What's not technically positive about relocating our moon to Earth's L1

We humans are in fact measurably adding toxic, physical and thermal
trauma to our badly failing environment, however, we are not the
primary cause of our ongoing anti-ice-age demise.

The gravitational or graviton force that exist between Earth and our
moon is roughly equal to the ongoing centripetal force, whereas each
of those factors are typically calculated on the second per second
basis that's continuous.

According to a couple of online calculators:
Excluding matters of whatever orbital friction or that of our moon's
38 mm/year recession, whereas our somewhat binary Earth+Moon orbital
Centripetal Force(Fc) = 2.00076525e20 N = 2.04021e19 kgf

As merely on behalf of a given frame of reference, each kgf = 9.80665
joules when applied at or within +/- 32 km near the surface of Earth.

2.04021e19 kgf x 9.80665 = 20.0076e19 joules = 2e20 j/sec at the
surface of Earth

Supposedly this Earth/moon graviton force is just a wee bit less than
the Centripetal Force, of which this mutual gravity = 2.021492e19 kgf
x 9.80665 = 1.9824e20 joules (perhaps it's less than Fc because of
physics/math errors or because it's in the process of moving away is
what accounts for the 1.833e18 joule difference).

Of course we'll need to appreciate, that 2e20 joules is not a one
shot application of such energy, but a continuous ongoing flow of
mutual attraction that's worth 2e20 joules for each and every second
of each and every hour, as well as for each and every day that goes on
and on for each and every year and so forth until hell freezes over,
GW Bush tells us the truth or Yids admit their faith-based PR stunt
allowed one of their own kind to being put on a stick.

Fortunately for us, though having been a bit more applied energy than
required, whereas without that nifty moon we'd be seriously stuck in a
somewhat monoseason of being extra cold and of a more extensive
freshwater environment, with roughly a third of an ocean tide that's
derived from our 24 hour rotation as we orbit that relatively passive
sun of ours, and most likely not having nearly as many complex forms
of DNA to play with.

Therefore, with that nifty moon we're talking 7.2e20 KW.h of applied
graviton energy.

Earth having a mostly fluid volume of 1.0832e12 km3 = 1.0832e21 m3

If for round numbers we include our wet atmosphere = 1.1e21 m3

Should merely half of the 7.2e20 kw worth of graviton energy be
applied = 3.6e20 KW.h

3.6e20 kw / 1.1e21 m3 = 3.2727e-1 = .327 kw/m3 or 327 w/m3

Just for a little silly fun; that's also roughly the available energy
per volumetric worth of us humans at giving off 100 watts each.
Whereas perhaps if absolutely necessary 3.27 of us (if we're not too
fat) could be squeezed into a given cozy volume of one cubic meter.

327 watts/m3 is actually imposing quite a great deal of applied
graviton energy, though at a nearly constant force isn't actually
causing the kind of planetology trauma you'd think possible. Whereas
my limited and somewhat dyslexic SWAG is suggesting that perhaps as
little as .1% is converted into heat via friction, therefore an
average of 327 mw/m3 is contributed into keeping the interior and
surface of Earth (including its badly polluted atmosphere) physically
interactive and a little extra toasty.

If you have better or even weird physics and math that'll suggest
otherwise, then I'm interested in reviewing such notions that'll give
us a better idea as to exactly how much that pesky moon of ours is
contributing to our badly failing environment. Of course, my
intentions of relocating that moon out to Earth's L1 would greatly
moderate its affects upon warming our environment, and we'd still have
roughly half the ocean tides plus a rather badly needed spot of shade,
all without losing the new and improved benefits of what the moon's L1
(facing Earth) has to offer as our LSE-CM/ISS worth of a terrific off-
world and moon-tethered depot/gateway. Of course, this would also
allow our new and improved Earth+moon L1 as headed towards our sun to
being greatly extended for the benefit of ACE and other solar science
data obtaining platforms.
- Brad Guth

Al Gore isn't the least bit dead wrong, he's not not entirely right.

We humans are in fact measurably adding our soot worth of toxic,
physical and thermal trauma to our badly failing environment that's
also in the process of losing its protective magnetosphere due to the
ongoing -.05%/year demise of that rather nifty planetology feature,
however, in spite of how badly we've utilized and somewhat trashed
this planet, we are not the primary cause of our ongoing anti-ice-age
demise.

The gravitational or graviton force that exist between Earth and our
moon is roughly equal to the ongoing centripetal force that would
otherwise toss that moon on its mary way, whereas each of those
opposing factors are typically calculated on the second per second
basis, that's also continuous.

According to a couple of online calculators:
Excluding matters of whatever orbital friction or that of our moon's
38 mm/year recession, whereas our somewhat binary Earth+Moon orbital
Centripetal Force(Fc) = 2.00076525e20 N = 2.04021e19 kgf

As merely on behalf of a given frame of reference, each kgf = 9.80665
joules when applied at or within +/- 32 km near the surface of Earth,
therefore including our oceans, most of the crust and that of our
polluted atmosphere.

2.04021e19 kgf x 9.80665 = 20.0076e19 joules = 2e20 j/sec at the
surface of Earth

Supposedly this Earth/moon graviton force is just a wee bit less than
Centripetal Force, of which this combined gravity force = 2.021492e19
kgf x 9.80665 = 1.9824e20 joules (perhaps it's less than Fc because of
physics/math errors or because it's in the process of moving away is
what accounts for the 1.833e18 joule difference).

Of course we'll also need to further appreciate that 2e20 joules is
not a one shot application of such energy, but that of a continuous
ongoing graviton flow of mutual attraction that's worth 2e20 joules
for each and every second of each and every hour, as well as for each
and every day that goes on and on for each and every year and so forth
until hell freezes over, GW Bush tells us the truth or those crazy
Yids admit their faith-based PR stunt allowed one of their own kind to
being put on a stick.

Fortunately for us, as having created and sustained our seasonal tilt,
though having been a bit more applied energy on behalf of melting ice
than required, whereas without that nifty moon we'd be seriously stuck
in a somewhat monoseason of being extra cold and likely that of having
a more extensive freshwater environment, with roughly something better
than a third of ocean tides that's derived from our 24 hour rotation
as we orbit that relatively passive sun of ours, as well as most
likely not having nearly as many complex forms of DNA to play with, or
to eat.

Therefore, instead of our merely dealing with 5.556e13 KW.h as
suggested by the one second calculated worth of 2e20 joules, because
such energy of applied gravitons should by rights add up with that
nifty moon of 7.35e22 kg that's trekking so nearby, continually in
motion and thus unavoidably affecting our physical realm (inside and
out), is why I do believe we have 7.2e20 KW.h worth of applied
graviton energy that's sort of speak up for grabs.

Earth as having a mostly fluid volume of 1.0832e12 km3 = 1.0832e21 m3

For round numbers of volume we include our wet atmosphere = 1.1e21 m3

Should merely half of the 7.2e20 KW.h worth of graviton energy be
applied = 3.6e20 KW.h

3.6e20 kw / 1.1e21 m3 = 3.2727e-1 = .327 kw/m3 or 327 w/m3

Just for a little silly fun; that's also roughly the available energy
per volumetric worth of us humans at giving off 100 watts each.
Whereas perhaps if absolutely necessary 3.27 of us (if we're not too
fat) could be squeezed into a given cozy volume of one cubic meter.

327 watts/m3 is actually imposing quite a great deal of applied
graviton energy, though at a nearly constant force isn't actually
causing the kind of planetology trauma you'd think possible. Whereas
my limited and somewhat dyslexic SWAG is suggesting that perhaps as
little as .1% is converted into heat via friction, therefore an
average of 327 mw/m3 is contributed into keeping the interior and
surface of Earth (including its badly polluted atmosphere) physically
interactive and thereby our environment gets made a little extra
toasty.

If you have a better understanding or even weird physics and math
that'll suggest otherwise, then I'm interested in reviewing such
notions that'll give us an idea as to exactly how much good or bad
news that pesky moon of ours is contributing to our failing
environment. Of course, my intentions on behalf of relocating that
moon out to Earth's L1 would greatly moderate its affects upon warming
our environment, and we'd still have roughly half the ocean tides plus
a rather badly needed spot of solar isolation shade, all without
losing the new and improved benefits of what the moon's L1 (moon--
L1---earth) has to offer as our LSE-CM/ISS worth of a terrific off-
world and moon-tethered depot/gateway. This would also allow our new
and improved Earth+moon L1 as headed off towards our sun to being
greatly extended for the benefit of ACE and other solar science data
obtaining platforms. Therefore, I do believe that we're talking of a
multitasking win-win-win for the old gipper, and then some.

If this moon relocation does its cool thing, perhaps within a century
or so our winter Olympics can be held on the same island mountain
range as the KECK observatory.
- Brad Guth

On Aug 6, 6:45 am, BradGuth wrote:
The relocating of our moon to Earth's L1 isn't for the typical naysay
wuss of this anti-think-tank of such a Usenet from Yiddish hell on
Earth.

Not that within our salty old moon doesn't offer great potential
that's nearby and therefore accessible, and I certainly don't
otherwise mean to be anti-topic because, I happen to know there's all
sorts of good that moon and of its L1 can be utilized for, but what
the hell is wrong with you silly naysay folks that are deductively
blind and otherwise swarm like mindset bigoted into naysayism past the
point of no return?

There's nothing worth our living science that's alive and kicking on
that surface morgue of our physically dark moon that's in any way
growing, or that could have otherwise survived the cosmic and solar
gauntlet of gamma and hard-Xrays, other than the nifty likes of sodium
crystals shortly before they must vaporise by day. The planet Mars
represents an interesting but very frozen to death and otherwise a
geologically dead worth of CO2 managed planetology, that which no
matters what is simply too far away and otherwise too moon like naked
for our own frail DNA good and the obvious lack of our having any
viable fly-by-rocket lander.

Venus has been on the other Ovglove hand almost exactly like proto-
Earth, and at least at times merely 100 fold the distance of our moon,
plus it's offering us darn good signs of having been lived upon by
something that's a whole lot more intelligent than a hot rock.

If Venus itself is offering too much of such a toasty and newish
planetology reality for your swarm's faith-based naysay mindset, then
perhaps POOF City at Venus L2(VL2) will provide the space depot/
gateway that's doable. At least this cool VL2 is humanly manageable
as is, unlike our physically hot plus rad hot Earth-moon-L1 that's
still being kept as taboo/nondisclosure rated, and otherwise
representing about as nasty of a local gamma and Xray exposed location
as you're going to get.

Venus L2 is not the least bit hot, or even all that nasty to our frail
DNA, and it's a good starting point before going in for the kill.
Whereas the moon's L1 (once that moon has been relocated to Earth's
L1) would become extremely cool, but still nearby enough to humanly
visit for extended periods of time, making it the best ever space
depot/gateway in town.
- Brad Guth

Here's an even better than GOOGLE X Prize, that's worth mutiple
billions per year, if not trillions upon trillions.

First to establish the relocation process of migrating our salty old
moon out to Earth's L1, as such gets a 10% take of all future
interplanetary action, plus whatever service fees for the mining of
our moon and for using the LSE-CM/ISS space depot/gateway.
- Brad Guth -

One nifty and clean energy resource alternative has to do with our
moon, in part by eventually relocating that physically dark and
somewhat salty big old thing out to Earth's L1, and the next
requirement is for us to fully utilize the LSE-CM/ISS and of its
tether dipole element that can technically reach as close as you'd
like to Earth (just short of a few fail-safe km worth of coming into
direct contact).

Willie Moo / William Mook:
A detailed analysis of the power flows in Earth's biosphere came up
with the following;

50,000 TW - direct solar
320 TW - hydrological cycle (including winds)
40 TW - photosynthesis (all life)
10 TW - human industry (2005)

Once again, your CIA WorldFactBook "detailed analysis" is simply being
way too conservative, and your human energy consumption (if all
inclusive) is off by at least 50% (I'd go as far as humans being
worthy of 20 TW).

On behalf of the raw 'energy in' simply has to equal 'energy out', or
else Earth explodes. Your CIA WorldFactBook doesn't even take the
horrific influx or clean through and through energy worth of solar and
moon gravity issues into account. Doesn't the complex Earth/moon/sun
tidal force of such interactive gravity account for anything within
that good old mainstream conditional physics book of Mook?

You good folks do realize that the all-inclusive volumetric worth of
Earth (including its extremely wet and sooty atmosphere) is 98.5%
fluid to those multibody forces of gravity, don't you.
- Brad Guth -