Why Not the Moon?

How is it we have all of this chatter about living on Mars, movies and all but yet this is very little if at all consideration about living on Luna. Pretty much all the challenges that could be encountered on the Moon would be magnified 10 fold.

I do agree that it's weird we haVent created a base on the moon, that we know of (the moon imo would be a much cheaper and more efficient launching point.

That being said, I dont want to temper or slow down any attempt at visiting and creating a base or colony on Mars

a reply to: TheKestrel04

I think it'd be at least possible to geoform Mars to have an atmosphere again to compliment our idea of life. It's big enough to have gravity that would also be good. Moons just too small for long term living.

a reply to: TheKestrel04

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity...but we'd probably end up accidently launching it into the earth.

i believe part of the reasoning is that people believe mars is much more habitable. and can be terraformed.

another part is that it's like a race. we have been to the moon. and thus it doesn't matter. where as the first ones on mars would be a huge thing and of course a FIRST. and just look at how much we put far more value on first of anything and everything. like we are just checking off boxes. black President, CHECK. so we don't need another. and just look at the big deal that was always made about it. people don't even care about his destruction of the country, because he checked that box of first. but we still need a female, a sexually confused, latino, etc.

a reply to: TheKestrel04

We humans are a greedy moronic species.
We can't even figure out this planet, but we ignore that part of the equation and talk about screwing up other planets.
I'd prefer we concentrate and focus on our own planet before screwing all the other ones up.

Lets create a civilized earth first, before venturing out into space like the idiots we have proven to be.
Nukes, genocide, regime changes, corruption, slavery, human trafficking etc etc etc

Great book recommendation:
Who Built The Moon?

Who Built the Moon?
by Christopher Knight, Alan Butler

The moon has confounded scientists for many years. It does not obey the known rules of astrophysics and there is no theory of its origin that explains the known facts--in fact it should not really be there...

The authors of Civilization One return, bringing new evidence about the Moon that will shake up our world. Christopher Knight and Alan Butler realized that the ancient system of geometry they presented in their earlier, breakthrough study works as perfectly for the Moon as it does the Earth.

On further investigation, they found a consistent sequence of beautiful integer numbers when looking at every major aspect of the Moon--no such pattern emerges for any other planet or moon in the solar system.

In addition, Knight and Butler discovered that the Moon possesses few or no heavy metals and has no core—something that should not be possible. Their persuasive conclusion: if higher life only developed on Earth because the Moon is exactly what it is and where it is, it becomes unreasonable to cling to the idea that the Moon is a natural object. The only question that remains is, who built it?

www.goodreads.com...

Q: Why were there no women astronauts on the Apollo 11 mission to the moon?
A: Because the moon didn't need cleaning.


I'll show myself out.

The main problem is the properties of the dust. Mars dust has been blown around by the atmosphere and this has worn off the sharp points of the particles. Moon dust is as sharp as the day it was blasted from the impacts that made craters. This sharp dust eats through the fabric of the space suits. The Apollo suits outer layer was Teflon coated nylon and the moon dust deteriorated them badly at the microscopic level. This also applies to anything mechanical that moves.

Think tiny stone arrow heads and knife points embedding in the fabric and cutting with every movement.

Unless you have an endless supply of space suits, you can only stay on the Moon for a short time.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: TheKestrel04

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity...but we'd probably end up accidently launching it into the earth.

The moon is tidally locked to the earth...
spin doesn't create gravity, mass does. Spinning the moon just reduces surface gravity.

MARS, on the other hand, has more mass, and therefore gravity- and therefore more atmosphere. A base on Mars would be less horrible for humans than the moon.




The biggest challenge is that getting anything from earth to mars costs a lot of expendable resources, although honestly not that much more than going for the moon. Using the moon as a gravity boost would even help getting to mars, but that requires planning that appears to be mostly outside of our ability.

Moon base is more effort than its worth when compared to a mars base. If you want to spread the human condition into space, what we need is a moon space station.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Umm gravity is a function of mass, not spin..

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: TheKestrel04

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity...but we'd probably end up accidently launching it into the earth.

That must be the reason why ET doesn't let us do it. Hahaha....

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: TheKestrel04

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity...but we'd probably end up accidently launching it into the earth.

The apparent surface gravity of the moon is already about 1/6 the surface gravity of earth. It’s already rotating at one revolution per month. That’s why it always keeps the same face towards earth. If you were somehow able to speed up the moon’s rotation that would actually reduce the apparent gravity experienced on the moon’s surface.

originally posted by: Iconic
a reply to: TheKestrel04

I think it'd be at least possible to geoform Mars to have an atmosphere again to compliment our idea of life. It's big enough to have gravity that would also be good. Moons just too small for long term living.

Well the ISS in orbit for the past 20 or so years is a bit to contrary. Ive got nothing against going to Mars and yeah Gravity maybe the one of the high concerns but the quality of life and kinks can be worked out by testing transport techniques on a functional base before colonization. It also provides a good pit stop for space craft.

Unless its inhabited

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: TheKestrel04

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity...but we'd probably end up accidently launching it into the earth.

The apparent surface gravity of the moon is already about 1/6 the surface gravity of earth. It’s already rotating at one revolution per month. That’s why it always keeps the same face towards earth. If you were somehow able to speed up the moon’s rotation that would actually reduce the apparent gravity experienced on the moon’s surface.

Apparently it does rotate but like once every 27 days, however having it not rotate would enhance the effects of gravity as there would be less centrifugal forces that counteract.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Be cool to try and give the moon some rotation for gravity.

How would breaking apart the Moon into its material constituents make gravity? Any rotation to be a noticeable change in gravity would reduce it. Rotation is only simulating gravity in the direction from the center of rotation. With enough rotation, the Moon would simply come apart into dust, gravel, and rocks.

It would make a nice ring around the earth until it formed a moon again.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
Q: Why were there no women astronauts on the Apollo 11 mission to the moon?
A: Because the moon didn't need cleaning.


I'll show myself out.

I gave you a star to light your way out.

Hey, we just found a way to change the Apparent Gravity of a Planet . Speed it up or Slow it down

Technically planets are satellites of the Star in the system soooo .... Just need a really big lever now....

a reply to: DrumsRfun
Geez Drums, you do realize we would NEVER get off this planet, if we waited on that to happen, right? LOL


We have to colonize another planet, so we CAN completely destroy this one, apparently.

a reply to: TheKestrel04
Actually if you had a tractor beam, rotation would be a great weapon. Spin an enemy ship by aiming the tractor beam to one edge of that ship instead of the center of mass and they can't aim their weapons at you. Keep increasing the spin and they will be unable to do anything inside the ship to operate it. Apply the spin acceleration very quickly and you turn the occupants into soup.