Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:09119ca4fc63a755ff19e35ab5699889.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Clearly our nifty orbiting mascon/moon is in fact so 'one of a kind'
unusually massive and nearby, so much so that it can't but help to
transfer and thereby induce an amount of thermal energy into our
environment by way of tidal forces (inside and out), plus whatever's
contributed from all of those reflected and secondary worth of IR/FIR
photons.

This following topic link is still a tough mainstream nut to crack, much
less sell, as it's representing a serious load of perfectly weird
notions based entirely upon the regular laws of physics, that's having
to do with creating a surplus of shade for Earth, by way of relocating
our moon to Earth's L1. (easier said than done)

Next Space Station: 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...=smart&p=1/211

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...990d88e00958f4

Earth's L1 for accommodating something of the robust mass of our moon,
that also has the LSE-CM/ISS of 256e6 tonnes of our interplanetary
gateway to deal with, is essentially a planetoid parallel parking zone
that's roughly 4 fold further away than its current 384,400 km orbital
status, thus 1.5376e6 km representing 1/16th the mutual attracting or
holding force of gravity, as well as having cut the amount of tidal
energy that's getting applied back into Earth's environment should be of
a similar reduction. However, once fully aligned with the sun while
parked within this halo orbit of Earth's L1 should actually not allow
that combined sol+moon tidal energy to at most drop to half of
whatever's currently taking place. I haven't fully polished off the
physics math in order to prove all of this, but I do believe it'll end
up being somewhere between this third amount less and perhaps half of
what tides we're currently dealing with, which is actually quite a
significant reduction in tidal energy transfer, that by rights should
also tend to cool off our terrestrial environment (inside and out).

Of course the 24 hour rotation of Earth in relationship to Earth's L1 is
no longer the same as our moon's existing 1.023 km/s. In one weird
sense we'd have to speed that moon of our's up to 112 km/s, which is
actually worth 6e23 joules, and that's seemingly going to be a tough
notion to accomplish because, it's existing 1.023 km/s of 2e20
centripetal joules worth of orbital energy is clearly insufficient for
that of L1, of which can't exactly be derived out of thin air unless
having been continually pulled along and subsequently established by a
sufficient other centripetal force, for getting our moon out to Earth's
L1 in the first place.

Here's some more of this weird math, suggesting what it'll take.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1
However Sol--Earth L1 is what takes that centripetal energy back
-5.996e23 joules Sol--L1 = 0.0 joules (near zero G)

However, since the moon is already keeping up with Earth is why there's
no real delta-v increase in its orbital velocity. In fact, it's having
to slightly reduce its average orbital velocity that'll become primarily
in relationship to Sol, as having become our binary associated L1
planetoid, as our solar shade instead of being a pesky moon.

In spite of all the usual status quo flak of Usenet's anti-think-tank
and naysayism that's typically of a faith based mindset, of borg like
individuals going postal in order to keep each and every one of their
infomercial lids on tight, whereas giving Earth some badly needed shade
while improving upon the usage of our moon's L1, at the very same time
as having moderated those global warming tidal forces by at least a
third, is what's actually quite doable in spite of whatever their
all-knowing god has to say.

BTW; my LSE-CM/ISS or at the very least a scientific (Earth facing)
tethered science platform or space depot may likely become another
requirement, that is unless having a slightly rotating L1 planetoid
isn't a problem. However, any possible rotation may remain as nullified
since the moon's original L2 tethered mass of 1e12 kg will likely still
exist at some reduced amount of mass, now modified as per acting on
behalf of representing the planetoids's (Sol facing) L1 tethered science
platform(s). In spite of my best dyslexic encrypted efforts, this
moon--planetoid thing is certainly damn confusing, isn't it.

If you have similar or obviously better math, I'd like to hear about
that. However, if you only wish to topic/author stalk and bash upon
whatever in order to continually whine about the matter of your having
to keep everything exactly as it was, such as when your Earth was flat
and everything else was still in orbit around your faith-based solitary
existence, then don't bother. The same goes if your conditional laws of
physics only applies to terrestrial matters, or on behalf of supporting
those matters orchestrated by and thus approved by the status quo which
you must worship at all cost.

On the other honest topic constructive hand, even if your subjective
interpretations and subsequent ideas or whatever best swag is way off in
another dimension, it's not going to be all that upsetting to my kind of
open mindset way of thinking that's more often outside the box than not
to start with. If you simply can not manage to safely think for
yourself without blowing yet another mainstream status quo gasket, then
perhaps not all is lost when our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) has a
perfectly good paying, non-thinking as well as non-caring job without
ever involving a speck of remorse, for you and others of your kind.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Besides our 100,000 some odd +/- year or +/- century encounters with the
Sirius star/solar system, that had been of more frequent orbital
encounters in the past, we've had that pesky moon of our's to deal with
as of the last ice age this planet will ever see. Take away our moon
and Earth gets cold. Put our moon at Earth's L1 and we extensively cool
off mother Earth in spite of what we've managed to do to our frail
environment (perhaps creating a touch too much shade, which is still
better off than mot having enough shade).

As geothermally heated from the active core on up, and thereby as
humanly nasty as Venus is, it still has our polluted and energy raped
Earth beat by a long shot at offering hundreds of fold more locally
available energy/m2, that's actually environmentally clean (soot free as
well as near zero NOx, and this taking of energy is even free of any
artificial CO2 potential), otherwise Venus energy is perfectly renewable
to boot. Unfortunately, the relatively newish planetology and
geothermally active nature of Venus is still intellectually as well as
scientifically off-limits, as remaining sequestered in official
taboo/nondisclosure mode, where it's having to remain as stealth as were
all of those Muslim or Islamic WMD. In other words, science and even
physics can not share the truth about Venus, out of fear of their
careers terminated, if not worse.

JFK honestly attempted to put a stop to such Skull and Bones cult like
authority, which only got himself terminated in a very personal and
lethal way. Here's that JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of
the Press http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU.

I happen to totally agree with the intent of honest renewable energy
topics, of promoting as much as possible "Solar, not nuclear", in that a
composite of solar PV, stirling and wind turbine per energy tower can in
fact deliver a clean and perfectly safe footprint of energy density
that's worth 37.5 kw/m2 (37.5 kjhr/m2), that's likely to advance to the
50 kw/m2 level in the near future. Along with a national power grid
infrastructure, the areas best suited for this form of renewable energy
extraction can pick up as much as 75% of our future needs, along with
15% hydroelectric, 10% nuclear (meaning near zero coal and oil).
Nations without hydroelectric or nuclear potential would obviously have
to make due with supplementing LNG and perhaps h2o2 in order to obtain
their maximum benefit with the least pollution from whatever fossil or
biofuel alternatives.

However, the nuclear alternatives at perhaps their best all-inclusive
birth to grave 375 whr/m2 or 375 jhr/m2 are not going down without a
tough and bloody as hell fight, to each of our mutually polluted and GW
deaths if need be. I also agree that perhaps the best this global
energy shortage fiasco can mange is for going along with our utilizing
nuclear alternatives for the relatively safely (far better off than coal
and oil) methods of accomplishing 10% of our global energy needs. So,
I'm not and never have been your Mr. Anti-Nuclear. After all, there are
more than a few nations of less than heathen status that probably can't
be fully entrusted with nuclear energy, but if we keep making coal and
oil spendy or otherwise unavailable, the only viable alternative may
come down to WW-III.

BTW; for this and most any other topic argument sake, the laws of
energy still represents that 3600 joules = 3600 whr = 1 kw or 1 kwhr or
1 kjhr because, a jhr is still worth 3600 joules. There's nothing
hocus-pocus about it, other than it's the truth and nothing but the
truth, which in modern times of big-energy polluting, pillaging and
raping mother Earth to death obviously doesn't count for squat.

These Usenet big-energy folks that are the best at infomercial spewing
and for usually being directly or indirectly industry paid-for as
naysayers against all that's renewable and clean, are into playing their
silly word or syntax games, thereby avoiding the honest intent or jest
of the original topic, and thus focused upon stalking and trashing
whomever and of whatever the pro green/renewables of constructive
contributions have to share, treated as though we're their big-energy
approved toilet-paper.

BTW No.2; Global Warming is for real, and it's real in more ways than
one. At least we can honestly say that it's partially (10%~25%) caused
by humanity, and that there are direct and indirect environmental
consequences of our past, present and future actions. However, because
of the vast amount of required energy, the continued thawing of Earth
since the last ice age this planet will ever see, is not entirely our
fault.

Rather oddly, but not hardly a surprise if going by these extra special
infomercial days of promoting all that's pro big-energy and of having to
protect their puppet government(s) mainstream status quo butt, plus
seeing those usual cover thy butt-loads of faith based damage control on
steroids, whereas this following topic of perfectly honest science seems
as though rather Mailgate/Usenet taboo/nondisclosure rated, therefore it
must be offering us too much of the truth and nothing but the truth.

Mailgate/Usenet indext listed as; Message not available:
"Temperature on global warming turned up" / by William Elliot

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...4e1a7a3d8636ec

The regular laws of physics and I'm strongly suggesting that as much as
90% of our inside and out GW fiasco is derived from our recently
obtained moon, which isn't discounting the 10% impact as caused by
humanity (at best I'd buy into a 75%/25% ratio). In other words, if we
all departed this Earth and let nature take its planetology course, this
Earth would continue to thaw from the last ice age this planet will ever
see. As long as we have that pesky moon of ours, ice age trapped
methanes and CO2 will in fact keep "Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates
Undersea Hills", though at a reduced rate if the human factor were
entirely eliminated.
http://www.mbari.org/news/news_relea...aull-plfs.html
You folks do realize that Earth isn't getting itself any bigger, whereas
if anything it's ever so gradually shrinking, exactly as it should.
Imagine that, another truth being told that we're not supposed to know
about, just like we're not supposed to realize that our magnetosphere
has been losing its worth at 0.05%/year.

Clearly our nifty orbiting mascon/moon is in fact so 'one of a kind'
unusually massive and nearby, so much so extra special that as such it
can't but help to transfer and thereby induce an amount of thermal
energy into our environment by way of tidal forces (inside and out),
plus whatever's unavoidably contributed from all of those reflected and
secondary worth of IR/FIR photons that have little if any trouble
getting through to the surface that getting a little extra sooty and
otherwise polluted by the day, which includes less snow and ice coverage
that means upon average a lower global albedo, that in turn represents
an even better sol and moon energy absorber that in turn keeps our
nighttime atmosphere more cloud covered due to the increased levels of
h2o in our atmosphere.

This following topic link is still a tough mainstream nut to crack, much
less sell, as it's representing a serious load of perfectly weird
notions based entirely upon the regular laws of physics, that's having
to do with our creating a surplus of shade for Earth, by way of
relocating our moon to Earth's L1. (easier said than done)

Next Space Station: 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...=smart&p=1/211

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...990d88e00958f4

Earth's L1 for accommodating something of the robust mass of our moon,
that also has the LSE-CM/ISS of 256e6 tonnes of our interplanetary
gateway to deal with, is essentially a planetoid parallel parking zone
that's roughly 4 fold further away than its current 384,400 km orbital
status, thus 1.5376e6 km representing 1/16th the mutual attracting or
holding force of gravity, as well as having cut the amount of tidal
energy that's getting applied back into Earth's environment should be of
a similar reduction. However, once fully aligned with the sun while
parked within this halo orbit of Earth's L1 should actually not allow
that combined sol+moon tidal energy to at most drop to half of
whatever's currently taking place. I haven't fully polished off the
physics math in order to prove all of this, but I do believe it'll end
up being somewhere between this third amount less and perhaps half of
what tides we're currently dealing with, which is actually quite a
significant reduction in tidal energy transfer, that by rights should
also tend to cool off our terrestrial environment (inside and out).

Of course the 24 hour rotation of Earth in relationship to Earth's L1 is
no longer the same as our moon's existing 1.023 km/s. In one weird
sense we'd have to speed that moon of our's up to 112 km/s, which is
actually worth 6e23 joules, and that's seemingly going to be a tough
notion to accomplish because, it's existing 1.023 km/s of 2e20
centripetal joules worth of orbital energy is clearly insufficient for
that of L1, of which can't exactly be derived out of thin air unless
having been continually pulled along and subsequently established by a
sufficient other centripetal force, for getting our moon out to Earth's
L1 in the first place.

Here's some more of this weird math, suggesting what it'll take.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1
However Sol--Earth L1 is what takes that centripetal energy back
-5.996e23 joules Sol--L1 = 0.0 joules (near zero G)

However, since our moon is already keeping up with Earth is why there's
no real delta-v increase in its orbital velocity. In fact, it's having
to slightly reduce its average orbital velocity that'll become primarily
in relationship to Sol, as having become our binary associated L1
planetoid, representing our solar shade instead of being a pesky moon
that's causing us all sorts of grief.

In spite of all the usual status quo flak of Usenet's anti-think-tank
and naysayism that's typically of a faith based mindset, of borg like
individuals going postal in order to keep each and every one of their
infomercial lids on tight, whereas giving Earth some badly needed shade
while improving upon the usage of our moon's L1, at the very same time
as having moderated those global warming tidal forces by at least a
third, is what's actually quite doable in spite of whatever their
all-knowing god has to say.

BTW; my LSE-CM/ISS or at the very least a scientific (Earth facing)
tethered science platform or space depot may likely become another
requirement, that is unless having a slightly rotating L1 planetoid
isn't a problem. However, any possible rotation may remain as nullified
since the moon's original L2 tethered mass of 1e12 kg will likely still
exist at some reduced amount of mass, now modified as per acting on
behalf of representing the planetoids's (Sol facing) L1 tethered science
platform(s). In spite of my best dyslexic encrypted efforts, this
moon--planetoid thing is certainly damn confusing, isn't it.

If you have similar or obviously better math, I'd like to hear about
that. However, if you only wish to topic/author stalk and bash upon
whatever in order to continually whine about the matter of your having
to keep everything exactly as it was, such as when your Earth was flat
and everything else was still in orbit around your faith-based solitary
existence, then don't bother. The same goes if your conditional laws of
physics only applies to terrestrial matters, or on behalf of supporting
those matters orchestrated by and thus approved by the status quo which
you must worship at all cost.

On the other honest topic constructive hand, even if your subjective
interpretations and subsequent ideas or whatever best swag is way off in
another dimension, it's not going to be all that upsetting to my kind of
open mindset way of thinking, that's more often outside the box than not
to start with. If you simply can not manage to safely think for
yourself without blowing yet another mainstream status quo or whatever
faith based gasket, then perhaps not all is lost when our resident LLPOF
warlord(GW Bush) has a perfectly good paying, non-thinking as well as
non-caring job without ever involving a speck of remorse, for you and
others of your kind.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Earth may soon enough be w/o magnetosphere, thus making our GW fiasco a
somewhat minor issue for those of us without a sufficient shelter or a
viable resource of affordable rad-hard food. In other pesky words,
where's the hell is all of that supposed intelligent design when you
need it?

Since accomplishing most anything upon or even anywhere near our moon
seems rather Usenet taboo/nondisclosure (off limits), and since folks
here in this silly Usenet land of all that's spook/mole orchestrated as
anti-think-tank naysayism, or otherwise stuck in damage control mode
simply can't manage to behave themselves, much less focus constructively
upon the original topic at hand; here's yet another of my constructive
GS(global shading) contributions, of related research work in progress
to sha

Though not impossible, it is simply not all that likely that Earth's
moon emerged from within mother Earth, whereas more likely as having
materialized from an incoming glancing sucker punch, such as by that of
a Sirius Oort cloud icy item, as for Earth having received a nasty blow
(say having created an arctic ocean basin like impression, along with
causing that seasonal tilt), by a very icy proto-moon (possibly of 4,000
km).

For a brief example; If the orbital distance were made half and thus
the velocity would have to double because the mutual gravity of
attraction would have become 4X, therefore we'd have introduced 16 fold
more inside and out worth of centripetal/tidal energy to deal with, and
I'm not all that sure mother Earth would have stayed glued together at
that level of horrific gravitional and internal tidal forced trauma,
much less for cutting that orbital distance by yet another half (making
its previous orbit at 96,100 km and velocity of 4.092 km/s) would have
to impose yet another 16 fold factor, or rather suggesting 256 fold
worse global warming trauma than what we currently are suffering from
the existing tidal and thereby unavoidable GW affects as is.

The mainstream argument(s) against my icy proto-moon argument, as to
what's not quite adding up, soon becomes a real physics ****-off; How
much time did it take for that moon which supposedly emerged from within
Earth, to have reached the orbital altitude of 96,100 km, then having
migrated from 96,100 km out to where it's currently operating at 384,400
km? (thus far, none of those spendy computer simulations seem clean
enough)

If within the regular laws of physics and by way of scientific matter of
fact, suggesting that we do seem to have at our disposal 2e20 joules of
potential mascon tidal energy via the mutual Earth/moon gravity and the
for ever ongoing centripetal force to deal with, as applied energy
that's coming or ongoing per each and every second, as such that's
actually imposing a rather great potential of interactive planet--moon
energy that's obviously existing and ongoing, or simply as coming or
going as to/from somewhere or otherwise having to coexist as real
energy.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
AJ Gravity Equations Formulas Calculator

http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpgravity...tion_force.php
Just for our calculating the Earth/moon static or passive worth of
gravitational force:

object 1 mass (m1) = 5.9736e24 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.349e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 384.4e6 meters

grams of gravitational force(F) = 2.021492e22 g
The kg of gravitational force = 2.021492e19 kg

Here's some more of this weird physics math that doesn't quite fit the
status quo mold, suggesting as to what it'll create by way of our having
placed 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1 if we excluded the sun itself, which of
course can't ever be the case.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s (if in relation to Earth's 24 hr rotation)
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1

However, since the notion of having our moon relocated at Earth's L1 is
essentially having diverted such into no longer orbiting us, there's
actually zero centripetal interaction taking place (Earth is simply
rather nicely spinning for no apparent reason at the end of this mutual
and somewhat nullified sol/moon/Earth gravity string), whereas
Sol--Earth L1 is supposedly the primary gravity influence of what takes
back or rather nullifies all of the moon's gravity as well as having
eliminated the centripetal force of whatever's equivalent in joules
worth of implied energy:

As for the sol--moon orbital interaction, as having established a
7.35e22 kg planetoid of orbital Fc = 44.4975e25 joules

object 1 mass (m1) = 1.989e30 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.35e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 148060290 meters
gravitational force (F) = 4.5375282969184E+25 kgf
The kgf as energy.s = 4.5375283e25 * 9.80655 = 44.4975e25 joules

Obviously the opposing gravity force/energy relationship that's
involving mother Earth has to be taken into account. I simply haven't
gotten that far.

In other words, with our moon relocated out to Earth L1, we/Earth lose
out on the original 2e20 joules, replaced by the sol/moon combined
gravity and tidal influence that's going to become considerably less
imposing than what we'd had ongoing from having that horrific amount of
nearby orbiting mass of 7.35e22 kg and cruising at 1.023 km/s. However,
we/Earth get to deal with our fair share portion of the 44.4975e25
joules while that moon becomes our local planetoid that's cruising
within Earth's L1, as our binary partner on behalf of offering that much
needed shade.

Since we're talking about the existing Fc as a centripetal force per
second, therefore the conversion over to joules is also of one that's
based upon a second by second basis.

1 joule = 1 W.s (watt second)
3600 j = 1 W.h (watt hour)
1 watt hour of applied energy is therefore worth: 3600 joules
1 joule/sec as applied for an hour thereby also = 3600 joules

Each kgf (kg of applied force/m/s) = 9.80665 joules

There's roughly 2.0394e19 kgf of Fc (centripetal force) that's
continually second by second as ongoing opposing force between Earth and
our unusually massive and nearby orbiting mascon/moon.

The second by second amount of centripetal force becomes:
2.0215e19 * 9.80665 = 19.824e19 joules

Per hour, that amount of second by second applied energy becomes worth:
2e20 j * 3.6e3 = 7.2e23 W.h (watts per hour), or 7.2e20 kw

At 7.2e20 / 5.112e14 m2 = 1.408e6 kw/m2

Obviously we're not getting ourselves mascon/moon roasted or otherwist
tramatised to death by way of that horrific amount of applied energy,
though a small portion of that mutual (inside and out) tidal induced
energy is unavoidably becoming thermal energy via friction (inside and
out). In addition to the Fc of 7.2e20 KW.h, there's also a touch of the
moon's IR/FIR as terrestrial influx, although because we're continually
being science data starved, as without having moon/L1 data, is why I've
not yet accounted for the reflected and secondary worth of such IR/FIR
energy that's received by Earth.

The slight portion of the mascon gravity that's offset by centripetal
force is what I'm suggesting is capable of global warming us inside and
out, as listing below:
0.1% = 1.408 kw/m2
0.01% = 140.8 w/m2
0.001% = 14 w/m2
0.0001% = 1.4 w/m2

However, since I'm on such a Usenet taboo or banishment status of a
need-to-know basis, and since I clearly do not already know all there is
to know, is why some of my math could be unintentionally skewed or even
dead wrong. Therefore, if your wizardly expertise should know any
better, perhaps you could simply share by telling us how much or how
little of that total amount of nearby mascon gravity and centripetal
force of applied tidal energy is actually keeping us a little extra warm
and toasty. My swag is leaning towards the 0.001% of the 7.2e20 KW.h,
as being worth 14 w/m2. Of course that's applied inside and out,
including a tidal forced atmosphere and otherwise all the way down to
the very core of Earth, and thereby affecting most everything in between
that's in any way fluid or capable of getting moved along by such
forces.

Therefore, take away our moon and subsequently a major portion of our
surface environment becomes rather extra snowy and icy cold to the
touch, not to mention rather albedo reflective to boot, perhaps even ice
age cold enough as to reestablish a few of those badly receding glaciers
and otherwise expand those polar caps. At least that's what the regular
laws of physics and of replicated science has been suggesting. That's
not my excluding or disqualifying the human GW factor of our global
dimming via soot and by having added those nasty elements (including
h2o) into our frail environment that's obviously anything but within
energy balance, that are directly and/or indirectly polluting our oceans
and atmosphere, like none other or even by what the entire collective of
known species other than human can accomplish (are we humans good at
raping and sucking the very life out of mother Earth, or what).
However, as bad off as that sounds, I simply do not place more than 25%
responsibility onto ourselves, and perhaps that's even worth as little
as 10% of the ongoing global warming demise that's plaguing us until we
manage to relocate that pesky moon of our's.

Too bad there's not one American supercomputer that's worthy of running
any of this analogy, at least not without blowing out their mainstream
status quo CPUs. Apparently only of what's Old Testament faith based,
or as hocus-pocus and/or cloak and dagger analogies can be run as fully
3D interactive computer simulations. As God forbid, you certainly
wouldn't want to rock thy good ship LOLLIPOP with the truth, now would
we.

Unfortunately, our ongoing demise of our highly protective
magnetosphere, at the rate of -0.05%/year, may eventually overtake the
GW factor, as being the more human DNA and of other forms of life
ultimate lethal demise of these two ongoing gauntlets, which added
together are going to represent more trauma than most such forms of life
as we know of can manage to evolve our way through, or otherwise survive
via applied technology.

Perhaps if the status quo gets its usual brown-nosed Skull and Bones
worth of big-energy buttology certified way, whereas life on Venus
(though naked humanly hot) isn't looking quite as bad off as we've been
faith-based mainstream informed.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Earth may soon enough be w/o its magnetosphere, thus making our GW
fiasco a somewhat minor issue for those of us without a sufficient
shelter or a viable resource of affordable rad-hard food. In other
pesky words, where the hell is all of that supposed intelligent design
expertise in DNA/RNA genetics when you need it?

Since accomplishing most anything upon or even anywhere near our moon
seems rather Usenet taboo/nondisclosure (off limits), and since folks
here in this silly Usenet land of all that's spook/mole orchestrated as
anti-think-tank naysayism, or otherwise stuck in damage control mode
simply can't manage to behave themselves, much less focus constructively
upon the original topic at hand; here's yet another of my constructive
GS(global shading) contributions, of related research work in progress
to sha

Though not impossible, it is simply not all that likely that Earth's
moon emerged from within mother Earth, whereas more likely as having
materialized from an incoming glancing sucker punch, such as by that of
a Sirius Oort cloud icy item, as for Earth having received a nasty blow
(say having created an arctic ocean basin like impression, along with
causing that seasonal tilt), by a very icy proto-moon (possibly of 4,000
km).

For a brief example; If the orbital distance were made half and thus
the velocity would have to double because the mutual gravity of
attraction would have become 4X, therefore we'd have introduced 16 fold
more inside and out worth of centripetal/tidal energy to deal with, and
I'm not all that sure mother Earth would have stayed glued together at
that level of horrific gravitional and internal tidal forced trauma,
much less for cutting that orbital distance by yet another half (making
its previous orbit at 96,100 km and velocity of 4.092 km/s) would have
to impose yet another 16 fold factor, or rather suggesting 256 fold
worse global warming trauma than what we currently are suffering from
the existing tidal and thereby unavoidable GW affects as is.

The mainstream argument(s) against my icy proto-moon argument, as to
what's not quite adding up, soon becomes a real physics ****-off; How
much time did it take for that moon which supposedly emerged from within
Earth, to have reached the orbital altitude of 96,100 km, then having
migrated from 96,100 km out to where it's currently operating at 384,400
km? (thus far, none of those spendy computer simulations seem clean
enough)

If within the regular laws of physics and by way of scientific matter of
fact, suggesting that we do seem to have at our disposal 2e20 joules of
potential mascon tidal energy via the mutual Earth/moon gravity and the
for ever ongoing centripetal force to deal with, as applied energy
that's coming or ongoing per each and every second, as such that's
actually imposing a rather great potential of interactive planet--moon
energy that's obviously existing and ongoing, or simply as coming or
going as to/from somewhere or otherwise having to coexist as real
energy.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
AJ Gravity Equations Formulas Calculator

http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpgravity...tion_force.php
Just for our calculating the Earth/moon static or passive worth of
gravitational force:

object 1 mass (m1) = 5.9736e24 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.349e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 384.4e6 meters

grams of gravitational force(F) = 2.021492e22 g
The kg of gravitational force = 2.021492e19 kg

Here's some more of this weird physics math that doesn't quite fit the
status quo mold, suggesting as to what it'll create by way of our having
placed 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1 if we excluded the sun itself, which of
course can't ever be the case.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s (if in relation to Earth's 24 hr rotation)
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1

However, since the notion of having our moon relocated at Earth's L1 is
essentially having diverted such into no longer orbiting us, there's
actually zero centripetal interaction taking place (Earth is simply
rather nicely spinning for no apparent reason at the end of this mutual
and somewhat nullified sol/moon/Earth gravity string), whereas
Sol--Earth L1 is supposedly the primary gravity influence of what takes
back or rather nullifies all of the moon's gravity as well as having
eliminated the centripetal force of whatever's equivalent in joules
worth of implied energy:

As for the sol--moon orbital interaction, as having established a
7.35e22 kg planetoid of orbital Fc = 44.4975e25 joules

object 1 mass (m1) = 1.989e30 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.35e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 148060290 meters
gravitational force (F) = 4.5375282969184E+25 kgf
The kgf as energy.s = 4.5375283e25 * 9.80655 = 44.4975e25 joules

Obviously the opposing gravity force/energy relationship that's
involving mother Earth has to be taken into account. I simply haven't
gotten that far.

In other words, with our moon relocated out to Earth L1, we/Earth lose
out on the original 2e20 joules, replaced by the sol/moon combined
gravity and tidal influence that's going to become considerably less
imposing than what we'd had ongoing from having that horrific amount of
nearby orbiting mass of 7.35e22 kg and cruising at 1.023 km/s. However,
we/Earth get to deal with our fair share portion of the 44.4975e25
joules while that moon becomes our local planetoid that's cruising
within Earth's L1, as our binary partner on behalf of offering that much
needed shade.

Since we're talking about the existing Fc as a centripetal force per
second, therefore the conversion over to joules is also of one that's
based upon a second by second basis.

1 joule = 1 W.s (watt second)
3600 j = 1 W.h (watt hour)
1 watt hour of applied energy is therefore worth: 3600 joules
1 joule/sec as applied for an hour thereby also = 3600 joules

Each kgf (kg of applied force/m/s) = 9.80665 joules

There's roughly 2.0394e19 kgf of Fc (centripetal force) that's
continually second by second as ongoing opposing force between Earth and
our unusually massive and nearby orbiting mascon/moon.

The second by second amount of centripetal force becomes:
2.0215e19 * 9.80665 = 19.824e19 joules

Per hour, that amount of second by second applied energy becomes worth:
2e20 j * 3.6e3 = 7.2e23 W.h (watts per hour), or 7.2e20 kw

At 7.2e20 / 5.112e14 m2 = 1.408e6 kw/m2

Obviously we're not getting ourselves mascon/moon roasted or otherwist
tramatised to death by way of that horrific amount of applied energy,
though a small portion of that mutual (inside and out) tidal induced
energy is unavoidably becoming thermal energy via friction (inside and
out). In addition to the Fc of 7.2e20 KW.h, there's also a touch of the
moon's IR/FIR as terrestrial influx, although because we're continually
being science data starved, as without having moon/L1 data, is why I've
not yet accounted for the reflected and secondary worth of such IR/FIR
energy that's received by Earth.

The slight portion of the mascon gravity that's offset by centripetal
force is what I'm suggesting is capable of global warming us inside and
out, as listing below:
0.1% = 1.408 kw/m2
0.01% = 140.8 w/m2
0.001% = 14 w/m2
0.0001% = 1.4 w/m2

However, since I'm on such a Usenet taboo or banishment status of a
need-to-know basis, and since I clearly do not already know all there is
to know, is why some of my math could be unintentionally skewed or even
dead wrong. Therefore, if your wizardly expertise should know any
better, perhaps you could simply share by telling us how much or how
little of that total amount of nearby mascon gravity and centripetal
force of applied tidal energy is actually keeping us a little extra warm
and toasty. My swag is leaning towards the 0.001% of the 7.2e20 KW.h,
as being worth 14 w/m2. Of course that's applied inside and out,
including a tidal forced atmosphere and otherwise all the way down to
the very core of Earth, and thereby affecting most everything in between
that's in any way fluid or capable of getting moved along by such
forces.

Therefore, take away our moon and subsequently a major portion of our
surface environment becomes rather extra snowy and icy cold to the
touch, not to mention rather albedo reflective to boot, perhaps even ice
age cold enough as to reestablish a few of those badly receding glaciers
and otherwise expand those polar caps. At least that's what the regular
laws of physics and of replicated science has been suggesting. That's
not my excluding or disqualifying the human GW factor of our global
dimming via soot and by having added those nasty elements (including
h2o) into our frail environment that's obviously anything but within
energy balance, that are directly and/or indirectly polluting our oceans
and atmosphere, like none other or even by what the entire collective of
known species other than human can accomplish (are we humans good at
raping and sucking the very life out of mother Earth, or what).
However, as bad off as that sounds, I simply do not place more than 25%
responsibility onto ourselves, and perhaps that's even worth as little
as 10% of the ongoing global warming demise that's plaguing us until we
manage to relocate that pesky moon of our's.

Too bad there's not one American supercomputer that's worthy of running
any of this analogy, at least not without blowing out their mainstream
status quo CPUs. Apparently only of what's Old Testament faith based,
or as hocus-pocus and/or cloak and dagger analogies can be run as fully
3D interactive computer simulations. As God forbid, you certainly
wouldn't want to rock thy good ship LOLLIPOP with the truth, now would
we.

Unfortunately, our ongoing demise of our highly protective
magnetosphere, at the rate of -0.05%/year, may eventually overtake the
GW factor, as being the more human DNA and of other forms of life
ultimate lethal demise of these two ongoing gauntlets, which added
together are going to represent more trauma than most such forms of life
as we know of can manage to evolve our way through, or otherwise survive
via applied technology.

Perhaps if the status quo gets its usual brown-nosed Skull and Bones
worth of big-energy buttology certified way, whereas life on Venus
(though naked humanly hot) isn't looking quite as bad off as we've been
faith-based mainstream informed.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

On Feb 5, 6:11 pm, "Brad Guth" wrote:
"tomcat" wrote in message

ups.com

The Earth has periods of warming and cooling that appear to have no
connection whatsoever with the activity of man. While it is possible
that we are 'aggravating' Global Warming it is unlikely that we have
caused it or that we can stop it by our actions.

That's mostly true, whereas I give humanity all of 10% worth of the
ongoing GW fiasco, and the other 90% as contributed to our extremely
large, massive and nearby moon that has only been with us since the last
ice age.

However, as it is, it takes a good -20 j/m2 shift and more than a month
in order to force a given summertime environment into an icy winter
environment. Obviously it'll take a little something extra, plus
countless years of better than -20 J/m2 in order to reconstruct those
absolutely missive layers and vast areas worth of such thick ice, as far
as reaching their frost well into the tropics of Cancer/Capricorn.

It is to our advantage to do those things that will enable us to
adapt, rather than try to stop the inevitable at the cost of our
economy.

We seem to be running on Muslim blood, or any other blood that's getting
in our way.

INSULATION will protect against both heat and cold. To triple the
insulation in our homes makes a good deal of sense.

Oddly, I have R1024/m at your disposal, and its somewhat structural as
well as essentially fire proof.

DOMES will protect against high winds in the Super Storm category.
Geodesic domes should become the 'new' style in above ground housing.

I agree, as well as for promoting 50/50 underground for those bad solar
days w/o a viable magnetosphere to defend our frail DNA seems like a
good move.

UNDERGROUND homes don't get hit by the wind at all and provide
enormous insulation besides. Obviously a good choice where a high
water table doesn't present problems.

Now you're talking common sense and of what's perfectly doable within
existing expertise and resources.

ELECTRICITY provides the energy to produce either heat or cold for our
homes as well as lighting, cooking, and hot water, et. al. Massive
nuclear reactors in relatively barren parts of our country should be
built to augment our electrical power reserves.

The composite solar PV, Stirling and Wind Turbine energy footprint
density is roughly 100 fold better off than most anything nuclear.

DISTILLATION of Sea Water should be developed that could take the
place of rivers and streams that dry up due to Global Changes.

Lots of spare energy in = h2o out.

OUTER SPACE needs our top priority so that man can leave the Earth and
be free of Earth's changes, cold, hot, or violent. Space Colonies
will 'not' be affected by Earth's climate except when they are still
dependent on Earth for resupply.

All we or rather China have to accomplish is that of our moon's L1.

GENETIC ENGINEERING can adapt man to a particular environment. While
our current capabilites are marginal, soon adaptation to extreme
environments will be Genetics 101 taught at the Freshman level.

Intelligent design is but one of the ways out of this horrific mess.

SOLAR ENGINEERING so we can tame that big furnace 'up there' that is
currently melting our ice caps.

Silly jewboy that's still in denial; without our pesky mascon/moon, or
simply with our moon relocated out to Earth L1 would more than cool off
mother Earth, and then some.

The above are a few suggestions that could -- if done in time -- help
prevent cataclysmic events by enabling us to simply adapt to the
changes. The events would then be 'dramatic' but not 'cataclysmic'.

But first you'll have to get most all of those born-again liars (mostly
those Third Reich minions of the Old Testament and/or Skull and Bones
types) out of public office. Good luck on that one.
-
Brad Guth

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server -http://www.Mailgate.ORG


The best housing will probably be geodesic domes made of aluminum
tubes covered with aluminum plates with lexan windows, which would
simply be lexan plates put side by side for windows of any size.

All of this would be on an 18" concrete footer and covered over with
basalt fabric and epoxy. Basalt has a high insulative factor.
Aluminum is inexpensive, easily moved and worked, is quite strong and
doesn't rust.

This should result in a dome, perhaps several stories in height, that
could take Super Hurricanes and protect against either extreme heat or
cold. The interior of such a dome could be aluminum frame with wood
paneling or dry wall.

A large stone fireplace near the center of the dome would allow for
emergency heat, light, and cooking in the event of a power failure.

There are currently domes made of ferro-concrete and also of wood.
Domes can take much higher winds that a traditionally shaped home.
The geodesic dome structure is extremely strong and resilient.

Global Warming warrents both concern and reasonable preparation. Dome
homes are one way to protect your family.


tomcat

"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com

Global Warming warrents both concern and reasonable preparation. Dome
homes are one way to protect your family.

The ongoing failure of our magnetosphere is a little further off, though
actually much worse off than GW, but it should help by going partly
underground by day, and for having that secure home situated well above
sea level, along with extra good drainage and deep underground fresh
water storage (say at least 10,000 gallons per person)
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

As long as we're losing our protective magnetosphere at the ongoing
demise of -.05%/year, as such that alone could become the worse news to
our frail DNA than whatever's global warming us to death. With applied
technology and spare energy, we can adapt ourselves to whatever's too
hot, too cold or too ocean rising wet, but cosmic and solar radiation is
an entirely different matter, as having spare energy simply isn't going
to protect your frail DNA unless it's in the form of being artificially
shielded from the polluted sky, that's no longer of sufficient density
in order to defend yourself from the influx gauntlet of all that's
becoming dark and nasty (including the TBI worthy dosage that's derived
from our very own nearby moon).

What's so terribly wrong with blocking off roughly 3.5% of our sun, as
well as having gotten rid of most of that rather pesky gravity/tidal
force, plus having eliminated the secondary IR/FIR that's also a touch
global warming us to death at the same time?

Wouldn't it also be a darn good thing, for getting that horrific orb of
gamma and hard-X-rays a little further away from us?

At four times the distance, we'd have roughly 1/16th of that lethal
dosage to deal with, and due to such efforts having accomplished nearly
zilch worth of centripetal related force is why we'd have accomplished a
mere fraction of what's pertaining to tidal energy influx that's keeping
us a little too extra warm (inside and out).

Establishing the LSE-CM/ISS (along with its tether dipole element that's
still capable of reaching to within 4r of Earth) is still perfectly
doable, and actually much better off for such being within the
protective shade of that moon, and otherwise getting full-earthshine
illuminated as being more than ideal for such a lunar space elevator and
interplanetary depot/gateway of efficient operations.

Where's the down side?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:882473de514abd002072aa86e9536865.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Besides my previous notions of terraforming our moon (instead of Mars),
there's also a great deal of clean energy that's existing/coexisting
between Earth and that of our pesky GW moon, that rather badly needs to
get relocated to Earth's L1 before there's not hardly a km3 worth of ice
left on Earth.

Since that moon of our's may not have a viable magnetosphere (likely
because it's w/o iron core, as semi-hallow or at best offering a salty
brine of a core), thus holding onto any significant atmosphere of CO2 or
heavier elements isn't exactly going to be as easy as you'd think.

2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the mutual
attraction of gravity is worth 6.307e27 joules/yr (1.752e24 kwhrs).

As long as our physically dark and nasty moon (that's unavoidably global
warming us to death) is in the process of losing mass, and there's
sufficient secondary tidal forces at play, it'll never again impact
Earth. If that sucker ever manages to gain mass (such as from
accommodating NEOs getting litho terminated or the likes of being
penetration impacted by Sedna) is when we'll have to put those hard
thinking yarmulkes back on.

It seems the usual disinformation gauntlet that's continually hauled
about at taxpayer and consumer expense, and mainstream flaunted at the
drop of a yarmulke, such as carried onboard our spendy good ship USS
LOLLIPOP, which apparently has butt-loads more of their infomercial
crapolla as damage-control flak to share. Otherwise, lord knows there's
damn little if any topic constructive feedback unless accommodating an
ulterior motive or hidden agenda.

Starlord:
They have maped the moon and only find the light weigth
metal ores.
Is that the reason why the moon is still so salty and otherwise loaded
down with such complex mascon issues?

Excuse please; Whom the heck is "they", and why should we believe such
remote science as provided by such faith-based and/or politically agenda
formulated individuals, that clearly owe their brown nosed loyalty to
whomever is in charge of their private parts?

Terrestrial identified moon rocks do not seem of low denisity, or didn't
you silly folks know that?

Starlord:
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far
across the universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the
forefathers of the Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some
believe that they may yet be brothers of man, who even now fight to
survive, somewhere beyond the heavens.

I simply believe that other life similar or entirely different from
whatever we know of, should by all the known laws of physics and of
other biological rights of pure random happenstance or via intelligent
design exist/coexist elsewhere within this vast universe (possibly even
within our solar system), and of whatever's intelligent enough to have
made space travel safely doable should also be wise enough for giving
our badly polluted Earth a wide buffer DMZ because of our inbread
arrogance, greed and bigotry that has time and again demonstrated as
having practically if not absolutely no remorse whatsoever.

Even though there could have been a far better science transponder
alternative than those terribly small passive areas of retroreflectors,
or that of whatever impact deployed reflective material, whereas until
better interactive range finding science is made available to the
extremely electrostatic dusty surface of our moon, I'd have to accept
the best available science of others, as having established that our
moon is currently leaving town at the rate of 38 mm/yr.

For our icy proto-moon to have gotten safely away from having delivered
such a glancing sucker punch of a nasty bounce off Earth to begin with,
whereas it seems this seasonal tilt making and arctic ocean basin
forming encounter required that our original icy proto-moon had to lose
or rather transfer a good deal of its original mass in the initial
impact process, and then continually having to lose other mass (such as
whatever remaining ice), and then ever since having lost a sufficient
tonnage/yr of sodium in order to be leaving us at the supposed recession
rate of 38 mm/year.

If the mass of our moon had remained essentially unchanged, it's orbit
would have long since stabilized or possibly even in spite of secondary
tidal forces surcome to the unavoidable friction of terminal velocity
and mutual gravity of attraction, whereas instead of losing our moon by
38 mm/yr, we'd be joining back up at some future date.

As it is, that moon of our's is continually in the process of losing
mostly the raw element of sodium, but w/o a protective magnetosphere is
why there's also a few other elements that are getting boiled, vacuum
sucked out and continually excavated away by the solar wind.

Here's some more of my (corrected) weird/dyslexic math:
I'm certain it's a whole lot more complex than this, such as if one
meter per year as having moved our 7.35e22 kg moon were taken to
represent 1.165e15 joules, whereas I do believe the combined effect of
tidal forces and of the ongoing loss of mass that's resulting in the 38
mm/yr recession, as reverse extrapolated from the value of KE=.5MV2 can
thereby be taken as per applied kgf/yr = 171.62e9 (171.6 megatonnes), or
of that same force were otherwise applied into kinetic energy as worth
1.683e12 joules/yr, by which if that amount were taken in addition to
the ongoing 2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the
mutual attraction of gravity, as that's worth 6.307e27 joules/yr. Seems
as though the 38 mm recession is worth far less than a mere pico-drop in
the old bucket.

So, perhaps it's not going to be nearly as energy intensive as we'd
thought for relocating our moon to Earth's L1, especially once having
doubled the distance should have greatly reduced the mutual gravity of
attraction by a good 1/4. Too bad we're either not smart enough or
there's not so much as one qualified supercomputer that's offering a
simulator of such orbital mechanics, that can draft and thereby animate
this one out for us. I guess all of those publicly paid for
supercomputers are simply too busy at downloading live smut or animating
yet another eye-popping movie for our entertainment.

Perhaps once again, I'll have to say that it's rather unfortunate that
we're not quite smart enough, such as for our not having established an
efficient station-keeping science platform as of the mid 60s, as
situated within the moon's L1 zone, whereas we'd certainly have obtained
a great deal more replicated knowledge about our unusually massive and
nearby moon, and I do believe loads more learned about Earth science,
that is if we only had half a village idiot's brain instead of our
mutually perpetrated cold-war mindset (a terribly spendy and time
consuming real life cloak and dagger reality game called "Up Yours" that
has only cost us trillions per decade and damn near brought us into
WW-III, w/o sufficient energy reserves to boot).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:ea7904dcf9cf8a9fd7a4e4d97da058f4.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Besides my previous notions of terraforming our moon (instead of Mars),
there's also a terrific argument as to the absolutely great deal of
clean energy that's existing/coexisting between Earth and that of our
pesky GW moon, that rather badly needs to get relocated to Earth's L1
before there's not hardly a km3 worth of ice left on Earth.

Secondly, moving our moon to Earth's L1 also makes that otherwise nasty
moon of our's into a rather nifty little 3.5% dot of shade for Earth, as
well as offering a seriously cool earthshine environment of a worthy
outpost/depot/(gateway via the LSE-CM/ISS) that's representing a whole
lot less of IR/FIR trauma, as well as being less DNA lethal, though
otherwise naked and thus exposed to whatever's cosmic and/or physical
that's coming along.

Since that moon of our's may not have a viable magnetosphere (likely
because it's w/o iron core, as semi-hallow or at best offering a salty
brine of a core), thus holding onto any significant atmosphere of CO2 or
heavier elements isn't exactly going to be as easy as you'd think.

2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the mutual
attraction of gravity is worth 6.307e27 joules/yr (1.752e21 kwhrs).

As long as our physically dark and nasty moon (that's unavoidably global
warming us to death) is in the process of losing mass, and there's
sufficient secondary tidal forces at play, it'll never again impact
Earth. If that sucker ever manages to gain mass (such as from
accommodating NEOs getting litho terminated or the likes of being
penetration impacted by Sedna) is when we'll have to put those hard
thinking yarmulkes back on.

It seems the usual disinformation gauntlet that's continually hauled
about at taxpayer and consumer expense, and mainstream flaunted at the
drop of a yarmulke, such as carried onboard our spendy good ship USS
LOLLIPOP, which apparently has butt-loads more of their infomercial
crapolla as damage-control flak to share. Otherwise, lord knows there's
damn little if any topic constructive feedback unless accommodating an
ulterior motive or hidden agenda.

Starlord:
They have maped the moon and only find the light weigth
metal ores.
Is that the reason why the moon is still so salty and otherwise loaded
down with such complex mascon issues?

Excuse please; Whom the heck is "they", and why should we believe such
remote science as provided by such faith-based and/or politically agenda
formulated individuals, that clearly owe their brown nosed loyalty to
whomever is in charge of their private parts?

Terrestrial identified moon rocks do not seem of low denisity, or didn't
you silly folks know that?

Starlord:
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far
across the universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the
forefathers of the Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some
believe that they may yet be brothers of man, who even now fight to
survive, somewhere beyond the heavens.

I simply believe that other life similar or entirely different from
whatever we know of, should by all the known laws of physics and of
other biological rights of pure random happenstance or via intelligent
design exist/coexist elsewhere within this vast universe (possibly even
within our solar system), and of whatever's intelligent enough to have
made space travel safely doable should also be wise enough for giving
our badly polluted Earth a wide buffer DMZ because of our inbread
arrogance, greed and bigotry that has time and again demonstrated as
having practically if not absolutely no remorse whatsoever.

Even though there could have been a far better science transponder
alternative than those terribly small passive areas of retroreflectors,
or that of whatever impact deployed reflective material, whereas until
better interactive range finding science is made available to the
extremely electrostatic dusty surface of our moon, I'd have to accept
the best available science of others, as having established that our
moon is currently leaving town at the rate of 38 mm/yr.

For our icy proto-moon to have gotten safely away from having delivered
such a glancing sucker punch of a nasty bounce off Earth to begin with,
whereas it seems this seasonal tilt making and arctic ocean basin
forming encounter required that our original icy proto-moon had to lose
or rather transfer a good deal of its original mass in the initial
impact process, and then continually having to lose other mass (such as
whatever remaining ice), and then ever since having lost a sufficient
tonnage/yr of sodium in order to be leaving us at the supposed recession
rate of 38 mm/year.

If the mass of our moon had remained essentially unchanged, it's orbit
would have long since stabilized or possibly even in spite of secondary
tidal forces surcome to the unavoidable friction of terminal velocity
and mutual gravity of attraction, whereas instead of losing our moon by
38 mm/yr, we'd be joining back up at some future date.

As it is, that moon of our's is continually in the process of losing
mostly the raw element of sodium, but w/o a protective magnetosphere is
why there's also a few other elements that are getting boiled, vacuum
sucked out and continually excavated away by the solar wind.

Here's some more of my (corrected) weird/dyslexic math:
I'm certain it's a whole lot more complex than this, such as if one
meter per year as having moved our 7.35e22 kg moon were taken to
represent 1.165e15 joules, whereas I do believe the combined effect of
tidal forces and of the ongoing loss of mass that's resulting in the 38
mm/yr recession, as reverse extrapolated from the value of KE=.5MV2 can
thereby be taken as per applied kgf/yr = 171.62e9 (171.6 megatonnes), or
of that same force were otherwise applied into kinetic energy as worth
1.683e12 joules/yr, by which if that amount were taken in addition to
the ongoing 2e20 joules of centripetal energy that's offsetting the
mutual attraction of gravity, as that's worth 6.307e27 joules/yr
(1.752e21 kwhrs). Seems as though the 38 mm recession is worth far less
than a mere pico-drop in the old bucket.

So, perhaps it's not going to be nearly as energy intensive as we'd
thought for relocating our moon to Earth's L1, especially once having
doubled the distance should have greatly reduced the mutual gravity of
attraction by a good 1/4. Too bad we're either not smart enough or
there's not so much as one qualified supercomputer that's offering a
simulator of such orbital mechanics, that can draft and thereby animate
this one out for us. I guess all of those publicly paid for
supercomputers are simply too busy at downloading live smut or animating
yet another eye-popping movie for our entertainment.

Perhaps once again, I'll have to say that it's rather unfortunate that
we're not quite smart enough, such as for our not having established an
efficient station-keeping science platform as of the mid 60s, as
situated within the moon's L1 zone, whereas we'd certainly have obtained
a great deal more replicated knowledge about our unusually massive and
nearby moon, and I do believe loads more learned about Earth science,
that is if we only had half a village idiot's brain instead of our
mutually perpetrated cold-war mindset (a terribly spendy and time
consuming real life cloak and dagger reality game called "Up Yours" that
has only cost us trillions per decade and damn near brought us into
WW-III, w/o sufficient energy reserves to boot).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

That's rather odd, that Earth has been losing it's one and only
magnetosphere at the ongoing demise of -.05%/year, and yet that's not of any
interest to anyone within this group.

I guess Earth simply doesn't actually need nearly as much atmosphere, since
that'll have to be the next item that'll get solar wind extracted. Of
course, then we'll not have to bother going to Mars because, Earth's frail
environment will soon enough become rather Mars like.
-
Brad Guth