting there and coming back) and getting either enough money to consider it a good opportunity or because they want to go there in any circumstance.

As for your guess, I don't think ~1/3 G acts the same as microgravity (~0 G), but that's only my guess.

It has to be way less than half as bad or they can't even get there and back without superman drugs. Also as far as I'm aware there is no plan to measure it ahead of time by doing something like sending mice to Mars first and bringing them back. Instead, I think these drugs are their workaround. They plan to moot the issue.

They may have other tricks up their sleeves that we are not even imagining, but I'm sure there's someone somewhere looking for a solution.

a reply to: dragonridr

It does take almost a year to travel to Mars, that's the problem.

Some specific science (not in confusing PhD formula/math lingo) for traveling to and from mars...


Unit 7: Mission to Mars

Source Link: www.polaris.iastate.edu...

What’s not mentioned in detail is if Murphy’s Law kicks in for systems, subsystems, electro-mechanical failures, circuit board and down to the component level failures, electrical cable harness connection failures.... internal craft electrical power failures, and the Beast of all failures, the dreaded “Intermittent” failures.

Sure some systems will be designed to have backup redundancy and spare parts bought along. But Murphy’s Law also includes what you don’t plan for and no means of remediation repairs. i.e. repair parts/materials you didn’t bring that all of a sudden becomes a critical part/material for repairing the mishap at hand.

To be fair All you have left is ingenuity.....”While duct tape alone didn't save the Apollo 13 crew, it certainly would have been difficult for them to have survived without it. ... However, with a little ingenuity and duct tape, the Apollo Mission Operations Team was able to fit “a square peg in a round hole.” The Mission Evaluation Room for Apollo.”

Having a Tron’s background..... failures in which electronics components short or burn out on circuit boards ruining the surrounding parts and multi layered copper traced connection eyelet, and pads....especially for IC’s....that board, or backplane is ruined and not serviceable..... By the way, has any astronauts tried soldering in space?



Yes, the ISS survives but only because of preventative maintenance and vigilance and earth is close by to have parts shipped up to them.... Not the case 1/2 of the way to mars or back to earth.. hence a rescue may be a too late scenario given launch windows not being available and or poor launch weather.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Yes, rescuing a Mars mission is something only possible close to Earth, as soon as they get away from Earth they will be on their own.

Electronics are a large part of the problem, as modern electronics with small sizes and low currents are very sensitive to radiation, unlike the 60s electronics, so even relatively mild radiation may be capable of destroying an integrated circuit.
If that happens with an unmanned craft it's a problem, if it happens with a manned craft it could be the death of all aboard.

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Blue Shift

The moon dust just sits there being irradiated and negatively charged. Any equipment that is not treated will have it stick. And you can’t just blow it out the airlock. You have to vacuum and use a static spray. What you cannot see gets everywhere so all areas will to be filtered (requires energy) adding to the logistical nightmare.

Your space suit is a mini spaceship. And it is then like washing your car. A chore. And anything on the surface becomes like that. Then, instead of playing golf on the moon you are working at the moon wash just to wander around!

PS - Not “pessimistic” but trying to keep it real!! This will not be easy. And this is just one. A big problem too!

Just because a thing gets irradiated, that doesn't mean that thing becomes radioactive.
Radiation isn't a virus.

Harte

originally posted by: 11andrew34
And really, before you can say 'telomeres' etc, I'm doing you a favor when I tell you it was also really ridiculous and condescending of you to assume I didn't know anything at all about any of the other physiological processes of aging. Are you used to talking down to people? People will ignore you over time.

It wasn't ridiculous nor was it condescending. He could have pointed out the ignorance you yourself displayed (and now are trying to run from like a scared rabbit) when you blurted out this ridiculously inane statement:

originally posted by: 11andrew34
It also means all the senior citizens of the world could/should be as physically healthy as any 25 year old pro athlete and stay that way until they die.

How, exactly, would a reader interpret what you said here? Seniors should be able to stay "physically healthy as any 25 year old pro athlete and stay that way until they die?" Now you say you didn't say that?

Some of us here can read, and we can also speak English. You're lucky you weren't smacked down for saying something like that, instead of having a polite poster point out the silliness in a perfectly nonconfrontational reply.

Harte

In addition to moon woes with radiation the below narrows the solar radiation part of it....Moon Hazards continues....


June 30, 2020 NASA Spacecraft Helps Identify Solar Radiation Patterns That Expose the Moon

Source Link: www.nasa.gov...

.....” Which way the wind blows in space has new importance for astronaut safety at the Moon. Using data from several NASA missions, scientists discovered that wind created by high-speed particles from the Sun can cause the tail of Earth’s protective magnetic bubble to flap like a windsock in a strong breeze. This movement can pull the tail so far out of line that it exposes the Moon to potentially damaging charged particles at times it was previously thought to be protected. The finding, which reveals a new challenge of predicting when solar activity exposes the Moon, will help scientists and engineers prepare for future lunar missions.”....







You got to wonder if Aliens are all on the dark side of the moon 🌚

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
You got to wonder if Aliens are all on the dark side of the moon 🌚

If they are they need to keep on moving, as the dark side changes with the Moon's rotation.

originally posted by: ArMaP
If they are they need to keep on moving, as the dark side changes with Moons rotation.

Interesting misconceptions factoids about the moon 🌓

moon.nasa.gov...

Adding to this now Humans Don’t Belong In Space Hazards thread....

Exposure to Outer Space May Accelerate Aging, New Evidence Suggests

......”These new studies of astronauts and model organisms have revealed six potentially detrimental aspects of long-duration spaceflight: oxidative stress (an imbalance of free radicals and antioxidants leading to tissue damage); DNA damage; mitochondrial dysfunction (mitochondria are the power packs of our cells); telomere length alterations; changes to the genome and epigenome (i.e. environment-influenced gene expression); and changes to the microbiome (the totality of microorganisms living outside and inside our bodies).

Of these, two in particular grabbed my attention: telomere length alternations and DNA damage. All six health features listed in the new studies play a profound role when it comes to our health, but telomeres and DNA damage in particular can be linked to the aging process.

Telomeres are the protective caps located on the ends of chromosomes (threaded structures in the nucleus of cells that carry our genes). Telomeres get progressively shorter as a person ages, and significant changes to the length of these caps can be taken as a sign of accelerated aging and/or heightened risk of developing age-related diseases like cancer, cardiovascular disease, and dementia”.......

Fundamental Biological Features of Spaceflight: Advancing the Field to Enable Deep-Space Exploration

.....”Summary

Research on astronaut health and model organisms have revealed six features of spaceflight biology that guide our current understanding of fundamental molecular changes that occur during space travel. The features include oxidative stress, DNA damage, mitochondrial dysregulation, epigenetic changes (including gene regulation), telomere length alterations, and microbiome shifts. Here we review the known hazards of human spaceflight, how spaceflight affects living systems through these six fundamental features, and the associated health risks of space exploration. We also discuss the essential issues related to the health and safety of astronauts involved in future missions, especially planned long-duration and Martian missions”......

originally posted by: Arnie123
Perhaps building deep underground? Enough to mitigate any radiation?

and only come out at night time and have solar umberllas..