A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The 0.1~1% hollow moon / Brad Guth



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 13, 07:28 PM posted to sci.astro,alt.astronomy,sci.geo.geology,misc.education.science,uk.media.newspapers
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The 0.1~1% hollow moon / Brad Guth

On Dec 29 2012, 9:13*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 3, 6:00*am, Brad Guth wrote:









Since I received nothing but the usual topic/author stalking grief and
avoidance about our potentially hollow moon (natural as well as TBM
hollowed out), I’ve revised this topic from original “The 1~10% hollow
moon” as to offering “The 0.1~1% hollow moon”. *Not that it really
matters all that much, because the mainstream of our insider status-
quo still isn’t buying into any of it, nor allowing mainstream media
or even K12s to pick up on any notions of such.


Within or especially under that tough shell of our moon is where life
even as we know it could with some applied technology manage to
survive, as well as manage to contribute to terrestrial matters of
providing exotic minerals or rare elements and perhaps lots more. At
0.1% hollow (as within geode pockets, cavernous layers or easily
enough TBM excavated to suit), there’s certainly no shortage of
worthy habitat volume, and thereby maintaining of atmospheric pressure
simply can’t be an insurmountable problem.


With near zero gravity near or within the offset core of our extremely
unusual moon, and otherwise perfectly good odds that the surrounding
substance outside of that solid core being of a relatively low density
and/or semi-hollow geology (poorly compacted or naturally porous)
that's sandwiched between the offset core and the otherwise extremely
dense, thick and mineral saturated basalt crust, as such is what
drives my continuing interpretation that our Selene/moon, as
supposedly formed quickly within a vacuum, is perhaps quite usability
hollow enough to begin with.


Even if this hollow or easily excavated under-crust potential were
limited as to offering a minimal volume of 0.1%, as such this kind of
nicely crust protected volume would represent a terrific off-world
outpost and otherwise failsafe kind of habitat that’s existing as is.
(0.1% of 2.2e19 m3 is worth 2.2e16 m3, and that’s hardly
insignificant, as representing 3.14e6 m3 for each and every man, woman
and child would make for a pretty nifty interstellar spacecraft, or
call it our lifeboat in case our Earth gets nailed by another really
big one)


The unusually mineral saturated and otherwise paramagnetic and mascon
populated basalt crust itself could also offer a few existing passages
and/or geode like pockets, as deep and volumetric enough to safely
utilize as is. *In fact, it might be extremely odd if such natural
voids didn’t exist. *Most of those larger lunar craters are unusually
shallow (as little as 1% of their diameter), almost as though that
original surface prior to impact as having a thick layer of protective
ice. *Of somewhat newer and much smaller diameter craters offer
bedrock impressions or morph depths of 10%, with only a few
exceptions that suggest diameter/depth ratios of 2:1. *However, one of
the most recent LRO discovered craters or possibly an old geothermal
vent that’s kind of small is also suggesting as offering a much
greater depth than its diameter (in other words a significant vertical
hole or cave like formation of a crust opening into a hollow rill or
lava tube).


If there’s anything capable of holding a given molecule of h2o
together, it’s those strong electrostatic, paramagnetic plus all the
usual atomic and subatomic strong binding forces, plus whatever
subsequent worth of good old pressure or even that of aether that
doesn’t necessarily involve or require gravity (although naked aether
pressure simply can’t coexist w/o molecular gravity or vise versa,
whereas artificial pressure or vacuum can only coexist if there’s a
viable shell or artificial energy field of some kind). The extremely
thick (50150 km) and robust basalt crust that’s fused solid and so
mineral saturated as paramagnetic about our physically dark Selene/
moon, offers an absolutely terrific shell that isn’t easily penetrated
(not even by helium).


Of water exposed at the environment of 3e-21 bar (the near ideal
vacuum as found at Selene L1) pretty much along with ample sunlight
and secondary IR happens instantly as to demolecularization or
subliming itself into something less than atoms of hydrogen and
oxygen, and that’s going to be pretty much instantaneous or even
explosive regardless of its volume and original mass. *Therefore, the
extremely weak Newtonian force of gravity or whatever molecular
binding force isn’t necessarily worth all that much when the water or
whatever fluid elements represent a zero delta-V and especially as
being so easily lost to that 300+ km/sec of hot solar wind whenever
such molecules are situated within that extreme EML1 vacuum.


*https://groups.google.com/forum/m/
*http://groups.google.com/groups/search
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


*The 0.1~1% hollow moon / Brad Guth


Is there any evidence or objective proof that our moon isn't the least
bit hollow or even porous?

With a somewhat thinner crust as recently reported, it seems entirely
logical that escaping gasses and the continual build-up of internal
gasses as well as fluids could provide for quit a bit of geode pockets
and porous rock, as well as an inverted interior density that TBMs
could more easily deal with.


Those surface gamma spectrometer details obtained from orbit, giving
us good map of rare elements and a better understanding of those
mascon issues, suggesting that internal activity as well as via
asteroid impacts have created a highly complex and valuable item for
us to mine, whereas with dozens of mostly robotic TBMs hard at work,
and thereby safe underground habitats easily created, represents all
sorts of mining and processing opportunities within easy reach, not to
mention the enormous value of simply utilizing its L1 and the easily
tethered dipole element that can reach from the lunar surface out
safely to within 6r of Earth.

Our NASA and DARPA simply didn't have to fake everything about our
moon, because they only had to fudge a little on those most risky
parts of their Apollo missions that we couldn't safely perform 40+
years ago, as supposedly having so much better capability and
reliability than we can accomplish nowadays, of which the best of
modern fly-by-rocket lander capability offers us a kind of zilch worth
of any viable fly-by-rocket lander that could be deployed and honestly
trusted to perform without a hitch.

However, accomplishing one-way soft or semi-hard landings and
obviously obtaining science via impacting have been technically
doable, as have a limited degree of robotic accomplished deployments
on behalf of assorted science that's unfortunately extremely limited
since nothing of those has ever been established as fully interactive
and as such having never been allowed to be independently accessed and
utilized for the greater good by those outside of NASA, DARPA or even
anything Russian, as for privately obtaining their very own direct and
raw science about the physically dark and naked surface of our
paramagnetic moon remains as strictly nondisclosure/taboo. What
little we know about our moon is 100% derived from the victors of our
mutually perpetrated cold-war era, in that each having numerous
motives, means and opportunity to snooker and dumbfound us into
accepting and obviously paying for everything.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth BradGuth Policy 1 August 9th 09 06:49 PM
The 1% hollow moon / Brad Guth BradGuth Policy 1 July 19th 09 09:19 PM
The 1% hollow moon / Brad Guth YKhan Policy 1 July 18th 09 12:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.