|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 3, 12:47*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 3, 11:56*am, Nightcrawler wrote: On 1/3/2010 12:05 PM, BradGuth wrote: snip crap 1) Define suction. 2) Define void. 3) Define vacuum. 4) Define hollow. 5) Formulate a real example of how they *all* interact. 6) Show how this interaction occurs on the moon and exerts * * a force (not pressure) that is vectored in a direction * * perpendicular to the surface of the moon, outward from * * the center of the moon. Gee whiz, now you expect me to be another Einstein, right off the top of by little head none the less. *You do realize that I'm only suggesting a 0.1% hollow/void worthy interior. He didn't specifically ask for mathematical definitions. Can't you explain suck in terms of chrome and trailer hitches? Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 psi: *14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ m2) Hmmm. That's about 1 bar. What a coincidence! Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 *Otherwise negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = 62 t/m2 Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder. Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (25%) towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon saturated farside crust. The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated basalt crust is worth 4e21 kg, and the maximum 450 km radii of the metallic core is supposedly worth 45e21 kg (more than likely it’s only worth 4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. *~ BG So, where is the green cheese factory? Double-A |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 3, 1:16*pm, Double-A wrote:
On Jan 3, 12:47*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Jan 3, 11:56*am, Nightcrawler wrote: On 1/3/2010 12:05 PM, BradGuth wrote: snip crap 1) Define suction. 2) Define void. 3) Define vacuum. 4) Define hollow. 5) Formulate a real example of how they *all* interact. 6) Show how this interaction occurs on the moon and exerts * * a force (not pressure) that is vectored in a direction * * perpendicular to the surface of the moon, outward from * * the center of the moon. Gee whiz, now you expect me to be another Einstein, right off the top of by little head none the less. *You do realize that I'm only suggesting a 0.1% hollow/void worthy interior. He didn't specifically ask for mathematical definitions. *Can't you explain suck in terms of chrome and trailer hitches? Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 psi: *14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ m2) Hmmm. *That's about 1 bar. *What a coincidence! It was just given as an example, although I'd favor 100 bar because so little O2 percentage would be required (1% O2 and 99% H2), of which our moon(Selene) can't possibly be shy of those O2 and H2 elements. Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 *Otherwise negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = 62 t/m2 Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder. Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (25%) towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon saturated farside crust. The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated basalt crust is worth 4e21 kg, and the maximum 450 km radii of the metallic core is supposedly worth 45e21 kg (more than likely it’s only worth 4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. *~ BG So, where is the green cheese factory? Double-A Obviously that "green cheese factory" is inside where it's perfectly cozy and otherwise perfectly safer than here on Eden/Earth. ~ BG |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 3, 1:11*pm, Nightcrawler wrote:
On 1/3/2010 2:47 PM, BradGuth wrote: Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 psi: * 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ m2) Just as an aside, what made the "open" space in these geode like hollows 14.7 psi? That was merely my constructive suggestion, such as derived from natural geology produced gasses or from being artificially injected with an atmosphere in order to benefit human habitat usage. Your NASA claims that the thick and robust basalt crust of our naked moon(Selene) contains loads of water (250 ppm essentially right at the surface none the less), as well as there being a host of radioactive plus other reactive elements to boot. So, I don't see any problem in that lunar geology as having evolved with its fair share of such geode and vug like voids (especially since it supposedly cooled off so fast), or at the very least having substantially porous layers to work with. ~ BG |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Our 99% hollow head of Guthball once again spewed...
On Jan 2, 10:34*am, Nightcrawler wrote:
On 1/2/2010 12:07 PM, BradGuth wrote: Where’s the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least bit hollow, or at least sufficiently porous? Where's the objective evidence that Guthball has a brain? What exactly is not holding up that robust lunar crust? Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 psi: 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ m2) Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = 62 t/m2 Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently fused molecular kind of solid that’s only leaking sodium, whereas 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, whereas even I might doubt that we’d get anywhere near that kind of result, but it’s certainly fun to ponder. Seems it’s going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (25%) towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon saturated farside crust. The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated basalt crust is worth 4e21 kg, and the maximum 450 km radii of the metallic core is supposedly worth 45e21 kg (more than likely it’s only worth 4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or voids of gasses were 100 bar (1470 psi) shouldn’t be unexpected. Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 2, 3:18*pm, Robert Collins wrote:
I can remain silent no longer. *Here with the above quoted evidence I would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. *The complaint is as follows: *Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. *It should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way. Robert Collins Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations. Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is? ~ BG |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 / Brad Guth
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 07:32:05PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 2, 3:18*pm, Robert Collins wrote: I can remain silent no longer. *Here with the above quoted evidence I would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. *The complaint is as follows: *Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. *It should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way. Robert Collins Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations. Your fits are more 'abram' than anything, and hence I don't really see why you think anyone should respect the content of your posts, other than as some sort of bizarre ego-gratification at your ability to froth at the keyboard. You obviously type far too quickly for your own good, or anyone else's. If you look closely at what I wrote there It might be implied that "continuously emerging interpretations" doesn't do much for space exploration, which would be fantastic if you were being funded by the NSF and needed a good reason to continue your 'research'. Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is? I'd probably prefer to look at a jovian moon or perhaps something in the asteroid belt, but there are lots of good things about the moon. For one thing, an authoritarian government such as the Chinese Communist Party wouldn't have far to send a large military force if there was ever a rebellion uprising on some moon colony. Never mind that large state and non-state corporations would be there with an eye to assuring an environment condusive to profitable buisness undertakings, at least in theory. The moon is in extremely close proximity to a large market hugry for products and services as well as raw materials, in relation to astronomical scales. The sale of those products and services can drive development in the first part of any expansionist phase; after that it is difficult to say where the money is. But, we don't really have to worry about that now since there isn't _anything_ going on any further out than L5 as far as human activity is concerned. Voyager (or whatever it's called these days) notwithstanding. None of this, of course, should be news to anyone here. Personally, I like some of the moons on other planets just because its further away from the Earth and all of its crazies. Tin-pot dictators of yesteryear, who influence contemporary affairs to an intolerable degree now, are the last people you want near, say, the delicate machinery of an airlock. The "stuttering" method of your writing probably tells us your also a physical spastic, perhaps with a special helmet and a name-plate riveted to a spot in some quasi-rural, little yellow schoolbus. Hell, *you'd* probably drool on the controls one day and space everyone in your compartment by accident -- that is, if we are somehow unable to reliably build drool-proof airlocks, on account of the fact that Dancing With The Stars is on TV right now and I'll be right back with the rest of this article. (If you want, you can take a break from reading this post for about twenty-two minutes, thirty if you don't skip the commercials.) So, like I was saying, I'd prefer to skip the Moon and get a little further away. That makes it harder since the start-up costs go way, way up but I figure that should be all that much of a problem since one the the things that H. Sap. is really, really good at is spending money buying stuff. Engineering and Science, not so much, but that can be fixed with education, at least in theory. (Hold on, I've got a caller... "No, I don't need any your goddamned life insurance!" *slam*) Uh, where was I. Oh yeah, moons. And asteroids. Asteroids are probably a good choice, but only if we can get robots to push them out of the belt and somewhere where it's easier to work on them. Again, expensive, but not as expensive as trying to work *in* the asteroid belt. It's just as cold or colder than the Moon in the further reaches of the Solar System, and the vaccum is just as hard so it insulates well no matter where you are. In neither place will there be trouble with cooling your computers and machinery unless you choose Venus or Mercury in a fit of insanity. I couldn't personally imagine a scenario where anyone would want to colonize Venus, but it's a good thing to consider and reject just in case we need to be prepared to put Venus advocates in straightjackets the moment they start campaigning for Venusian operations. But otherwise I wouldn't dream of it even if I had a nuclear robot body, which I note would probably require a smog test in California and annoying paperwork anywhere it went. Don't get me started on software updates and preventative maintenance, either. Let's just stick with tele- operated robotics, CNC, or semi-autonomous robot agents with specialized field-level AI and leave it at that. It's so much simpler. Other destinations in the solar system are good from the standpoint of epidemiology: any disease will have further to travel in the isolating conditions of extra-planetary commerce. A pandemic on Earth would be much less likely to infect the personnel of a space-station on Titan or Io, whereas the Moon is close enough that frequent travel would make the two atmospheres effectively linked from the standpoint of microbiology. Nanotechnology presents similar challenges, but we don't know exactly what they are yet so it is difficult to form a perspective without more hard data. Speculation is fun, though, and there's a bunch of good fiction out there with entertaining scenarios on the future of people and cities in space. Not much committment from the public on getting there, but hey it's only the twenty-first century. There's a long, long way to go before it will be commonplace to live in off-planet settlements with advanced technological comforts and labour-saving devices. Maybe someone can convince Microsoft to name one of its releases "Windows Jupiter", "Titan 9.0" or something to raise awareness and nudge things along a bit faster. And we probably need something better than the AT&T Death-Star logo. Symbolic associations with cute puppies and kittens wouldn't hurt either, perhaps a Hello-Kitty mascot to narrate infomercials on YouTube wouldn't be out of order. See, Brad? There's lots of things you can do with coherent English that just aren't possible with word salad. As promised, I have informed Usenet Control of your transgression and expect their response at any moment. Robert Collins |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 16, 12:40 pm, Robert Collins wrote:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 07:32:05PM -0800, BradGuth wrote: On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins wrote: I can remain silent no longer. Here with the above quoted evidence I would like to register a formal complaint with Usenet Control about the entity that calles itself 'Brad Guth'. The complaint is as follows: Brad Guth, or whatever it is, is a poor example of space activism and degrades the greater enterprise with its format. It should therefore be held to shut up until it can present its propaganda in a civilized and reasonable way. Robert Collins Gee whiz, you don't seem to have any support for your mainstream interpretation of my research, that by the way uses as much of your NASA and other public funded data that fits into my ongoing and continuously emerging interpretations. Your fits are more 'abram' than anything, and hence I don't really see why you think anyone should respect the content of your posts, other than as some sort of bizarre ego-gratification at your ability to froth at the keyboard. You obviously type far too quickly for your own good, or anyone else's. If you look closely at what I wrote there It might be implied that "continuously emerging interpretations" doesn't do much for space exploration, which would be fantastic if you were being funded by the NSF and needed a good reason to continue your 'research'. Why don't you instead provide us with your independent interpretations as to how hollow and otherwise valuable that moon of ours is? I'd probably prefer to look at a jovian moon or perhaps something in the asteroid belt, but there are lots of good things about the moon. For one thing, an authoritarian government such as the Chinese Communist Party wouldn't have far to send a large military force if there was ever a rebellion uprising on some moon colony. Never mind that large state and non-state corporations would be there with an eye to assuring an environment condusive to profitable buisness undertakings, at least in theory. The moon is in extremely close proximity to a large market hugry for products and services as well as raw materials, in relation to astronomical scales. The sale of those products and services can drive development in the first part of any expansionist phase; after that it is difficult to say where the money is. But, we don't really have to worry about that now since there isn't _anything_ going on any further out than L5 as far as human activity is concerned. Voyager (or whatever it's called these days) notwithstanding. None of this, of course, should be news to anyone here. Personally, I like some of the moons on other planets just because its further away from the Earth and all of its crazies. Tin-pot dictators of yesteryear, who influence contemporary affairs to an intolerable degree now, are the last people you want near, say, the delicate machinery of an airlock. The "stuttering" method of your writing probably tells us your also a physical spastic, perhaps with a special helmet and a name-plate riveted to a spot in some quasi-rural, little yellow schoolbus. Hell, *you'd* probably drool on the controls one day and space everyone in your compartment by accident -- that is, if we are somehow unable to reliably build drool-proof airlocks, on account of the fact that Dancing With The Stars is on TV right now and I'll be right back with the rest of this article. (If you want, you can take a break from reading this post for about twenty-two minutes, thirty if you don't skip the commercials.) So, like I was saying, I'd prefer to skip the Moon and get a little further away. That makes it harder since the start-up costs go way, way up but I figure that should be all that much of a problem since one the the things that H. Sap. is really, really good at is spending money buying stuff. Engineering and Science, not so much, but that can be fixed with education, at least in theory. (Hold on, I've got a caller... "No, I don't need any your goddamned life insurance!" *slam*) Uh, where was I. Oh yeah, moons. And asteroids. Asteroids are probably a good choice, but only if we can get robots to push them out of the belt and somewhere where it's easier to work on them. Again, expensive, but not as expensive as trying to work *in* the asteroid belt. It's just as cold or colder than the Moon in the further reaches of the Solar System, and the vaccum is just as hard so it insulates well no matter where you are. In neither place will there be trouble with cooling your computers and machinery unless you choose Venus or Mercury in a fit of insanity. I couldn't personally imagine a scenario where anyone would want to colonize Venus, but it's a good thing to consider and reject just in case we need to be prepared to put Venus advocates in straightjackets the moment they start campaigning for Venusian operations. But otherwise I wouldn't dream of it even if I had a nuclear robot body, which I note would probably require a smog test in California and annoying paperwork anywhere it went. Don't get me started on software updates and preventative maintenance, either. Let's just stick with tele- operated robotics, CNC, or semi-autonomous robot agents with specialized field-level AI and leave it at that. It's so much simpler. Other destinations in the solar system are good from the standpoint of epidemiology: any disease will have further to travel in the isolating conditions of extra-planetary commerce. A pandemic on Earth would be much less likely to infect the personnel of a space-station on Titan or Io, whereas the Moon is close enough that frequent travel would make the two atmospheres effectively linked from the standpoint of microbiology. Nanotechnology presents similar challenges, but we don't know exactly what they are yet so it is difficult to form a perspective without more hard data. Speculation is fun, though, and there's a bunch of good fiction out there with entertaining scenarios on the future of people and cities in space. Not much committment from the public on getting there, but hey it's only the twenty-first century. There's a long, long way to go before it will be commonplace to live in off-planet settlements with advanced technological comforts and labour-saving devices. Maybe someone can convince Microsoft to name one of its releases "Windows Jupiter", "Titan 9.0" or something to raise awareness and nudge things along a bit faster. And we probably need something better than the AT&T Death-Star logo. Symbolic associations with cute puppies and kittens wouldn't hurt either, perhaps a Hello-Kitty mascot to narrate infomercials on YouTube wouldn't be out of order. See, Brad? There's lots of things you can do with coherent English that just aren't possible with word salad. As promised, I have informed Usenet Control of your transgression and expect their response at any moment. Robert Collins Wow! nice blocks of well crafted word salad, that unfortunately has nothing whatsoever to do with our semi-hollow or porous moon(Selene). However, for fun I'll eventually read through parts of it so as to insure that you get full credit. At least my honest speculations are those based upon interpreting the best available science, plus as always sticking within those pesky regular laws of physics. I sure hope that "Usenet Control" has nothing better to do, than to follow up your request to terminate anyone having any deductive formulated mindset, such as mine. In the mean time, perhaps you can tell us why that unusual moon isn't the least bit hollow or otherwise sufficiently porous within or under that thick crust. Otherwise, I'd like us to collaborate as to exactly what that 7.35e22 kg captured asteroid/moon(Selene) has to offer, including it's L1 usage that Clarke, Boeing and a few others thought was extremely nifty, as did I for accommodating my LSE-CM/ISS. Venus is another issue that's hardly insurmountable, at least by most any 5th grader or older person that isn't brainwashed to whatever status quo standards that you seem to approve of. Do you have a better plan of action (besides extensive use of blinders and ear plugs) that we should follow? ~ BG |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 / Brad Guth
"BradGuth" wrote in message ... On Jan 16, 12:40 pm, Robert Collins wrote: On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 07:32:05PM -0800, BradGuth wrote: On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins wrote: Give it up, GuthBall, I'm not the only one who thinks you are retarded. Bob Collins wants to take action to have you barred from the NGs ... I think we should call Nurse Cratchett and have you permanently confined to the Cookoo's Nest, complete with padded cell and straight-jacket, with pictures of the Moon. Venus and Sirius plastered all over your cell walls. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 /Brad Guth
On Jan 16, 4:51 pm, "Hagar" hagen@sahm,name wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message ... On Jan 16, 12:40 pm, Robert Collins wrote: On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 07:32:05PM -0800, BradGuth wrote: On Jan 2, 3:18 pm, Robert Collins wrote: Give it up, GuthBall, I'm not the only one who thinks you are retarded. Bob Collins wants to take action to have you barred from the NGs ... I think we should call Nurse Cratchett and have you permanently confined to the Cookoo's Nest, complete with padded cell and straight-jacket, with pictures of the Moon. Venus and Sirius plastered all over your cell walls. Your intent to get rid of anyone that isn't a trailer park redneck is noted. ~ BG |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 / Brad Guth
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 04:11:06PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 16, 12:40 pm, Robert Collins wrote: As promised, I have informed Usenet Control of your transgression and expect their response at any moment. Robert Collins Wow! nice blocks of well crafted word salad, that unfortunately has nothing whatsoever to do with our semi-hollow or porous moon(Selene). However, for fun I'll eventually read through parts of it so as to insure that you get full credit. Do not compound your crime with yet more baseless accusations. Usenet Control will examine the record or relevant posts very carefully, in particular, messages after the fact are sometimes the most revealing. At least my honest speculations are those based upon interpreting the best available science, plus as always sticking within those pesky regular laws of physics. I sure hope that "Usenet Control" has nothing better to do, than to follow up your request to terminate anyone having any deductive formulated mindset, such as mine. Well, no. Usenet Control would if necessary contact the Galactic Patrol if they thought there was a serious issue of that sort. I hope you aren't thinking of messing with the Galactic Patrol; they have no sense of humor. In the mean time, perhaps you can tell us why that unusual moon isn't the least bit hollow or otherwise sufficiently porous within or under that thick crust. Otherwise, I'd like us to collaborate as to exactly what that 7.35e22 kg captured asteroid/moon(Selene) has to offer, including it's L1 usage that Clarke, Boeing and a few others thought was extremely nifty, as did I for accommodating my LSE-CM/ISS. A Collaborator collaborator? But anyways, as I said I was not really interested in the moon. Venus is another issue that's hardly insurmountable, at least by most any 5th grader or older person that isn't brainwashed to whatever status quo standards that you seem to approve of. Do you have a better plan of action (besides extensive use of blinders and ear plugs) that we should follow? Ear plugs? Robert Collins |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Our 0.11% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1/... | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 3 | November 13th 09 06:25 PM |
The 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth | BradGuth | Astronomy Misc | 103 | November 6th 09 12:50 PM |
The 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth | BradGuth | Policy | 1 | September 15th 09 03:47 AM |
The 1% hollow moon / Brad Guth | BradGuth | Policy | 1 | July 19th 09 09:19 PM |
The 1% hollow moon / Brad Guth | Six of Nine or Half-dozen of the Oher | Policy | 0 | July 17th 09 06:50 PM |