|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"TeaTime" wrote in message
"Brad Guth" wrote in message news:1750ae77a57e6221505dcb964c7522d8.49644@mygate .mailgate.org... usual total disregard for other poster's comment and question snipped ... and that's why I stepped in and answered Paul's question, in plain English, with not a trace of taboo, non-disclosure, X-rating, banishment, or any other of your stupid paranpid bull****. See how simple it is, really? As far as I could tell, Paul had no apparent question about anything Lagrange related, as that's pretty well covered by Sir Arthur Clarke and countless others. However, there was a fairly obvious hint of a "comunications possibilities" question that obviously your trigger happy if not equally lose cannon mindset entirely missed. Thanks anyway for telling us what we already know, or at least should have known. I do have a few Lagrange related questions for another time, that is if you're still interested in being so nice about sharing your expertise. Now tell us why you're the one that's going Usenet postal about all of this. BTW; why are you and so many others of your kind being so anti SI/metric? - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"Brad Guth" wrote in message news:3e3971d0690e5a4b1db061de1dc51f5c.49644@mygate .mailgate.org... As far as I could tell, Paul had no apparent question about anything Lagrange related, as that's pretty well covered by Sir Arthur Clarke and countless others. However, there was a fairly obvious hint of a "comunications possibilities" question that obviously your trigger happy if not equally lose cannon mindset entirely missed. Thanks anyway for telling us what we already know, or at least should have known. I do have a few Lagrange related questions for another time, that is if you're still interested in being so nice about sharing your expertise. Paul did say that he had difficulty visualising the orbit of a body at such a point. He also mentioned communication possibilities. I took that to be an inferred query and tried to fill in some of the blanks. I realise you would already know about it or you wouldn't post about it so enthusiastically. As a matter of interest, I take it you are aware that the SOHO satellite enjoys its unobstructed view of the sun from earth's L1 libration point? Like the moon's L1, it isn't a point of stable equilibrium so that SOHO requires a little fuel every few months to nudge it back into position. Now tell us why you're the one that's going Usenet postal about all of this. What do you mean by 'Usenet postal' ? I read posts on this group on a daily basis with considerable interest and post a response wherever I think I can make an interesting or humorous contribution. BTW; why are you and so many others of your kind being so anti SI/metric? For my own part, as a professional engineer living in the UK and working worldwide, I use nothing but S.I. units on a daily basis. When we converse colloquially, both here and in the USA, we still talk about miles as they remain more familiar to many people. Road signs here are still in miles for some odd reason, though it is actually illegal for our shopkeepers to sell their produce in anything but kilogrammes and litres. It's a whacky old world and I suspect full metrification, both official and social, will take a few more years. See? I give you an inch and you take a mile. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
TeaTime wrote: Paul did say that he had difficulty visualising the orbit of a body at such a point. He also mentioned communication possibilities. I took that to be an inferred query and tried to fill in some of the blanks. Thanks to both of you for filling in the blanks and getting me to first base on this. A further set of queries occurs to me: If something is orbiting the earth more or less coincident with the moon, I assume that communicating with it from the earth will require some frequencies and/or technologies which will prevent it from interfering with GEO or LEO communications. Has the ITU considered this in its little red books and has anyone applied for licenses to use such frequencies. That would be a practical thing for nation states to do if they wanted to build something out there, I would think. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 03:04:35 GMT, in uk.sci.astronomy , "TeaTime"
wrote: teatime, -- _____________________ /| /| | | ||__|| | Please do not | / O O\__ | feed the | / \ | Trolls | / \ \|_____________________| / _ \ \ || / |\____\ \ || / | | | |\____/ || / \|_|_|/ | _|| / / \ |____| || / | | | --| | | | |____ --| * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/ *-- _--\ _ \ | || / _ \\ | / ` * / \_ /- | | | * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________ |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"TeaTime" wrote in message
Paul did say that he had difficulty visualising the orbit of a body at such a point. He also mentioned communication possibilities. I took that to be an inferred query and tried to fill in some of the blanks. I realise you would already know about it or you wouldn't post about it so enthusiastically. As a matter of interest, I take it you are aware that the SOHO satellite enjoys its unobstructed view of the sun from earth's L1 libration point? Like the moon's L1, it isn't a point of stable equilibrium so that SOHO requires a little fuel every few months to nudge it back into position. Thanks much for the constructive feedback. How much station-keeping fuel per tonne per lunar month are we talking about, of staying within the interactive zone of our moon's L1? Now tell us why you're the one that's going Usenet postal about all of this. What do you mean by 'Usenet postal' ? I read posts on this group on a daily basis with considerable interest and post a response wherever I think I can make an interesting or humorous contribution. Going Usenet postal is simply my catch phrase for others doing somewhat exactly as I with my battery of lose cannons in order to defend myself, especially when folks arrive as seemingly out of nowhere (as though topic/author stalking) in order to enter an established topic, and right off the bat they go into another one of their all or nothing naysay modes, and/or tear off in an entirely different out-of-context direction because they obviously don't like me or hardly anyone else for that matter. Those topic/author stalking with no honest intentions of constructively contributing to the given intent of the topic at hand are in my koran more than worthy of being classified as going usenet postal. It's also what folks tend to do if they're crazy with ulterior motives and hidden agendas that are at risk. If I can manage to return the warm and fuzzy favor, I do so with all the love and affection I can muster, as to rock their good ship LOLLIPOP until it hopefully sinks, along with all of such naysay fools onboard. For my own part, as a professional engineer living in the UK and working worldwide, I use nothing but S.I. units on a daily basis. When we converse colloquially, both here and in the USA, we still talk about miles as they remain more familiar to many people. Road signs here are still in miles for some odd reason, though it is actually illegal for our shopkeepers to sell their produce in anything but kilogrammes and litres. It's a whacky old world and I suspect full metrification, both official and social, will take a few more years. See? I give you an inch and you take a mile. Just for being a good sport, I think we should stick with S.I. units, which is still a somewhat tricky matter for my dyslexic self. Unlike most others wizards within this Usenet naysay land, at least I'm willing to learn in order to go along with the majority flow of this world, which for good reason has been metric for decades. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"Paul Mc" wrote in message
ups.com If something is orbiting the earth more or less coincident with the moon, I assume that communicating with it from the earth will require some frequencies and/or technologies which will prevent it from interfering with GEO or LEO communications. Has the ITU considered this in its little red books and has anyone applied for licenses to use such frequencies. That would be a practical thing for nation states to do if they wanted to build something out there, I would think. I find it rather odd that these folks that usually claim as being such all-knowing wizards can't manage to constructively contribute to your request. Terrestrial and/or of whatever's of terrestrial satellite communications with whatever's utilizing the moon's L1 isn't the least bit of a problem for existing technology, especially if using FM/quantum binary packets via laser beams. Might I further ask; How many terabytes per second or rather per ms would you like to transfer? - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
It seems that our trusty moon, as having represented such a terrific mascon of forced global warming to our environment ever since the last ice age, is still more off-limits than Venus, whereas Venus is simply need-to-know or Old Testament nondisclosure sequestered for the moment (in mainstream status quo damage-control limbo because the planetology of Venus simply isn't as old as Earth, and worse yet, it looks as though we wouldn't be the first of intelligent souls having set a hot foot on Venus). Speaking a little about 'microgravity'; as such it's actually hard to come by and harder yet to sustain unless you're in a fast LEO orbit and therefore having to push yourself through 8 km/s worth of headwinds (worse yet if you're in retrograde mode), or simply best accommodated if you are out and about while literally hanging nearly effortlessly around or rather within our moon's interactive L1 nullification zone. If we are intent and thereby serious upon going for other planets or other moons of such other planets, as such we could really use our moon's L1 for accommodating our next ISS or whatever POOF or Clarke Station as our do-everything space depot. In fact, if we're merely going for our moon, it's rather nifty if not technically essential for having the mission command platform as coasting safely and efficiently at roughly r34, thereby sustaining an average velocity of roughly 866 m/s with respect to Earth, as parallel parked or rather coasting nearly effortlessly along within this ME-L1 pocket of nearby space that's about as devoid of atoms as it gets. 0) Our moon's L1 isn't a cheap date, nor is it not complex. You'll need more than a good slide rule or pocket calculator if planning upon fully utilizing this nifty interactive space that's so nearby. In other words, all morons and/or the dumb and dumber sorts of village idiot snookered fools, especially the dumbfounded naysayer's of Usenet, need not apply. 1) Anything deployed at our moon's L1 starts off small, and it grows to suit. 2) From then on. it only gets as big and/or as complex as you'd like it to get. 3) Because of what this LSE-CM/ISS represents, it's not going to happen overnight. My previously suggested 1e9 m3 CM/ISS abode or space depot that's capable of becoming worth 256e6 tonnes is not an all or nothing sort of super Clarke Station on steroids. For starters, it's simply quite a bit larger (a core of roughly 1280 meters), it's placed a wee bit further towards Earth (perhaps r35~r36, averaging 60,830 km @861 km/s to 62,568 km @856 m/s) while multi-tethered directly to the moon, and there are a few nifty interactive elements involved. The massive hull or shell of this CM/ISS may or may not have to spin, as there are personal artificial gravity alternatives that would function from within this well shielded environment. The LSE-CM/ISS can eventually reside at the moon's 34r (59,092 km), with those counter rotating flywheels of energy storage being sustained at r33.5 or whatever's exactly L1 (+/- 1 microgravity) once the tether dipole element is extended to within 4r(25,512 km) of Earth (or perhaps r6/38,268 is close enough). Over time the affect of this installation would somewhat moderate the elliptical lunar orbit and could even reduce and/or eliminate the rate of recession, whereas some open mindset folks might tend to think this outcome is a good thing. Besides, I'm absolutely certain that China will know exactly what to do. So, I'll have to keep asking, why are so many of you folks (as all-knowing as you've claimed to be) getting yourselves so gosh darn huffy or otherwise naysay about all of this? Just because you don't have a masters degree in Chinese Mandarin doesn't mean that we're out of luck. That's because China becoming smarter and having been wiser than most of us, and having been increasing that lead, as such they'll learn our language (as many already have) in order to accommodate their less fortunate (Mandarin illiterate) clients, such as us. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications...aryland01b.pdf This fancy enough "Clarke Station" document that's rather interesting but otherwise seriously outdated, not to mention way under-shielded unless incorporating 8+ meters of water plus having somehow established an artificial magnetosphere, or perhaps 16+ meters of h2o if w/o magnetosphere that's necessary because it's parked within 60,000 km from our physically dark and otherwise highly reactive moon that's providing a not so DNA friendly TBI(total body irradiation) dosage worth of gamma and hard-X-rays, is simply downright wussy about sharing the positive science and habitat/depot considerations for utilizing the moon's L1. In fact, the Clarke Station document itself gives hardly a mention on behalf of the tremendous L1 benefits to humanity, much less as to space exploration or the daunting task of salvaging our mascon warmed environment, and oddly it's still not having squat to do with any task of actually developing, exploiting or otherwise terraforming the moon itself. The document talks as though the moon doesn't hardly exist, which is rather unfortunate since we'll be in need of such raw elements and vast energy resources of the moon and from the L1 dipole as we manage to run ourselves out of terrestrial fossil and yellowcake fuels (can't hardly wage WW-IV w/o energy), as we continue to dim the albedo of our Earth with as much energy consuming soot and otherwise toxic chemical pollution as we can muster. If you folks need my list of related subtopics before getting involved, as such I'll do just that because, I have far more questions than answers to share. Also, if you can place a copy of this topic into NASA's "uplink.space.com" or even Usenet "cam.misc" and of similar groups (especially of those moderated to death) that might appreciate a good challenge or poke in the eye with a sharp stick, please do as much as you can get away with. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
Brad Guth wrote: Terrestrial and/or of whatever's of terrestrial satellite communications with whatever's utilizing the moon's L1 isn't the least bit of a problem for existing technology, especially if using FM/quantum binary packets via laser beams. Might I further ask; How many terabytes per second or rather per ms would you like to transfer? Please forgive this very ignorant follow-up question, but do such laser beams work over such vast distances and through atmospheric conditions or are you taking about satellite to station communications? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"Paul Mc" wrote in message
ups.com Please forgive this very ignorant follow-up question, but do such laser beams work over such vast distances and through atmospheric conditions or are you taking about satellite to station communications? No problem. Laser beam communication works best external to atmosphere, thus the further away or between planets or that of a given planet/moon or binary planet L1 situation the better for such laser beams achieving the most two-way range per joule. However, a laser beam can be configured in order to function to/from the surface of Venus, transferring if need be a terabyte/ms is still technically doable, especially if that's being accomplished to/from Venus L2, or quite possibly as to/from our moon's L1. Earth to Venus is even doable, although it'll obviously demand more initial beam energy and there may be significant data throughput limitations. Without a Venus satellite or at least that of a rigid airship cruising above them thick clouds, as such there's no laser communications capability of Venusians specifically hitting Earth with any such beam of photons, although cloud-top illuminations of their FM/quantum modulated packets are certainly doable. Remember that at times (roughly every 19 months/584 days), Venus is only 100 fold the distance as that of our physically dark and somewhat salty moon. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon
"Paul Mc" wrote in message ups.com... Please forgive this very ignorant follow-up question, but do such laser beams work over such vast distances and through atmospheric conditions or are you taking about satellite to station communications? Yes, out in space laser beams are an ideal medium for telemetry of all kinds. The most recent searches for extraterrestrial life have been in the visible spectrum (OSETI) in the expectation that other civilisations might use high-energy lasers as rotating beacons to send out a welcome note. Light photons travel on through space forever. That is how we can see distant galaxies thousands of millions of light-years away. Visible red or infrared types are ideal in the space environment, whilst for penetrating cloudy atmospheres the longer infrared wavelengths are more effective. increased by factors of thousands without basic changes of principle, but will requireincreased signal power; a suitable transmitter; and adequate onboard memory. Sev-to receive transmissions from spacecraft in various orbits.Ground receiving stations are simply large optical telescopes, which we knowhow to build. On high mountain tops, the atmosphere transmits signals from spaceto ground with a satisfactory efficiency of 70% at 1500-1600nm. Signal power on-board spacecraft can be provided by existing laser diodes amplified by Erbium increased by factors of thousands without basic changes of principle, but will requireincreased signal power; a suitable transmitter; and adequate onboard memory. Sev-eral well-separated mountain-top receiving stations around the globe are also neededto receive transmissions from spacecraft in various orbits.increased by factors of thousands without basic changes of principle, but will requireincreased signal power; a suitable transmitter; and adequate onboard memory. Sev-eral well-separated mountain-top receiving stations around the globe are also neededto receive transmissions from spacecraft in various orbits.Ground receiving stations are simply large optical telescopes, which we knowhow to build. On high mountain tops, the atmosphere transmits signals from spaceto ground with a satisfactory efficiency of 70% at 1500-1600nm. Signal power on-board spacecraft can be provided by existing laser diodes amplified by Erbium Doped3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 4 Fiber Amplifiers (EDFA) or Raman amplifiers, both in extensive use at 1550nm in thetelecommunications industry (6). To obtain sufficient bandwidth, Dense Wavelength-Division Multiplexing (DWDM), a widely used technique in the telecommunicationsindustry, can be employed (7). The spacecraft transmitter can be a 1-meter-class tele-scope with high pointing accuracy and adaptive optics to assure a properly collimatedbeam. The only component not readily available is the onboard memory required tostore up to several days' worth of collected data.A data gathering rate of 1 Gbps accumulates ? 1014bits of information in thecourse of a day. Commercially available solid state memories store up to ? 128gigabytes of memory, or 1012bits. If current growth rates are sustained, the requiredfactor of ? 100 increase in memory capacity will become commercially availablewithin 10 to 15 years.If we start serious work towards a functioning near-infrared telemetry systemtoday, an effective system can be available in 10 - 15 years to fully service missionsnow on the drawing boards. The lead must come from the scientific community. TheU. S. National Academy of Sciences has recognized the problem (8), but energeticaction will be required to prevent a data transmission bottleneck from reaching crisisproportions.Because the fiber-optics communications industry already provides most of the4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 5 individual components required for near-infrared laser telemetry, and componentsnot yet available should come on the market in the decade ahead, work towards anear-infrared telemetry system carries little risk and will rapidly pay for itself in theefficiency with which data can be gathered and transmitted. Meteorology, climato-logical observations, oceanography, geophysical studies, planetary exploration, andastrophysics will all benefit. However, progress will come about only with the alloca-tion of sufficient resources by NASA and ESA - the two lead agencies in the field -and the focused attention of the scientific community.AcknowledgmentThe work of MH is supported by contracts from NASA.References and Notes1. Long-range plans for future space missions include arrays with 109pixels with highdynamic range and readout times of the order of seconds.2. Starck, J.- L. et al., 1999, Astronomy & Astrophysics Supplement, 138, 365 -380.3. Manual of Regulations & Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 6 (the"Red Book"), http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/redbook/CHP04.pdf, pages 70- 91.4. Free-Space Laser Communication Technologies XIII, edited by G. StephenMecherie, Proceedings of SPIE, volume 4272, 24-25 January 2001, San Jose, CA,USA.5. "Perfect images transmitted via laser link between Artemis and SPOT 4",European Space Agency press release No. 75-2001, Paris, 6 December, 2001; also,"Lasers link orbiting satellites," 23 November, 2001, Optics.org, The Online PhotonicsResource: http://optics.org/article/news/7/11/23.6. P. C. Becker, N.A. Olson & J.R. Simpson Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers:Fundamentals and Technology, Academic Press, 1999.Five years ago, the European Space Agency (ESA) demonstrated near- infrared laser communication between the SPOT-4 and Artemis orbiting satellitesinfrared laser communication between the SPOT-4 and Artemis orbiting satellites. Initial tests used experimental data rates of only 50 Mbps.This rate can be increased by factors of thousands without basic changes in principle, but requires increased signal power, a suitable transmitter and adequate onboard memory. Several well separated mountain-top receiving stations around the globe are also needed to receive transmissions from spacecraft in various orbits. Ground receiving stations are simply large optical telescopes, which we know how to build. On high mountain tops, the atmosphere transmits signals from space to ground with a satisfactory efficiency of 70% at 1500-1600nanometres wavelength (long infrared). Signal power onboard spacecraft can be provided by existing laser diodes amplified by erbium doped fibre Amplifiers (EDFA) or Raman amplifiers, both in extensive use at 1550nm in the telecommunications industry. To obtain sufficient bandwidth, Dense Wavelength-Division Multiplexing (DWDM), a widely used technique in the telecommunications industry, can be employed. The spacecraft transmitter can be a 1-meter-class telescope with high pointing accuracy and adaptive optics to assure a properly collimated beam. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
War in Iraq -- Moon on the Moon Hoax -- Proof of Life After Death -- Man as Old as Coal -- Catholic Gospels Corrupt -- Extraterrestrials, UFOs | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 0 | September 15th 06 01:40 AM |
Of what's become nondisclosure/taboo | Jonathan Silverlight | SETI | 25 | September 22nd 05 11:10 PM |
'Christmas is taboo in America, but now people are fighting back' | Jmpngtiger | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | December 21st 04 12:19 AM |
BLUE MOON IN JULY,search 2x new moon FEB 2052/sky telesc | Don McDonald | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | July 8th 04 03:37 AM |
Will Bush nuke the moon? Will the black hole bomb be tested on the moon first? | Jan Panteltje | Astronomy Misc | 3 | December 6th 03 05:41 PM |