"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Besides my previous notions of terraforming our moon (instead of Mars),
there's also a terrific argument as to the absolutely great deal of
clean energy that's existing/coexisting between Earth and that of our
pesky GW moon, that rather badly needs to get relocated to Earth's L1
before there's not hardly a km3 worth of ice left on Earth.

Secondly, moving our moon to Earth's L1 also makes that otherwise nasty
moon of our's into a rather nifty little 3.5% dot of shade for Earth, as
well as offering a seriously cool earthshine environment of a worthy
outpost/depot/(gateway via the LSE-CM/ISS) that's representing a whole
lot less of IR/FIR trauma, as well as being less DNA lethal, though
otherwise naked and thus exposed to whatever's cosmic and/or physical
that's coming along.

Since that moon of our's may not have a viable magnetosphere (likely
because it's w/o iron core, as semi-hallow or at best offering a salty
brine of a core), thus holding onto any significant atmosphere of CO2 or
heavier elements isn't exactly going to be as easy as you'd think.

2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the mutual
attraction of gravity is worth 6.307e27 joules/yr (1.752e21 kwhrs).

As long as our physically dark and nasty moon (that's unavoidably global
warming us to death) is in the process of losing mass, and there's
sufficient secondary tidal forces at play, it'll never again impact
Earth. If that sucker ever manages to gain mass (such as from
accommodating NEOs getting litho terminated or the likes of being
penetration impacted by Sedna) is when we'll have to put those hard
thinking yarmulkes back on.

It seems the usual disinformation gauntlet that's continually hauled
about at taxpayer and consumer expense, and mainstream flaunted at the
drop of a yarmulke, such as carried onboard our spendy good ship USS
LOLLIPOP, which apparently has butt-loads more of their infomercial
crapolla as damage-control flak to share. Otherwise, lord knows there's
damn little if any topic constructive feedback unless accommodating an
ulterior motive or hidden agenda.

Starlord:
They have maped the moon and only find the light weigth
metal ores.
Is that the reason why the moon is still so salty and otherwise loaded
down with such complex mascon issues?

Excuse please; Whom the heck is "they", and why should we believe such
remote science as provided by such faith-based and/or politically agenda
formulated individuals, that clearly owe their brown nosed loyalty to
whomever is in charge of their private parts?

Terrestrial identified moon rocks do not seem of low denisity, or didn't
you silly folks know that?

Starlord:
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far
across the universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the
forefathers of the Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some
believe that they may yet be brothers of man, who even now fight to
survive, somewhere beyond the heavens.

I simply believe that other life similar or entirely different from
whatever we know of, should by all the known laws of physics and of
other biological rights of pure random happenstance or via intelligent
design exist/coexist elsewhere within this vast universe (possibly even
within our solar system), and of whatever's intelligent enough to have
made space travel safely doable should also be wise enough for giving
our badly polluted Earth a wide buffer DMZ because of our inbread
arrogance, greed and bigotry that has time and again demonstrated as
having practically if not absolutely no remorse whatsoever.

Even though there could have been a far better science transponder
alternative than those terribly small passive areas of retroreflectors,
or that of whatever impact deployed reflective material, whereas until
better interactive range finding science is made available to the
extremely electrostatic dusty surface of our moon, I'd have to accept
the best available science of others, as having established that our
moon is currently leaving town at the rate of 38 mm/yr.

For our icy proto-moon to have gotten safely away from having delivered
such a glancing sucker punch of a nasty bounce off Earth to begin with,
whereas it seems this seasonal tilt making and arctic ocean basin
forming encounter required that our original icy proto-moon had to lose
or rather transfer a good deal of its original mass in the initial
impact process, and then continually having to lose other mass (such as
whatever remaining ice), and then ever since having lost a sufficient
tonnage/yr of sodium in order to be leaving us at the supposed recession
rate of 38 mm/year.

If the mass of our moon had remained essentially unchanged, it's orbit
would have long since stabilized or possibly even in spite of secondary
tidal forces surcome to the unavoidable friction of terminal velocity
and mutual gravity of attraction, whereas instead of losing our moon by
38 mm/yr, we'd be joining back up at some future date.

As it is, that moon of our's is continually in the process of losing
mostly the raw element of sodium, but w/o a protective magnetosphere is
why there's also a few other elements that are getting boiled, vacuum
sucked out and continually excavated away by the solar wind.

Here's some more of my (corrected) weird/dyslexic math:
I'm certain it's a whole lot more complex than this, such as if one
meter per year as having moved our 7.35e22 kg moon were taken to
represent 1.165e15 joules, whereas I do believe the combined effect of
tidal forces and of the ongoing loss of mass that's resulting in the 38
mm/yr recession, as reverse extrapolated from the value of KE=.5MV2 can
thereby be taken as per applied kgf/yr = 171.62e9 (171.6 megatonnes), or
of that same force were otherwise applied into kinetic energy as worth
1.683e12 joules/yr, by which if that amount were taken in addition to
the ongoing 2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the
mutual attraction of gravity, as that's worth 6.307e27 joules/yr
(1.752e21 kwhrs). Seems as though the 38 mm recession is worth far less
than a mere pico-drop in the old bucket.

So, perhaps it's not going to be nearly as energy intensive as we'd
thought for relocating our moon to Earth's L1, especially once having
doubled the distance should have greatly reduced the mutual gravity of
attraction by a good 1/4. Too bad we're either not smart enough or
there's not so much as one qualified supercomputer that's offering a
simulator of such orbital mechanics, that can draft and thereby animate
this one out for us. I guess all of those publicly paid for
supercomputers are simply too busy at downloading live smut or animating
yet another eye-popping movie for our entertainment.

Perhaps once again, I'll have to say that it's rather unfortunate that
we're not quite smart enough, such as for our not having established an
efficient station-keeping science platform as of the mid 60s, as
situated within the moon's L1 zone, whereas we'd certainly have obtained
a great deal more replicated knowledge about our unusually massive and
nearby moon, and I do believe loads more learned about Earth science,
that is if we only had half a village idiot's brain instead of our
mutually perpetrated cold-war mindset (a terribly spendy and time
consuming real life cloak and dagger reality game called "Up Yours" that
has only cost us trillions per decade and damn near brought us into
WW-III, w/o sufficient energy reserves to boot).
-
Brad Guth


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