Lunar Research Lab

Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use. Some of the recent research results in
bio-warfare ought to be performed in a 'safer' environment, IMO.

--
Bob

So we go an polute the moon instead then? One of the most wonderful things
in the night sky ?
How about just doing no research into bio-warfare ?

"Arduin" wrote in message
om...
Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use. Some of the recent research results in
bio-warfare ought to be performed in a 'safer' environment, IMO.

--
Bob

(Arduin) wrote in message . com...
Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use. Some of the recent research results in
bio-warfare ought to be performed in a 'safer' environment, IMO.

Interesting and practical idea, but with the state of our current
launch capabilities and seriously limited funding of space projects
beyond LEO, you will face a massive hurdle. I have been proposing in a
similar way that the ISS could be dis-assembled in its current orbit
(given its uncertain future), and each part be fired to a fixed
location on the Moon's near side, ready for re-assembly into a Moon
base in the near future. (Check out my post on sci.space.station "Moon
base or ISS, I say take your pick").

In article ,
Arduin wrote:
Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use.

Current telerobotics technology is nowhere near being able to conduct
routine lab operations efficiently, especially with a significant time lag
in the communications links. (People have a greatly exaggerated idea of
the state of the art in, e.g., robotic hands. The hardware that's
actually available off the shelf is crude and very limited.) And orthodox
lab operations tend to use very large amounts of water in particular.

A lunar lab for hazardous research has been suggested, and it makes a
certain amount of sense. But it's going to have to be manned, and it
would be an offshoot of a substantial lunar base, not something we could
reasonably set out to build all by itself.
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

I wrote:
...(People have a greatly exaggerated idea of
the state of the art in, e.g., robotic hands. The hardware that's
actually available off the shelf is crude and very limited.)

I should have added that things *are* getting better. There are some
rather nicer devices working in labs and even as commercial prototypes.
But we are still a long way from being able to run unmanned labs.

(If robotic manipulators were as good as people think, they would be used
in "hot" labs on *Earth*. The protective gear used in those labs is
inconvenient and can be physically uncomfortable, and being just a glove
away from something nasty is hazardous. Even being able to do just the
more routine jobs by remote control instead would be useful. Last I
heard, those labs are still all manual.)
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

DM opined

So we go an polute the moon instead then? One of the most wonderful things
in the night sky ?
How about just doing no research into bio-warfare ?

"Arduin" wrote in message
. com...
Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use. Some of the recent research results in
bio-warfare ought to be performed in a 'safer' environment, IMO.

--
Bob

We mightr turn the moon into a lifeless wasteland.



-ash
for assistance dial MYCROFTXXX

Arduin wrote:

Given the types of extremely hazardous research now being performing
into biological, and potentially nanotech technology. Would it not
make sense to lobby the international community to build a
semi-automated, tele-robotics-operated laboratory on the surface of
the moon? Possibly a man-tended site, but one that is primarily
intended for autonomous use. Some of the recent research results in
bio-warfare ought to be performed in a 'safer' environment, IMO.

--
Bob


If you can get there cheaply enough, yes. Will this 'lobby' front the
R&D money for an economical Lunar transportation infrastructure?

Otherwise, it's easier (technically, not politically) to take the
'Andromeda Strain' approach of an underground lab on Earth, with a
nuclear self-destruct, if all else fails....

Besides, will all those who want to do research in the above level of
hazard want to share research facilities with others (who will be very
intelligent and observant, even if it's not their field) who are doing
them? Do you even want others to know you are even *doing* certain kinds
of research, like bio-weapons?


--

You know what to remove, to reply....

DM wrote:

So we go an polute the moon instead then? One of the most wonderful things
in the night sky ?
How about just doing no research into bio-warfare ?

Hmm. The Moon. A lifeless, airless, exposed to solar/cosmic
radiation, suffering signifigant temprature extremes, low gravity,
massively cratered, giant rock.

And still potentially very useful in spite of that (indeed *because*
of some of that), but come on. Pollute it? (Some people say; "Strip
mining makes a place look like the surface of the Moon." I say; "You're
right. Why don't we *use* the surface of the Moon instead?") The
multi-use, high risk lab is a questionable idea, but that's hardly the
reason.

Remember, the Moon only looks pretty from *here,* not up close. (Save
for Buzz Aldrin's sense of 'Magnificent Desolation,' which *will*
attract people, one day.)


--

You know what to remove, to reply....