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

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:11ebcd15a5c4f453d2b80ef55874b85e.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

What! still no Bigelow POOF for this cool application?

Where's all the 'can do' of Usenet spunk, of accomplishing such a nifty
task, especially once our moon is situated in Earth's L1 on behalf of
more than sufficienly shading our environmentally trashed and polluted
mother Earth.

However, by the time this daunting task of relocating 7.35e22 km gets
accomplished, it's just as likely that we'll be in serious need of all
3.5% worth of solar isolation, if not a touch more shade for good
terrestrial pollution measure.
-
Brad Guth


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

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:11ebcd15a5c4f453d2b80ef55874b85e.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

This somewhat polished contribution is indirectly related to that of
utilizing our moon as the ultimate LSE-CM/ISS anchor, as well as for
that moon blocking out a small portion of our sun, for understanding the
ongoing energy that's between Earth and our moon, and subsequently
helping us to appreciate as to how cold this Earth would get once our
moon was situated out of the way, or at least as for having been
relocated out to Earth's L1 for safe keeping, and for otherwise
accomplishing a double benefit.

In other words, I for one do not believe this daunting relocation phase
is going to demand all that much applied energy (most of which would be
derived from the moon itself), especially if it's currently moving out
at 38 mm/year as is. Whereas there should be a spare supercomputer or
two that's accomplishing damn little if anything constructive for the
moment, that which can run this one through whatever spendy 3D animated
production, as to our seeing where such things might run a little off
track.

mailgate/sci.astro / Will the Moon Crash Into Earth?
stealth listed topic: "Mailgate: Message not available"

"Peter Webb" wrote in message
u

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.a...d6f253d352fdaf
Will the Moon Crash Into Earth?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.g...8810ced9d201fe

Actually, as it moves into higher orbits, its velocity decreases.

What exactly are those hard scientific numbers (not via theory), as
having been independently measured down to the picosecond, about its
receding orbital loss of velocity per year?

It seems as though it would have been so much easier and otherwise
having been far more accurate as to our having measured any such annual
reduction in orbital velocity per year, than of having measured it's
supposed 38 mm/year of tidal forced recession.

I mean to further suggest, that it's apparently having to travel a bit
further each year, and according those of your mindset it's also taking
some loss in orbital velocity to boot, or perhaps it actually isn't
doing either, if not otherwise falling back towards Earth because of
having 'once upon a time' bounced itself off Earth to begin with.

In addition to all of that rant; What's the ongoing slug factor
(Vt/terminal velocity drag coefficient) in kgf that's working against
that extremely rough (40e12 m2) moon of ours?

You'd think that such a nifty 900,000 km comet like trail of what's
mostly solar wind forced sodium is capable of giving us a clue as to the
Vt/slug factor.


The paragraph above - and all the rest I have snipped below - both somewhat
cranky and wrong, at least as an explanation of the recession of the moon.

Sorry about all of that. For good reason(s), I am in fact somewhat
cranky, as having been so ever since interpreting that somehow Venus has
been accommodating other intelligent life, as having been
existing/coexisting where it's supposedly so freaking hot and nasty.

In other words, instead of your being the least bit cranky, whereas
you're cozy with being snookered and thus easily dumbfounded that you
actually believe we've walked upon that nasty moon of our's, even though
there's no such replicated evidence that actually proves NASA/Apollo
moon-walking squat, at least not as based upon those pesky regular laws
of physics.

You also don't believe that our moon is still in the process of losing
mass, or much less that it's seemingly losing substantial amounts of
sodium (I've estimated roughly 23.5 micrograms/m2/day), as otherwise you
would have given or having shared specific information that proves
otherwise.

I haven't entirely excluded tidal forces, but yourself and others of
your kind have always excluded whatever rocks your Old Testament
thumping (Earth/moon only) boat, as though we're it and there's none
others to behold within this entire universe that's existing/coexisting
as intelligent life, much less having managed nearly as good at it as
us.

What makes you folks think we even originated or subsequently belong
upon this planet that has become almost insufficient for sustaining our
species, that is unless you've got the biggest and nastiest gun in town,
as well as having no remorse about using it.
-

BTW; the thrust of a given rocket is in fact based upon the sudden
removal of mass that's going away from the original mass, the same as to
what's happening at an extremely slow pace with our moon that's losing
mass while moving itself away from Earth. Yet as far as we know of, its
orbital velocity simply isn't slowing down enough, if at all. So, what
gives?

I have no actual idea, outside of my best swag, as to the ongoing exit
velocity of my suggested 940 tonnes/day worth of sodium. So, for now
I'm sticking with the wussy exit velocity of one meter/second.
Ovbiously if it were exiting at 10 m/s would require 1% the sodium mass
as per what my best swag had previously suggested, and less yet due to
whatever amount of secondary tidal force is at play.
-

According to my dyslexic encrypted math (that's not always correct);
If that moon of ours was in fact moving off by 38 mm/year, and as such
not even slowing down one iota, whereas per year as based upon 1.023
km/s, it should be taking 2.334e-4 second longer for getting that
horrifically big old and massive sucker around us.

Obviously if your tidal forced analogy were all inclusive, as to
representing what's causing our moon's recession at the velocity losing
budget of whatever that amounts to, along with taking into account
whatever's the Vt/slug factor, whereas it should if anything be causing
the orbital velocity as having been somewhat diminished measurably from
the velocity of each previous year. Therefore, if anything the extra
amount of orbital time required by rights should have become much
greater than imposing the fixed velocity factor of taking 2.334e-4
second longer to get around Earth.

Besides all my usual spelling and syntax corrections, how am I doing?
-
Brad Guth


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

What's this I hear about moving our moon out to Earth's L1?

NOTHING AT ALL

Is Usenet's superior brain of all-knowing expertise broken?

Are those MI/NSA clowns without a good enough clown car, all because
they can't afford the gas?

Are those MIB clowns of enforcing infomercials and hypology down to
having to utilize bicycles?
-
Brad Guth

In case you're wondering, I do believe that relocating our moon to
Earth's L1 is a bit on the wild side, though given sufficient time and
utilizing the moon's own 2XL2 or possibly 3XL2 with as much tethered
mass of its own as possible, should accomplish most of that task.

Actually, a far more doable outpost or space depot/gateway than my LSE-
CM/ISS might be Venus L2, at merely 1,014,290 km from Venus, and
thereby always in the shade to the extent of keeping the solar influx
down to something less than 400 w/m2 (possibly as low as 350 w/m2),
with the interactive halo orbit able to +/- whatever degree of solar
isolation is necessary for a given task.

The one really neat thing about VL2 is that a tethered camera or
whatever cache of science instruments can be efficiently lowered
towards the nighttime season of Venus. If we installed a 1.1e6 km
spool of tether, and having deployed such directly towards Venus,
including the matter of our station of POOFs having to back off a bit
more from VL2, we'd have gotten those instruments just above the very
tops of those fast moving acidic clouds.

Of course the crew change per 19 month mission is going to push a good
many of those 'do not push' buttons, and the to/from commute is still
going to be somewhat humanly testy, though not 10% that of any Mars
fiasco.

How about some composite rigid airship/shuttle expertise, or is that
too much to ask of this Usenet of mostly naysayers?

At one time "tomcat" seemed perfectly airship or fat-waverider R&D
capable, at least up until the point when those MIB took him away.
-
Brad Guth

Good grief folks, here's the best ever solar isolation and next
generation space depot and/or nifty gateway alternative in our badly
polluted and GW town, by simply moving our pesky moon out to Earth L1.

That's nothing but a perfectly solid win-win for the old mother Earth
gipper, and then some, as we could then continue to summarily pillage,
plunder, rape and pollute whatever's left of mother Earth until long
after those NASA/Apollo cows come home, including our having to
survive WWIII and WWIV, with still enough shade to burn (sort of
speak).
-
Brad Guth

Without our moon, over sufficient time Earth would soon enough become
a Mars like orb. However, the notions of relocating our moon out to
Earth's L1 might become exactly what our GW doctor and the rest of us
village idiot minions could possibly hope for. Too bad such an honest
topic is so Usenet taboo/nondisclosure worthy, much like VL2 and even
that of our moon's L1. Of course, with any luck we could eventually
make the perpetual nighttime of our relocated moon into our next best
home away from home.

Planetology science is absolutely essential, especially if such is
related to Earth, as well as is cosmological research and subsequent
understandings that by all rights also has to involve our evolution
and/or having accommodated whatever intelligent design of having
created our complex DNA/RNA in the first place, that is unless it
turns out that hundreds of billions of random happenstance years are
actually the case. Yet lo and behold, we have to continually put up
with the likes of topic/author stalking, hijackings and bashings from
those rejecting all of whatever's off-world, or simply intent upon
banishing all of whatever rocks their faith-based or political good
ship LOLLIPOP. Of course, some folks simply can't get enough of their
own incest cultivated arrogance, greed, bigotry and stupidity, much
like our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

Earth has been more than a rare planet, whereas it's unusually fluid
(inside and out), along with a mostly wet surface and otherwise frozen
polar caps and other volumes of ice that if melted would summarily
drown or otherwise terminate most of us, and as of lately it has been
more than a little salty to boot, plus going GW(global warming) postal
at the same time that we're trying our level best to survive on this
orb.

The basic argument here is that Earth simply didn't always have that
pesky moon until after the very last ice age this planet w/moon will
ever see, as for that pesky moon representing such a horrific nearby
orbiting mascon, especially weird if that sucker were ever once upon a
time orbiting at a forth the distance, thus having been contributing
16 fold greater gravity/tidal forces into our 98.5% fluid Earth, as
that unfortunate outcome would have kept mother Earth more than a
little extra GW hot! hot!! hot!!!

I tend to favor a lithobraking arrival, via a glancing and thus
seasonal tilt worthy blow, which seems a whole lot more likely. As
otherwise, that alternative of a gradual exit migration away from
Earth would have been worthy of a whole lot more geophysical trauma
than previously given credit.

Solar tides always existed, along with eventually some oceans of
whatever less salty muck and of much less fluid volume had also
existed, as well as for our elliptical orbit and less seasonal tilt
having existed. So what? We can certainly have all of that w/o moon.

There may not be those local ice cubes surviving in 1AU space, but
much further out it's quite another cosmic story, especially if one of
those arriving ice cubes had a fairly terrific 7.35e22 kg worth of a
rocky core to start off with.

Although it would have been darn nice having a few direct interactive
science instruments on deck (which should have been easily
accomplished if we'd actually walked on that sucker), though otherwise
the best available remote science of our physically DARK and NASTY
moon is more than good enough to suggest upon multiple other reasons
for Earth (being 98.5% fluid) having obtained that absolutely horrific
mascon of a moon, and only as of the very last ice age this gravity/
tidal forced global warming of a mostly fluid planet will ever see.

Most folks here in Usenet naysay land, that are summarily stuck
forever with their one and only NASA/Apollo koran version of the
truth, are as such entirely unable to even consider upon any other
viable alternatives. That's rather unfortunate that so much of
otherwise good talent and resources must be continually wasted, along
with such spendy decades upon decades blown for good.

Much of our salty old moon's surface has in fact become soft, though
obviously much of that moon's dusty surface is protruded by basalt, it
has obviously since been terribly impacted and/or having collected
everything including the cosmic kitchen sink. In addition to it's
significant worth of gravity, it's also highly electrostatic charged
and thus far better off at having attracted and otherwise retained
most of the solar and cosmic flak that comes along, as certainly a
whole lot better off at keeping its nasty stuff than anything our
wussy magnetosphere manages to retain.

Unfortunately, icy proto-moons are still being officially topic/author
banished, as being as taboo/nondisclosure as is the truth about Iraq
and a good dozen other matters. Even a simple topic of "What if
(Craters)" by G=EMC^2 Glazier gets the usual mainstream status quo
flak treatment, as a insurmountable gauntlet that's contributed by
those Old Testament fools trying their faith-based level best at
keeping the rest of us village idiots as snookered and/or as
dumbfounded as possible, and for the most part it has been working.

Folks here in this well orchestrated anti-think-tank Usenet of naysay
land, as such really haven't allowed us to seriously look at those
moon craters with any open mindset, whereas most of which are truly
massive yet unusually shallow craters within those larger and even
shallower craters, with much less their ever having associated any
potential of ice as having once upon a time covered that big old salty
sucker (I'm thinking to the tune of 262 km).

Of the most recent craters being 10 fold deeper by ratio to their
diameter means there was at that more recent time little if any ice on
deck. Though I'd have to agree that a great amount of common moon
dust by way of primary and secondary impact shards, plus local and
cosmic dust has contributed to filling in the vast majority of those
older craters, to the tune of such nasty composition being tens of
meters deep in the most fluffy of dry and uncompacted dark/sooty (aka
coal pit) looking stuff you can imagine. I often think of our moon as
being a cosmic morgue, especially since nothing gets burned up prior
to impact.

You folks must realize that Sedna is a worthy icy proto-moon of
roughly 1500~1800 km, that's likely covered by as much as 500 km of
that dirty reddish and most likely salty ice. In fact, most anything
Oort cloud or even Kuiper belt worthy is going to be and/or shortly
become icy. For example, I can imagine the big rock and/or whatever's
the core of such a hard under-surface of Sedna being that of almost no
craters, as due to itself having been so nicely ice protected.

For benefit of further argument; If such an icy proto-moon were
moving along from Sirius to Sol, say if that interstellar trek had
been taking at most a few tens of thousands of years (say incoming at
40 km/s and thereby lots of spare time for a little interactive cosmic
DNA sequencing to take place), I wonder how much extra ice and snow
build-up (in addition to whatever it originally had) one might expect
to obtain while exiting away from the read-giant pushing realm of
Sirius and obviously entering through our icy Oort cloud?

You'd think this kind of fundamental planetology and cosmology
research, as based entirely upon the regular laws of physics and best
available science, would become another one of those nifty 3D
simulation applications for a good supercomputer, don't you think.
Especially since most other moons and perhaps even a few planets of
this solar system seem as though having arrived after the initial
creation of our Sol and whatever local planets. In fact, there's no
good reasoning to perceive that Earth was born of the very same exact
stuff as Sol.
-
Brad Guth

It's all about sustaining and/or improving the quality of life.

The best I can accomplish thus far, is coming up the new and improved
sun + (moon at Earth L1) as becoming worth 50.4% of our existing lunar
tide.

A 50% reduction in tidal action is perhaps a little less important to
ocean and other terrestrial life than we've been giving it credit.
Most tidal life can adapt, some of which getting by with a little of
our best intelligent design as help wherever necessary.

This moon relocation process of getting that mascon situated out to
Earth's L1 (roughly 4X further away than it's current orbital trek) is
going to take a good century or more, and therefore I'm not imposing
an overnight change to whatever terrestrial life that we know of
that's attached its life endurance to that existing lunar cycle and
ocean tidal issues.

There will be some unfortunate extinctions of life which simply can
not adapt, though hopefully humanity will not become one of those.
However, at the very same time, other existing species that are
currently finding it downright difficult or nearly impossible to
survive as is, as such will likely bloom or otherwise better populate
under the conditions of having less terrestrial trauma to deal with.

A measured reduction in global warming (in good part due to the solar
isolation afforded by the moon itself), along with accomplishing much
less gravity/tidal trauma taking place (inside and out), is what
should by rights benefit most all known species of life on Earth
(hopefully just short of bringing on another ice age).

What we need for this daunting task is that spendy supercomputer
running all of its parallel CPUs off the charts, doing exactly
whatever's necessary for figuring out what's doable, and otherwise
telling us whatever else needs to be avoided at all cost. If you have
such supercomputer access, and wouldn't terribly mind running off a
few of these weird ideas, as such I'd like to see a few what-if
results in 3D animation.
-
Brad Guth

It's all about sustaining and/or improving the quality of life. If
that motive takes on the form of my LSE-CM/ISS, or that of my VL2 POOF
City as part of the ultimate game plan, while our moon is gradually
getting relocated to Earth's L1, then so be it.

As to the perfectly valid argument(s) or honest topic jest of
artificially blocking out a little more than a sufficient portion of
our sun, as such is all about sustaining and/or improving the quality
of all life.

The best I can accomplish thus far, is coming up with the new and
improved sun + (moon at Earth L1) as becoming worth 50.4% of our
existing lunar tide.

A 50% reduction in tidal action is perhaps a little less important to
ocean and other terrestrial life than we've been giving it credit.
Most tidal life can adapt, some of which getting by with a little of
our best intelligent design as help wherever necessary.

This moon relocation process of getting that mascon situated out to
Earth's L1 (roughly 4X further away than it's current orbital trek) is
going to take a good century or more, and therefore I'm not imposing
an overnight change to whatever terrestrial life that we know of
that's attached its life endurance to that existing lunar cycle and
ocean tidal issues.

There will be some unfortunate extinctions of life which simply can
not adapt, though hopefully humanity will not become one of those.
However, at the very same time, other existing species that are
currently finding it downright difficult or nearly impossible to
survive as is, as such will likely bloom or otherwise better populate
under the conditions of having less terrestrial trauma to deal with.

A measured reduction in global warming (in good part due to the solar
isolation afforded by the moon itself), along with accomplishing much
less gravity/tidal trauma taking place (inside and out), is what
should by rights benefit most all known species of life on Earth
(hopefully just short of bringing on another ice age).

What we need for this daunting task is having that spendy
supercomputer running all of its parallel CPUs off the charts, doing
exactly whatever's necessary for figuring out what's doable, and
otherwise telling us whatever else needs to be avoided at all cost.
If you have such supercomputer access, and wouldn't terribly mind
running off a few of these weird ideas, as such I'd like to see a few
of those what-if results in 3D animation.
-
Brad Guth

That's odd, still no better ideas as to getting our salty old and
terribly reactive moon relocated into Earth's L1.

It must be doable, much like my LSE-CM/ISS is perfectly doable, as is
POOF City at VL2, whereas otherwise there'd be all sorts of mainstream
Zion flak to deal with.
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell
-
Brad Guth

Here's more of another tidbit of good news that we can all use, and
per usual there's consequences (mostly positive) to boot.

As per Usenet's infomercial spewed ****ology/naysay/banishment and/or
Zion/Yid status quo or bust usual, here's yet another old Boeing RASC
study/report that clearly has our hocus-pocus NASA wizards working as
though rad-hard within our moon's L1 for all it's worth, naturally
excluding anything "Clarke Station" or that of my "LSE-CM/ISS".

OASIS / Earth-Moon L1 Gateway Missions / Executive Summary 10/2/2001
http://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/design...SISEXEC_97.pdf

Since relocating our moon to Earth's L1 is technically doable, but no
matters what is never going to get accomplished, is why looking far
away from anything associated with utilizing our moon or of its L1 is
the only viable option we've got.

Too bad our moon's rather nifty L1 has always been kept so unusually
need-to-know and/or taboo to the sorry point of having been as
nondisclosure rated as most of everything associated with our
physically dark and unavoidably anticathode worthy moon. Of course,
that's actually reinforcing more of the same good news for otherwise
commercially accomplishing POOF City at VL2 instead.
-
Brad Guth