Permanent Moon Base - Why or Why Not?

I'd think it would be important and worth doing.

- Underground for the most part, partly for structural simplicity and
also for protection.

- Sunlight 'up there' is strong and free. Collecting it wouldn't be, at
least not at 1st.

- Potentially harmful experiments (say new types of energy production)
or experiments needing isolation away from Terrestrial sources could be
staged on the back side.

- Lunar based Astronomical Telescopes & other types of detection
equipment. Wouldn't necessarily need to be on the Dark Side, maybe dug
in deep down a long shaft. Freed from lots of Earth based light
pollution as well as atmospheric distortion we might well peer father
and farther back and out into time. Also, things would be a lot easier
to repair/upgrade/maintain.

- New Tech could create trade in the future, well of course things would
be very lop sided for a long time.


And while I am rooting for most all things American I would like to get
the Moon declared (not just on paper) a Weapon & Political Free Zone.
(Yeah, right.) Still, it's at the beginning of things when they can get
off on the right foot.


TBerk

T wrote in message m...

I'd definitely agree with all of those points, although I think that a
new space-based technology industry isn't going to be coming for a
long, long time.

Based on what we've seen so far, I would have to say that I imagine
the main driving force at first will be tourism. The moon has a small
amount of gravity, which quite frankly beats zero-gravity if you are
intending to spend a week or more in the same place. Also I imagine
the novelty of having to suck up your food through a straw in zero
gravity would get old, very quickly.

Astronomy and other science experiments will probably be done at the
same time as the tourism push, using the same resources, although I
doubt it will be the main driving force.

I'd think it would be important and worth doing.

- Underground for the most part, partly for structural simplicity and
also for protection.

- Sunlight 'up there' is strong and free. Collecting it wouldn't be, at
least not at 1st.

- Potentially harmful experiments (say new types of energy production)
or experiments needing isolation away from Terrestrial sources could be
staged on the back side.

- Lunar based Astronomical Telescopes & other types of detection
equipment. Wouldn't necessarily need to be on the Dark Side, maybe dug
in deep down a long shaft. Freed from lots of Earth based light
pollution as well as atmospheric distortion we might well peer father
and farther back and out into time. Also, things would be a lot easier
to repair/upgrade/maintain.

- New Tech could create trade in the future, well of course things would
be very lop sided for a long time.


And while I am rooting for most all things American I would like to get
the Moon declared (not just on paper) a Weapon & Political Free Zone.
(Yeah, right.) Still, it's at the beginning of things when they can get
off on the right foot.


TBerk

"Mike Jones" wrote in message
om...

Based on what we've seen so far, I would have to say that I imagine
the main driving force at first will be tourism. The moon has a small
amount of gravity, which quite frankly beats zero-gravity if you are
intending to spend a week or more in the same place. Also I imagine
the novelty of having to suck up your food through a straw in zero
gravity would get old, very quickly.

An Earth-orbiting hotel could have a rotating section that provided 1/6th G
of centrifugal force. I don't think vacationing in orbit vs. on the moon
would necessarily mean eating through a straw. (Besides, neither Shuttle
nor Station astronauts eat like that anymore.)

That said, I wouldn't dismiss the entire idea of lunar tourism. But I think
the advantage over orbital tourism would be the allure of exploring a
landscape. It would by necessity always be more expensive than orbital
tourism, and I certainly expect week-long stays in orbit to precede same on
the lunar surface.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the National Non-sequitur Society. We may not make
much sense, but we do like pizza.

T wrote in message m...

- Lunar based Astronomical Telescopes & other types of detection
equipment. Wouldn't necessarily need to be on the Dark Side, maybe dug
in deep down a long shaft. Freed from lots of Earth based light
pollution as well as atmospheric distortion we might well peer father
and farther back and out into time. Also, things would be a lot easier
to repair/upgrade/maintain.

You don't need 3,000km of moon to free a telescope from Earth based
light. 0.1mm of aluminium foil will do fine. This makes free space a
far better place for most* astronomy.

Forget the moon for astronomy - leave it to the miners (who'll create
their own atmospheric pollution).

* The only moon based application worth considering is optical
base-line inferometry, where a stable, measured base is necessary. For
radio telescopy, a laser can provide a stable virtual baseline.

Alex Terrell wrote:
T wrote in message m...


- Lunar based Astronomical Telescopes & other types of detection
equipment. Wouldn't necessarily need to be on the Dark Side, maybe dug
in deep down a long shaft. Freed from lots of Earth based light
pollution as well as atmospheric distortion we might well peer father
and farther back and out into time. Also, things would be a lot easier
to repair/upgrade/maintain.


You don't need 3,000km of moon to free a telescope from Earth based
light. 0.1mm of aluminium foil will do fine. This makes free space a
far better place for most* astronomy.

Forget the moon for astronomy - leave it to the miners (who'll create
their own atmospheric pollution).

* The only moon based application worth considering is optical
base-line inferometry, where a stable, measured base is necessary. For
radio telescopy, a laser can provide a stable virtual baseline.



OK, I might have limited myself with describing exactly what type of
telescope, but consider this:

http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~aas/tenmeter/site.htm
===========================================
The South Pole is the best available submillimeter observatory site on Earth

Submillimeter astronomy can be pursued only from extremely cold and dry
sites, where the atmosphere contains less than 1 mm of precipitable
water vapor (PWV). Water vapor is usually the dominant source of
opacity, although thousands of other molecular lines also contribute.
This "dry air" contribution is important at the Pole.

Of all ground-based observatory sites that have been tested for
submillimeter-wave sky quality, the best results have come from the
Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station.

The Antarctic Plateau is unique among observatory sites for unusually
low wind speeds, absence of rain, and the consistent clarity of the
submillimeter sky. The highest wind speed at the South Pole between 1957
and 1983 was only 24 m s-1, and there are many months during which the
wind speed does not exceed 12 m s-1. Ice cores show no rain at the Pole
for thousands of years. Schwerdtfeger (Climate of the Antarctic,
Elsevier 1984) has comprehensively reviewed the climate of the Antarctic
Plateau.
===========================================

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 10:07:12 GMT, T wrote:

I'd think it would be important and worth doing.

I agree, and I think it could also be used as a proving ground for
some Mars Mission tech.

The main driving force for anything as ridiculously expensive as a
moon base will be just a plain old "gold" rush . Only this will
probably be a "Helium" rush.

The Earth is rapidly running out of Helium , to the point that within
100 years you aren't going to see those inflatable baloons in fairs.
The moon on the other hand has huge amounts of Helium-3 , which is the
best material for nuclear fusion.

Also the moon has large almost pure Iron deposits because there never
was any water on the moon . So its the sort of Iron where you spend
next to nothing to get Steel or other exotic Iron alloys from.

Ultimately i think space tourism will provide a driving force , but
the real push towards Solar System exploration will be good old
resource hunting. Once the economics for Huge Carrier class resource
ships works out , we can expect 3-4 year space trips to the asteroid
belt to strip some asteroids off easy to mine rare metals.

Perfect to satisfy both the environmentalists and get a virtually
limitless supply of raw materials .

T wrote in message m...
I'd think it would be important and worth doing.

- Underground for the most part, partly for structural simplicity and
also for protection.

- Sunlight 'up there' is strong and free. Collecting it wouldn't be, at
least not at 1st.

- Potentially harmful experiments (say new types of energy production)
or experiments needing isolation away from Terrestrial sources could be
staged on the back side.

- Lunar based Astronomical Telescopes & other types of detection
equipment. Wouldn't necessarily need to be on the Dark Side, maybe dug
in deep down a long shaft. Freed from lots of Earth based light
pollution as well as atmospheric distortion we might well peer father
and farther back and out into time. Also, things would be a lot easier
to repair/upgrade/maintain.

- New Tech could create trade in the future, well of course things would
be very lop sided for a long time.


And while I am rooting for most all things American I would like to get
the Moon declared (not just on paper) a Weapon & Political Free Zone.
(Yeah, right.) Still, it's at the beginning of things when they can get
off on the right foot.


TBerk