Return To The Moon 2020

Originally posted by Dallas
"Since the moon landing its been discovered that the moon has a rather large supply of Helium 3 which is quite rare on earth.

Helium-3 is the perfect fuel for nuclear fusion. Its expected to be the cleanest fuel for 21st century fusion reactors.

About 25 tonnes of He3 would power the United States for 1 year at our current rate of energy consumption. "

I think a great point. Helium 3 on/beneath the moon has been going around talk channels and I think a revelent interest of EBEs dealing with part of their craft propulsion system..

Dallas

There is helium-3 in the oceans of earth.

Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
Anymore takers on the alledged ailen prescene on the moon?

The only conceivable defence humans may have developed in the period between the last moon landing in 1972 and now would be the Strategic Defence Initiative, or Star Wars anti-ballistic missile shield. Certainly, theories relating to the use of the SDI system as a counter to alien aggression have been raised in the past. Skadi_the_Evil_Elf has already noted the example of Colonel Corso, who stated in his book "The Day After Roswell" that the true purpose of the Star Wars missile shield technology was to defend Earth against the possibility of an alien invasion.

If you take the approach that Humanity was indeed warned off the moon in the late 1960s and early 1970s, then the genesis of the SDI system under Ronald Reagan in 1983 (Reference)takes on a new-found significance. Was the system, as it was lauded at the time, an attempt to counter the threat of a Svoiet missile attack? Or was its true purpose to create a defensive capability against a hostile alien species and facilitate Man's return to the Moon?

Although the SDI system was abandoned in 1993 under the Clinton Administration, it has subsequently been revived under George Bush. Proponents of the theory that we were warned away from travelling to the Moon may consider it a striking coincidence that a sudden desire and commitment to return a human presence to the Moon is joined by a re-emergence of interest in and commitment to the SDI system. If we were warned to stay away from the Moon thirty years ago, perhaps the development of new defensive or offensive technologies have rendered that warning impotent?

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I personally believe that we were subtly warned away from the moon. I have found nothing to convince me that the rumors of spaceships seen on the crater rim by the Apollo crew were false.

Hate to be a pesamist but what exactly are these aliens doing on the moon?? Taking He3 and transporting it for there own use?? Seems a hell of a long way to come for a vacant crater filled chunk of rock? Or is all the action on the dark side??? One thing thats always puzzled me about the moon landing is with all the contraversy over if it happened or not is why, they don't take photo's of all the stuff that should be left up there, like the moon buggy ect. Surely with the high power camera apparatus these days they could do it easily and shut the knockers up for good. If they could land on it in the 70's it should be like walking down the street by now.

[edit on 22-9-2005 by gottabesuss]

Originally posted by gottabesuss
One thing thats always puzzled me about the moon landing is with all the contraversy over if it happened or not is why, they don't take photo's of all the stuff that should be left up there, like the moon buggy ect. Surely with the high power camera apparatus these days they could do it easily and shut the knockers up for good. If they could land on it in the 70's it should be like walking down the street by now.

Unfortunately, as powerful as today's telescopes are, there is simply no way they could resolve an object as small as those left on the moon's surface.

As I said in an earlier post, the moon is approximately the same size as Australia:



whilst the lunar lander is not even as large as a small truck:



It is simply not possible for modern telescopes to focus on such a small object at such distances. For a good example of this, check out the Clementine Lunar Image Browser to see what sort of resolutions are and are not possible.

well, i suppose the quality of resolution would have to be pretty damn good! Thanks for the quick reply! Freaky how close Australia's size is to the moon. Must be peachy up there near Byron mate! Im about 100km from where all the Eureka started!!

2020 is a bit far into the future, not? The Japanese are planning several (unmanned) missions to the moon. This should raise the same issues (about possible alien presence, etc.) ...

Although the Japanese have been struggling to get their space craft of this planet since 1999, and they keep running into problems. Every time they're just about ready there's some weak excuse as to why they're not launching. I'm sure you guys can think up lots of conspiracy theories as to why the Japanese can't get to the moon. (They already gave up on their plans to go to Mars...)

Japanese mission - MSN.com
Japanese moon missions - SpaceToday.org

or could it just be that they will "pretend" to go to the moon, as some conspiracy theorist say they never went the first time. This may be a way to siphon off 100+ billion to put into some other "classified" project

Originally posted by Frosty

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by Frosty
Please, NASA is not going to the moon to collect Helium-3 when we have tritium, hydrogen and other fusion fuels here on earth. It is going to cost $100+ billion to go to the moon in one trip. How much will it cost to comeback with Helium-3? Another $100 billion? How much to build reactors that currently don't exist? Man them with scientist and engineers which don't exist?

[edit on 20-9-2005 by Frosty]

They have already built fusion reactors

Heres a pic of the Tokamak Fusion Reactor and it was manned by quite real scientist and engineers. They existed and everything. In 1994, TFTR produced a world-record 10.7 million watts of controlled fusion power, enough to meet the needs of more than 3,000 homes

He3/deuterium mixture is far better then 50/50 deuterium/tritium fuel mixtures.

The deuterium and helium-3 atoms come together to give off a proton and helium-4. The products weigh less than the initial components; the missing mass is converted to energy. 1 kg of helium-3 burned with 0.67 kg of deuterium gives us about 19 megawatt-years of energy output.

1 million metric tonnes of He3, reacted with deuterium, would generate about 20,000 terrawatt-years of thermal energy. That's about 10 times the energy we could get from mining all the fossil fuels on Earth, (without the smog and acid rain)

As for your 200 billion projected price tag for the mission if they brought back 100 tones of He3 the mission would see a net gain of 100 billion. Since the estimated price of 100 tons of He3 is 300 billion

And this runs of helium-3 and the power generated from it actually reaches those 3k homes?

As far as I know, there is no fusion reactor ever built that is 100% efficient. They all need more energy put in than they get out. The energy required to fuse the hydrogen and deuterium is greater than the energy you get back through the reaction.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
He3/deuterium mixture is far better then 50/50 deuterium/tritium fuel mixtures.

What happend to using plain sea water in fusion reactors? Now we need to go to the moon to get H^3 instead ?

Originally posted by Jeremiah25

Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
Anymore takers on the alledged ailen prescene on the moon?

The only conceivable defence humans may have developed in the period between the last moon landing in 1972 and now would be the Strategic Defence Initiative, or Star Wars anti-ballistic missile shield. Certainly, theories relating to the use of the SDI system as a counter to alien aggression have been raised in the past. Skadi_the_Evil_Elf has already noted the example of Colonel Corso, who stated in his book "The Day After Roswell" that the true purpose of the Star Wars missile shield technology was to defend Earth against the possibility of an alien invasion.

If you take the approach that Humanity was indeed warned off the moon in the late 1960s and early 1970s, then the genesis of the SDI system under Ronald Reagan in 1983 (Reference)takes on a new-found significance. Was the system, as it was lauded at the time, an attempt to counter the threat of a Svoiet missile attack? Or was its true purpose to create a defensive capability against a hostile alien species and facilitate Man's return to the Moon?

Although the SDI system was abandoned in 1993 under the Clinton Administration, it has subsequently been revived under George Bush. Proponents of the theory that we were warned away from travelling to the Moon may consider it a striking coincidence that a sudden desire and commitment to return a human presence to the Moon is joined by a re-emergence of interest in and commitment to the SDI system. If we were warned to stay away from the Moon thirty years ago, perhaps the development of new defensive or offensive technologies have rendered that warning impotent?

Yes, i have read about this. I think Timothy Good investigated this in one of his books. I think it was in his book Ailen Liason that he mentioned this. Apparently the Russians and Americans had an agreement about SDI and it's real agenda. The nuke attack thing was just a smoke screen. In fact SDI accelerated the end of the Cold War. But i am getting off topic myself here. Getting back to the moon, would anyone agree that the return to the moon (based on the assumption we did first time round) is part of a bigger picture to educate us? What if they discovered something and let it out to the public, ie water ice/primative microbes living in rocks etc? Anything is possible!