View Single Post
  #22  
Old February 12th 07, 01:46 AM posted to sci.environment,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy,sci.philosophy.tech
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Energy that's between us and our moon

"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message

Tether? Erm...where are the attachment points of
this tether?


Tethers, as in many such basalt composite tough fiber tethers made from
the moon itself, rather easily attached deep into whatever and wherever
you'd like.

The best one can hope for is
an increase to 1101 m/s, which will just make the orbit
more elliptical.


Sounds great, although it's already skewed "elliptical" because of the
sun, perhaps a little more so at times because of Jupiter, and once
every 19 months as measurably influenced by Venus.


If we go with your suggestion, the L2 point is about 60000
km above the far side of the Moon (the Wikipedia gives
61500 but I suspect they're using mass centers). If I
understand you correctly you want to move a gigatonne mass
(10^12 kg) 183000 km (1.83 * 10^7 m) from the far side,
and attach it to the Moon's surface with a sufficiently
strong tether.


I'd found a somewhat longer moon L2 of 64,700 km, thus a 2XL2 = 129,400
km, but instead by utilizing your further reach of 183,000 km should
obviously more than accomplish this pull like hell trick.


You are attempting to move a boulder with a flea. The Moon's
mass is 7.3477 * 10^22 kg -- about 7.3477 * 10^10 times bigger.


Flea by flea, or rather perhaps as much as tonne by tonne of tether
robotic pod by pod payloads and we'd eventually get there, with 1e12 kg
efficiently sitting but otherwise still attached at 2XL2, or possibly as
you've suggested a little further out.

Obviously you can't fully read, nor hardly think outside the box. Is
that because of old age, or is it something faith-based that's screwing
up the works?


You might try moving the tether further out, though I really don't see
how this is going to work anyway. Were the tether a very rigid lever
and L2 the fulcrum point, you'd want to have your mass 4.41 * 10^20 m
out -- which is 46,600 light years.


Silly boy, arnt you. What's your big ass hurry? I was thinking of this
taking a century if need be. I's called job security.


Did you bother to ask lord William Mook, as to how much tonnage of
U238/U235 we're talking about?


No, sorry; was I supposed to?


Most certainly, why the hell not? What could it possibly hurt to ask?
After all, he's yet another Usenet wizard that knows all there is to
know, and then some.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG