|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
We have been living on a very thin crusted planet that is essentially
unstable and clearly unsurvivable at roughly an average of 15 km below our feet, with deep 8+ Seismic events taking place all the time. Whereas the innards of our relatively cool moon should be quite survivable down at last 150 km if not technically robotic TBM accessible down 1000 km (nearly right up against its semi-liquid 1175 km diameter of lower mantel) Terraforming the innards of our moon is also about creating unlimited off-world habitats that are safer than here on Earth, not to mention having unlimited clean energy and likewise a darn good export of energy related products, not to mention a whole lot better yet once our moon is relocated as to being actively station-kept within the halo of Earth L1. Of course all the usual gauntlet of rusemasters and FUD-masters are going to continually pitch a fit over any of this, but then so would GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Hitler and their oligarch peers. Establishing a surface base of TBM logistics on the moon should be a relatively simple task, by selecting a small diameter but otherwise sufficiently deep crater would enable the best initial outcome with offering as much natural surrounding protection from the shade and physical shield derived by keeping the base camp site well below the crater rim. A pinpoint landing within a small crater shouldn’t be any problem for the new and improved fly-by-rocket landers capable of deploying 10+ lunar tonnes of TBM related payload per mission (that’s 60 terrestrial tonnes). Perhaps the item which impacted Earth and created our Arctic ocean basin along with having given us our seasonal tilt and 2/3s of our tidal considerations, is currently orbiting Earth. In case you haven't noticed, that moon/planetoid Selene happens to have a nicely matching 2500 km diameter crater in its amply robust crust, to have nailed our planet and kept itself mostly intact (minus its thick layer of ice and having obtained that extremely large diameter crater). Sirius(b) likely started off as an impressive 9 Ms star, so I think we'll need to redo our math if attempting to discover its age as based upon consuming itself 81 times faster than our sun, which puts its red giant phase starting 123.5 million years ago, and it may have fluctuated with multiple helium flashovers before its most recent white dwarf phase kicked in for the final time. As best I can tell, our solar system has been captured by the much greater original mass of Sirius(a+b+c), which started off as perhaps worth a combined 12.5 MS as of not more than 256 million years ago (or perhaps even as of roughly the timeline of when our ice-age cycles started 128 million years ago). Try keeping in mind that the star making nebula/molecular cloud which produced those Sirius stars was likely worth 2.5e37 kg, and for a good hundred thousand some odd years was situated nearby enough to have included our solar system. If that ever happened again, we’d be cooked by having been surrounded by so much ionized gas, and especially if all of that ionized molecular/ nebula gas was producing nearby stars like those of Sirius. Having a terraformed moon as our failsafe lifeboat could prove very handy should another nearby cosmic event take place, not to mention what having our moon actively parked within the Earth L1 halo orbit could do wonders for cooling off mother Earth regardless of how much be artificially pollute and attempt to warm it up. On Apr 28, 4:23*pm, Brad Guth wrote: It’s interesting whenever a Usenet/newsgroup topic or subsequent replies favor anything on behalf of a developing technology or applied physics for benefiting the lower 99.9% caste and for otherwise protecting or salvaging our global environment in multiple ways, in that only those intent upon topic/author stalking and bashing for the sake of discrediting others for all they can muster, seem to show up like those funny little cars with a dozen or more clowns jumping out in order to spin, obfuscate and FUD everything for all it’s worth, as well as in order to discredit anyone that isn’t fully oligarch approved. *On the other hand, whenever something is represented for improving the wealth and authority of oligarchs that seldom if ever have to work an honest day in their life, whereas any topics and replies on their butt-covering behalf seem to get mainstream media and even international attention, as well as much of their interpretation of science, physics and especially history getting mainstream published and into our K-12 textbooks as though it were the one and only undeniable word of God with by the way doesn’t even believe in hell. So, it obviously pays big-time if you’re an oligarch or even one of their brown-nosed minions, because life is very good when the lower 99.9% of us always get to pay for everything that directly and indirectly benefits them in spite of the consequences or how much negative Karma gets created along the way. *In fact, seems the more bad Karma the better for justifying their military industrial complex that’s problematic and spendy as hell. Obviously the intent of keeping our K-12s and others away from using any public social/media or unmoderated Usenet/newsgroups is very high on their priority of information damage control, as if Hitler’s SS Nazi oligarch goons as nicely protected by our “Operation Paperclip” are still in charge, as having always been protected by our “Operation Paperclip” policy which secretly extracted them and having given new American IDs with special privileges and few if any restrictions as long as they continued working their magic for benefiting our own oligarchs. No wonder my topics about privately off-world exploiting of the moon and the most accessible nearby planet are each being treated as socially taboo/nondisclosure rated issues, as well as having been worth forbidding K-12s and others to read or much less contribute any context or even to ask questions. *So, my topics must have hit a few too many status-quo nerves along the way, because the ongoing banishment and/or having been topic/author stalked and bashed for all they can muster seems to be their only hope of keeping mainstream media and K-12s from reading and interacting within our unmoderated Usenet/newsgroup topics. Most school and other public funded intranets automatically block or filter out unmoderated Usenet/newsgroups, and otherwise most K-12s are simply not educated well enough to go around those media filters. However, at some point the oligarch tight grip on their private parts isn’t going to be sufficient, and once again Karma revenge is going to rear its ugly head in another 9-11 or worse kind of way, even though trillions are being spent to either avoid such Karma or because of previous Karma that still isn’t paid for. *In other words, there’s no shortage of public loot, as long as it’s going mostly into the oligarch mainstream of sustaining their military industrial complex instead of exploiting anything off-world like our moon or the extremely nearby planet Venus. On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct, because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally bat**** crazy peers. Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to follow suit. Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer, because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth. Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy), just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is desirable. On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote: It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than 10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon. Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition. A new interpretation is that all-inclusively the geothermal outflux of Earth (including geothermal vents and volcanic contributions) is getting rid of roughly 128 mw/m2, whereas our moon is supposedly only getting rid of as little as 16 mw/m2 (an 8th as much). *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient *“Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior.” The "Igneous Petrology" of our moon and Venus should each be unique and considerably different than Earth. “The composition of igneous rocks and minerals can be determined via a variety of methods of varying ease, cost, and complexity. The simplest method is observation of hand samples with the naked eye and/or with a hand lens. This can be used to gauge the general mineralogical composition of the rock, which gives an insight into the composition.” Unfortunately, the rocks returned from our moon were entirely similar to those of terrestrial rocks. *Of course there’s all sorts of actual paramagnetic basalt moon rock to be found on Earth, because there should be at least a thousand teratonnes of it, whereas naturally most of which ended up in oceans and otherwise as having meteor and obvious melt indications that are entirely quite different than local volcanic spewed basalts. “A more precise but still relatively inexpensive way to identify minerals (and thereby the bulk chemical composition of the rock) with a petrographic microscope. These microscopes have polarizing plates, filters, and a conoscopic lens that allow the user to measure a large number of crystallographic properties.” Contributor “Wretch Fossil” actually has a very good “petrographic microscope” and multiple resources plus talent of interpreting such to go along with it. *Sadly this technology and its expertise of interpreting is being ignored by those of authority that do not want outsiders having a public say about anything. *So, once again, it really doesn’t matter whatever level of modern applied technology and expertise we have to offer, because it’s only going to be topic/author stalked and systematically trashed by those of Usenet/newsgroup authority that have multiple mainstream issues at risk. TBMs cutting their tunnels into the interior of our moon should prove both interesting and rewarding in terms of extracting rare and valuable elements, not to mention creating the very cozy and safe habitat potential that’s opened up for multiple uses. *Unfortunately this method can not be applied on such a geodynamically active planet like Venus that has such a thin crust and way more primordial core energy outflux of perhaps 20.5 w/m2 as contributing way more geothermal energy than any other planet or moon has to offer, although older and cooler planets or any number of their moons (except for Io that’s averaging 2 w/m2) should be somewhat similar to terraforming the cozy interior of our moon. *http://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-system-s...etary_interior... *http://commercialspace.pbworks.com/f/Public+ILN.pdf *The likely two thirds (6.6e17~6.6e18 tonnes) worth of lose surface basalt rock and dust including whatever 4+ billion years worth of accumulated deposits, as remaining crystal dry on the naked surface of our physically dark moon (not including the other good third portion as having been dislodged and deposited on Earth) is a direct result of the thousands of significant impacts, and especially as a result of whatever created its South polar crater of 2500 km diameter, that which all by itself should have contributed a minimum of 3e17 m3 or possibly a maximum contribution of 1e18 m3 if including the planet sized impactor contributions. *Given the limited surface area of the moon as being 3.8e13 m2 doesn’t exactly allow all that much surface area for accommodating such volume of lose crater made fallout, and perhaps due to much of its own basalt metallicity making its density worth on average 3.5 tonnes/m3 unless offset by loads of accumulated carbon buckyballs. *In that kind of hard vacuum, there really shouldn’t be all that much porosity to any of its solidified basalt or carbonado. Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts that should have extensively solidified and possibly fused upon contact with the relatively cool basalt surface, as such should have been quite obvious and highly distinctive if such exposed lunar bedrock samples had been return to Earth. *Sadly, no such samples or even unique meteorites ever materialized from our NASA/Apollo era, that found our naked moon as instead so unusually reflective and UV, X- ray and gamma inert as well as hardly the least bit dusty, and what little crystal dry dust there was seemed to offer terrific surface tension and clumping for their footing and traction like no place else. Even taking the utmost conservative swag-estimate of 3.8e16 m3 worth of lose rock, debris and accumulated dust, is still suggesting an average surface depth of one km, which of course our Apollo era found no such indications, as though that moon is relatively new to us. *Of course, if that moon had created our Arctic ocean basin as of 11,712 years ago, would actually explain quite a bit. How’s that for a worthy topic of terraforming the innards of our naked moon that’s practically dust free and mostly solid as any rock according to our Apollo wizards? |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On May 16, 7:10 pm, David Staup wrote: On 3/21/2013 4:47 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Just because redneck GOP FUD-masters like yourself that can not manage to terraform anything for the better (not even Earth), doesn't mean that I can't terraform the innards of our moon, or even exploit Venus. go for it goofy...you claim you can do it.....show us! talk is cheap......show us Thanks for all the help. (as in less than zero) Did you always treat your mother in this same way? you little wimp...that's the best you can do? |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On 5/22/2013 10:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On May 22, 5:51 pm, David Staup wrote: On 4/21/2013 7:36 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On Apr 21, 4:04 pm, David Staup wrote: On 4/21/2013 5:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Terraforming the moon underground: (mining plus creating safe habitats inside of that extremely tough crust) is not nearly as insurmountable as you might think. Besides the mainstream naysay gauntlet against folks ever exploiting the extremely nearby planet Venus for all it’s worth, it's as though there is also something oddly mainstream taboo/forbidden or nondisclosure associated with any notions of independently exploiting the likely soft innards of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon. Go figure that we’re either being intentionally snookered or simply misdirected by our oligarch peers. Once TBMs(tunnel boring machines) are situated and working sufficiently deep underground (other than remote logistics issues that at first should be daunting), what's the likely geological difference between our moon and Earth? Inside the paramagnetic basalt crust of our moon is probably not going to be all that much different than tunneling inside of Earth’s granite and much less paramagnetic basalt, especially once our TBMs get sufficiently into and below that extremely tough paramagnetic basalt and carbonado tough crust of 3.5+ g/cm3 that our NASA/Apollo era had documented as offering a much lower density as well as perfectly inert (not the least bit paramagnetic or hardly even mineral or other metal worthy) and otherwise as mostly monochromatic as well as hardly even the least bit dusty on top, and there certainly wasn’t any problems with the failsafe technology of their fly-by-rocket landers that can be manually flown and easily scaled to suit pretty much any payload tonnage. However, the greatly reduced gravity should by rights yield a very soft or porous kind of moon innards, along with offering gas formed geode pockets and possibly layers of mineral brines (even a potential of hydrocarbons in addition to encountering a great deal of fused crust sequestered helium), in that once sufficiently underneath is when TBMs should whiz right through at a fraction of the difficulty found in dealing with the inner bedrock of Earth. No doubt the resident redneck FUD-masters and their oligarchs of authority in charge of mainstream damage-control, by having to continually topic/author stalk and otherwise sequester such independent notions about exploiting our moon, are probably going to need many extra Depends(aka adult diapers) in order to effectively deal with their usual damage-control exploits of topic/author stalking and trashing of this topic. Sorry about that. Fortunately, we only have to be realistic in order to appreciate what the inverted density or softer innards of our moon should have to offer, not to mention my other notions of creating the LSE-CM/ISS and of otherwise relocating the orbit of our moon as to actively station- keeping it within Earth L1. At least Stanley Kubrick would be so proud, not to mention most every global domination villain on Earth, including those of our Paperclip Nazis that supposedly got us safely to/from our moon without a scratch. Figuring conservatively that fewer than 10% access my topics and replies via Google Groups or Groups+, makes my global Usenet/newsgroup audience worth at least 32,210 per week. Google Groups: Your 7-day activity 14 discussions replies 29 direct replies to your messages 3221views of your messages 14 views of your profile Not sure if this reported activity is necessarily a good or bad thing, but none the less it seems to reflect that others are finding some of what I have to offer as either worth their while or at least entertaining. Perhaps there’s not too many teachers or instructors that would have nearly the same audience to brag about, and especially those of my devoted FUD-masters as having an audience of roughly zero once excluding others of their own redneck FUD-master kind that must always brown-nose their oligarch peers, or else risk losing their funding. chuckle.... have you EVER considered..... that the reason you never get any serious responses.. is the absurdity of your thoughts.... Not really, but I do understand that ruse-masters and FUD-masters like yourself are a dime a dozen. Are you suggesting that exploiting our moon or even its L1 as our oasis/gateway and for accommodating the LSE-CM/ISS plus many other considerations, are not worth considering? Are you suggesting that saving Earth as a whole, its environment plus countless lives and perhaps more than a trillion dollars per year, as well as otherwise employing millions of us, is not such a good idea? How exactly are you calculating that I "never get any serious responses"? Google Groups: Your 7-day activity 14 discussions replies 32 direct replies to your messages 3240 views of your messages 15 views of your profile What sort of 7-day activity report does Google Groups report about your Usenet/newsgroup account? Dude all those replies are from YOU LOL You don't even understand how Google Groups works. That's rather pathetic, because most Usenet/newsgroup readers are not even using Google Groups version of accessing our topics, so chances are that tenfold as many have actually viewed my stuff. Your 7-day activity 1 discussion started 185 discussions replies 66 direct replies to your messages 6088 views of your messages 6 views of your profile LOL..you funny goofy pathetic...but funny idiotic ....but funny single digit IQ....but funny need I go on? |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On 5/26/2013 9:47 AM, David Staup wrote:
You don't even understand how Google Groups works. That's rather pathetic, because most Usenet/newsgroup readers are not even using Google Groups version of accessing our topics, so chances are that tenfold as many have actually viewed my stuff. Your 7-day activity 1 discussion started 185 discussions replies 66 direct replies to your messages 6088 views of your messages 6 views of your profile LOL..you funny goofy pathetic...but funny idiotic ....but funny single digit IQ....but funny need I go on? Please do. I love when people make fun of Brad Goth. -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On May 26, 6:47*am, David Staup wrote:
On 5/22/2013 10:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On May 22, 5:51 pm, David Staup wrote: On 4/21/2013 7:36 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On Apr 21, 4:04 pm, David Staup wrote: On 4/21/2013 5:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Terraforming the moon underground: (mining plus creating safe habitats inside of that extremely tough crust) is not nearly as insurmountable as you might think. Besides the mainstream naysay gauntlet against folks ever exploiting the extremely nearby planet Venus for all it s worth, it's as though there is also something oddly mainstream taboo/forbidden or nondisclosure associated with any notions of independently exploiting the likely soft innards of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
The crust of Venus is probably a third as thick as that of Earth, and
there's no viable TBM technology that can withstand the internal environments of going deep within Earth or much less that of Venus. However, our extremely robust moon is altogether another issue that's entirely TBM worthy, at least down to as deep as 1000 km should not be insurmountable, and otherwise down to 150 km should be entirely human habitat worthy. On May 26, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote: We have been living on a very thin crusted planet that is essentially unstable and clearly unsurvivable at roughly an average of 15 km below our feet, with deep 8+ Seismic events taking place all the time. Whereas the innards of our relatively cool moon should be quite survivable down at last 150 km if not technically robotic TBM accessible down 1000 km (nearly right up against its semi-liquid 1175 km diameter of lower mantel) Terraforming the innards of our moon is also about creating unlimited off-world habitats that are safer than here on Earth, not to mention having unlimited clean energy and likewise a darn good export of energy related products, not to mention a whole lot better yet once our moon is relocated as to being actively station-kept within the halo of Earth L1. Of course all the usual gauntlet of rusemasters and FUD-masters are going to continually pitch a fit over any of this, but then so would GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Hitler and their oligarch peers. Establishing a surface base of TBM logistics on the moon should be a relatively simple task, by selecting a small diameter but otherwise sufficiently deep crater would enable the best initial outcome with offering as much natural surrounding protection from the shade and physical shield derived by keeping the base camp site well below the crater rim. A pinpoint landing within a small crater shouldn’t be any problem for the new and improved fly-by-rocket landers capable of deploying 10+ lunar tonnes of TBM related payload per mission (that’s 60 terrestrial tonnes). Perhaps the item which impacted Earth and created our Arctic ocean basin along with having given us our seasonal tilt and 2/3s of our tidal considerations, is currently orbiting Earth. *In case you haven't noticed, that moon/planetoid Selene happens to have a nicely matching 2500 km diameter crater in its amply robust crust, to have nailed our planet and kept itself mostly intact (minus its thick layer of ice and having obtained that extremely large diameter crater). Sirius(b) likely started off as an impressive 9 Ms star, so I think we'll need to redo our math if attempting to discover its age as based upon consuming itself 81 times faster than our sun, which puts its red giant phase starting 123.5 million years ago, and it may have fluctuated with multiple helium flashovers before its most recent white dwarf phase kicked in for the final time. As best I can tell, our solar system has been captured by the much greater original mass of Sirius(a+b+c), which started off as perhaps worth a combined 12.5 MS as of not more than 256 million years ago (or perhaps even as of roughly the timeline of when our ice-age cycles started 128 million years ago). * Try keeping in mind that the star making nebula/molecular cloud which produced those Sirius stars was likely worth 2.5e37 kg, and for a good hundred thousand some odd years was situated nearby enough to have included our solar system. *If that ever happened again, we’d be cooked by having been surrounded by so much ionized gas, and especially if all of that ionized molecular/ nebula gas was producing nearby stars like those of Sirius. Having a terraformed moon as our failsafe lifeboat could prove very handy should another nearby cosmic event take place. On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: In case some of you didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon underground" means digging into it, and TBM means tunnel boring machine. On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct, because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally bat**** crazy peers. Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to follow suit. Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer, because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth. Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy), just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is desirable. On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote: It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than 10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon. Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
There are still no early (10,000+ BC) human created depictions of our
moon to any reasonable scale or magnitude of other much less important items as having been rather nicely detailed in their carvings and paintings, which leads me to perceive or deductively interpret that early humans of our last ice age (prior to 11,712 years ago) simply weren’t alive or perhaps didn't have that big old moon to depict, and otherwise their extra cold and icy Earth seemed to have very little if any significant seasonal tilt to offer, because there's also no indications pertaining to seasons or animal migrations due to seasonal changes. In other words the path of their sun was essentially always in the exact same location year round, and apparently there as no humanly perceived difference in summer daytime as opposed to their winter daytime, even though those caves were situated not all that far down(south) from the glacial ice-age terrain. You’d have to think that basic survival instincts would most likely have taken notice of seasons and especially of any enormous and vibrant moon by which to hunt and gather by, not to mention easily finding their way back home at night, and/or having extended their range and scope of hunting and gathering by moonlight. Apparently, most K-12s and higher educated have been thoroughly indoctrinated to only accept that early humans were not only badly nearsighted and perhaps even cross-eyed, because the only way they could manage to ever depict our big old and extremely vibrant moon (easily enough visible by day and otherwise extremely vibrant by night) was to make little dots or scratch marks to represent it, even though tenfold smaller resolution details of plants and animals was of no problem whatsoever to depict. Even with my sorry old eyes, I can see those phases of Venus, so imagine with having a perfectly crystal dry and clear (pollution free) atmosphere of their cool ice-age era, as to how much clearer and distinctive their naked eye-view of Venus should have been, as perhaps represented by those itsy bitsy markings that some of us interpret as representing our moon. Good grief, if you can see the details of your thumbnail at arms length, you sure as hell can manage to artistically carve or paint those contrasty surface patterns of our moon with at least similar resolution to that of your thumb, that is unless your genetics has you badly nearsighted and/or cross-eyed or perhaps because of having chopped your thumbs off, and otherwise this moon observation gets especially weird whenever that moon is either orbiting nearby (362,570 km) or getting viewed anywhere near the horizon that usually magnifies our perceived view of that moon, along with terrestrial items coming into play is what gives our naked eye view the added magnification illusion, even though it’s probably only at times getting slightly distorted and otherwise discolored by the thicker amount atmospherics we have to look through. At any rate, if you can see your badly smashed or bitten thumbnail details at arms-length, and have managed to transfer any of its observed condition over to a cave wall carving/depiction or painting (many of such items of cave art examples having depicted much smaller details than necessary for that of our moon), then whatever was their insurmountable visualization problem with not being able to reasonably depict our big old vibrant moon and even at times its oddly colorful (reddish/orange) moon (not to mention its bold and impressive crescent phases) shouldn’t be those of only little specks or notches, because the eye of a beast has been frequently depicted, and that’s a lot smaller item of more detail than any naked eye view of our moon that should have been worth at least as good as 16 km out of a diameter 3476 km, which is hardly asking too much, especially when tenfold worse or 160 km details would have still given us a very good moon depiction resolution that would have positively nailed it. When old cave art of 10,000+ BC is uncovered that depicts our very big old dynamically contrasty moon, and its extremely obvious phases of illumination, is when I’ll have to accept that they always had such a terrific moon and were just too stupid to ever have utilized its enormous survival benefits to those of such a nasty ice-age era. On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: In case some of you folks didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon underground" means digging into it, and "TBM" means tunnel boring machine. On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct, because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally bat**** crazy peers. Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to follow suit. Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer, because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth. Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy), just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is desirable. On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote: It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than 10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon. Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition. A new interpretation is that all-inclusively the geothermal outflux of Earth (including geothermal vents and volcanic contributions) is getting rid of roughly 128 mw/m2, whereas our moon is supposedly only getting rid of as little as 16 mw/m2 (an 8th as much). *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient *“Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior.” The "Igneous Petrology" of our moon and Venus should each be unique and considerably different than Earth. “The composition of igneous rocks and minerals can be determined via a variety of methods of varying ease, cost, and complexity. The simplest method is observation of hand samples with the naked eye and/or with a hand lens. This can be used to gauge the general mineralogical composition of the rock, which gives an insight into the composition.” Unfortunately, the rocks returned from our moon were entirely similar to those of terrestrial rocks. *Of course there’s all sorts of actual paramagnetic basalt moon rock to be found on Earth, because there should be at least a thousand teratonnes of it, whereas naturally most of which ended up in oceans and otherwise as having meteor and obvious melt indications that are entirely quite different than local volcanic spewed basalts. “A more precise but still relatively inexpensive way to identify minerals (and thereby the bulk chemical composition of the rock) with a petrographic microscope. These microscopes have polarizing plates, filters, and a conoscopic lens that allow the user to measure a large number of crystallographic properties.” Contributor “Wretch Fossil” actually has a very good “petrographic microscope” and multiple resources plus talent of interpreting such to go along with it. *Sadly this technology and its expertise of interpreting is being ignored by those of authority that do not want outsiders having a public say about anything. *So, once again, it really doesn’t matter whatever level of modern applied technology and expertise we have to offer, because it’s only going to be topic/author stalked and systematically trashed by those of Usenet/newsgroup authority that have multiple mainstream issues at risk. TBMs cutting their tunnels into the interior of our moon should prove both interesting and rewarding in terms of extracting rare and valuable elements, not to mention creating the very cozy and safe habitat potential that’s opened up for multiple uses. *Unfortunately this method can not be applied on such a geodynamically active planet like Venus that has such a thin crust and way more primordial core energy outflux of perhaps 20.5 w/m2 as contributing way more geothermal energy than any other planet or moon has to offer, although older and cooler planets or any number of their moons (except for Io that’s averaging 2 w/m2) should be somewhat similar to terraforming the cozy interior of our moon. *http://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-system-s...etary_interior... *http://commercialspace.pbworks.com/f/Public+ILN.pdf *The likely two thirds (6.6e17~6.6e18 tonnes) worth of lose surface basalt rock and dust including whatever 4+ billion years worth of accumulated deposits, as remaining crystal dry on the naked surface of our physically dark moon (not including the other good third portion as having been dislodged and deposited on Earth) is a direct result of the thousands of significant impacts, and especially as a result of whatever created its South polar crater of 2500 km diameter, that which all by itself should have contributed a minimum of 3e17 m3 or possibly a maximum contribution of 1e18 m3 if including the planet sized impactor contributions. *Given the limited surface area of the moon as being 3.8e13 m2 doesn’t exactly allow all that much surface area for accommodating such volume of lose crater made fallout, and perhaps due to much of its own basalt metallicity making its density worth on average 3.5 tonnes/m3 unless offset by loads of accumulated carbon buckyballs. *In that kind of hard vacuum, there really shouldn’t be all that much porosity to any of its solidified basalt or carbonado. Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts that should have extensively solidified and possibly fused upon contact with the relatively cool basalt surface, as such should have been quite obvious and highly distinctive if such exposed lunar bedrock samples had been return to Earth. *Sadly, no such samples or even unique meteorites ever materialized from our NASA/Apollo era, that found our naked moon as instead so unusually reflective and UV, X- ray and gamma inert as well as hardly the least bit dusty, and what little crystal dry dust there was seemed to offer terrific surface tension and clumping for their footing and traction like no place else. Even taking the utmost conservative swag-estimate of 3.8e16 m3 worth of lose rock, debris and accumulated dust, is still suggesting an average surface depth of one km, which of course our Apollo era found no such indications, as though that moon is relatively new to us. *Of course, if that moon had created our Arctic ocean basin as of 11,712 years ago, would actually explain quite a bit. How’s that for a worthy topic of terraforming the innards of our naked moon that’s practically dust free and mostly solid as any rock according to our Apollo wizards? |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
The mainstream of physics and science wants to exclude, banish and/or
obfuscate as to allowing any possibility of captured moons, planetoids or planets. Apparently those laws of physics are conditional, and all science has to be mainstream moderated before any of it becomes viable, and the same status-quo gauntlet applies for any exploitation of our moon or Venus. On May 28, 10:11*am, Brad Guth wrote: There are still no early (10,000+ BC) human created depictions of our moon to any reasonable scale or magnitude of other much less important items as having been rather nicely detailed in their carvings and paintings, which leads me to perceive or deductively interpret that early humans of our last ice age (prior to 11,712 years ago) simply weren’t alive or perhaps didn't have that big old moon to depict, and otherwise their extra cold and icy Earth seemed to have very little if any significant seasonal tilt to offer, because there's also no indications pertaining to seasons or animal migrations due to seasonal changes. *In other words the path of their sun was essentially always in the exact same location year round, and apparently there as no humanly perceived difference in summer daytime as opposed to their winter daytime, even though those caves were situated not all that far down(south) from the glacial ice-age terrain. You’d have to think that basic survival instincts would most likely have taken notice of seasons and especially of any enormous and vibrant moon by which to hunt and gather by, not to mention easily finding their way back home at night, and/or having extended their range and scope of hunting and gathering by moonlight. Apparently, most K-12s and higher educated have been thoroughly indoctrinated to only accept that early humans were not only badly nearsighted and perhaps even cross-eyed, because the only way they could manage to ever depict our big old and extremely vibrant moon (easily enough visible by day and otherwise extremely vibrant by night) was to make little dots or scratch marks to represent it, even though tenfold smaller resolution details of plants and animals was of no problem whatsoever to depict. Even with my sorry old eyes, I can see those phases of Venus, so imagine with having a perfectly crystal dry and clear (pollution free) atmosphere of their cool ice-age era, as to how much clearer and distinctive their naked eye-view of Venus should have been, as perhaps represented by those itsy bitsy markings that some of us interpret as representing our moon. Good grief, if you can see the details of your thumbnail at arms length, you sure as hell can manage to artistically carve or paint those contrasty surface patterns of our moon with at least similar resolution to that of your thumb, that is unless your genetics has you badly nearsighted and/or cross-eyed or perhaps because of having chopped your thumbs off, and otherwise this moon observation gets especially weird whenever that moon is either orbiting nearby (362,570 *km) or getting viewed anywhere near the horizon that usually magnifies our perceived view of that moon, along with terrestrial items coming into play is what gives our naked eye view the added magnification illusion, even though it’s probably only at times getting slightly distorted and otherwise discolored by the thicker amount atmospherics we have to look through. At any rate, if you can see your badly smashed or bitten thumbnail details at arms-length, and have managed to transfer any of its observed condition over to a cave wall carving/depiction or painting (many of such items of cave art examples having depicted much smaller details than necessary for that of our moon), then whatever was their insurmountable visualization problem with not being able to reasonably depict our big old vibrant moon and even at times its oddly colorful (reddish/orange) moon (not to mention its bold and impressive crescent phases) shouldn’t be those of only little specks or notches, because the eye of a beast has been frequently depicted, and that’s a lot smaller item of more detail than any naked eye view of our moon that should have been worth *at least as good as 16 km out of a diameter 3476 km, which is hardly asking too much, especially when tenfold worse or 160 km details would have still given us a very good moon depiction resolution that would have positively nailed it. When old cave art of 10,000+ BC is uncovered that depicts our very big old dynamically contrasty moon, and its extremely obvious phases of illumination, is when I’ll have to accept that they always had such a terrific moon and were just too stupid to ever have utilized its enormous survival benefits to those of such a nasty ice-age era. On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: In case some of you folks didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon underground" means digging into it, and "TBM" means tunnel boring machine. On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct, because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally bat**** crazy peers. Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to follow suit. Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer, because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth. Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy), just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is desirable. On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote: It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than 10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon. Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On 5/29/2013 1:14 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
The mainstream of physics and science wants to exclude, banish and/or obfuscate as to allowing any possibility of captured moons OK Goth. Let's just give you that one. Let's just all pretend you are correct. Now what? -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Terraforming the moon underground:
On May 26, 6:43*am, David Staup wrote:
On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On May 16, 7:10 pm, David Staup wrote: On 3/21/2013 4:47 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Just because redneck GOP FUD-masters like yourself that can not manage to terraform anything for the better (not even Earth), doesn't mean that I can't terraform the innards of our moon, or even exploit Venus.. go for it goofy...you claim you can do it.....show us! talk is cheap......show us Thanks for all the help. (as in less than zero) Did you always treat your mother in this same way? you little wimp...that's the best you can do? I can do so much better, except you're not worth the effort, at least not any more so than going after GW Bush, Dick Cheney or Hitler. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Terraforming the moon, before doing Mars or Venus | Brad Guth | Space Station | 39 | February 11th 07 11:11 PM |
Terraforming the Moon | Jim Davis | Policy | 1 | March 16th 05 03:47 PM |
Terraforming the moon, before doing Mars or Venus | Brad Guth | History | 1 | January 13th 05 05:31 PM |
Terraforming the Moon | Orbitan | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 26th 04 04:10 PM |
Terraforming the moon before doing Mars or Venus | BradGuth | Policy | 2 | November 8th 04 08:28 PM |