Off-World Metallicity and The Next Great Super-Duper Thing / Brad Guth

This one is falling too far below the topic index stack, but you K-12s
and other folks can help keep it alive by contributing a little
something.

On May 28, 5:34*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
There’s lots of cosmic produced iron going every which way, plus more
of just about everything else making new stars, planets, planetoids,
moons and otherwise there’s always exploding stars plus numerous rocky
collisions creating those pesky asteroids by the trillions per year,
not to mention the ongoing creation of helium which doesn’t naturally
bind with anything.

An initial star like our sun likely started off at 2.2e30 kg, quickly
getting rid of 2e29 kg worth of elements heavier than hydrogen and
helium within the first months or possibly even within the first few
days, whereas some (less than 10%) of that tossed or centrifugal
ejected mass became planets, moons, planetoids and assorted asteroids,
with a great extent of everything else sent packing as ISM blown far
away by those initial solar winds of 3000 km/sec.

If the IGM offers ionized hydrogen, then it also has to offer ionized
helium and pretty much a little of everything else to speak of, along
with more of the same arriving as stars merge or collide and others of
substantial initial mass (20+ SM) that simply self-terminate by
exploding.

5e11 galaxies, each producing 2 stars worth of SN per century

13e7 centuries X 2 = 2.6e8 X 5e11 = 1.3e20 SM

1.3e20 X 2e30 = 2.6e50 kg (many would likely round that up to 3e50 kg)
of ISM + IGM contributed to whatever was already available. *BTW; most
SNs are those stars of much greater mass (10+ MS), so that’s at least
another tenfold or even averaging as a twentyfold multiplier of what’s
getting dumped back into the ISM and IGM, making those SN
contributions worth at the very least 3e51 kg and possibly as great as
1e52 kg by now.

Supposedly it takes a minimum of 1e3 SM worth of molecular/nebula
cloud mass in order to produce a given star, though many of
astrophysics expertise would also consider 1e6:1 as necessary for
creating those stars of greater mass than our sun, and of course the
vast majority of stars are those smaller and more red dwarf
classified. *So, probably the average ratio of IGM and ISM per star is
somewhat closer to 1e4:1 (though possibly worth 1e5:1 of Jeans Mass),
and most of that original IGM+ISM by rights should still be out there
as ionized particles along with a great deal of rogue/nomad helium
because, that’s an element being continually created on the fly.

Matter initially ejected from stars, as added to the existing
inventory of ISM and IGM gas, combined with ongoing stellar ejected
material, and that's seriously a lot of stellar mass released as ISM
and IGM in addition to the already substantial ISM and IGM of
molecular/nebula gas (mostly hydrogen and helium) that simply had to
already exist to a very large extent. *So, as far as I can tell, if
anything our universe has too much ordinary mass to contend with,
which eventually is going to represent a very bad thing as galaxies
upon galaxies merge back into the likes of the relatively nearby Great
Attractor, whereas thousands of galaxies will merge and likely form
into yet another hoard of quasars, like the Huge-LQG of 6.1e18 SM.

A little extra deep thought, is that without helium our planet would
be relatively dead in the water, so to speak, and for the most part it
seems that our indoctrinated K-12s don’t even have a clue about the
values of helium. *Without that very special element of helium, most
of modern science, physics and medical advancements couldn’t have
happened, and if Earth suddenly ran itself out of helium or having
made its limited availability way too spendy, we’d be in a world of
hurt as well as our planet being of less mass and a world measurably
colder without a sufficiently active geothermal core of uranium and
thorium necessary for creating helium.

In a few other brief words, an exoplanet w/o helium is likely a very
dead planet, or at best poorly advanced compared to civilized planets
w/helium. *Lucky for us, our physically dark and naked moon is a
helium treasure trove, and whatever else our moon doesn’t have, the
extremely nearby planet Venus should more than make up for.

The OCO mission would have been a great help, but then it would have
also pointed out the artificial ventings and their enormous thermal
waste taking place, as well as mapping the various industrial
pollution along with their unavoidable thermal contributions, and
obviously Big Energy wanted none of that coming back to bite them.
Once again, our K-12s simply don’t have a clue, and by the time
they’re in charge, it’ll once again be too late because, the dastardly
deeds have already been established into the mainstream matrix that
they’re now very much part of and deeply indebted to.

On Apr 11, 9:43*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Feb 10, 3:36*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Dec 13 2012, 7:43*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Going off-world is at most as close as our moon, although Venus at
only 110 LD(lunar distance) isn't hardly all that much further.

*Thumbnail images of Venus, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/
pixel)
*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html
*Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html
*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
*“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...18595926178146
*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...79402364691314

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
*“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow...

Terraforming the moon underground:
It's probably close to averaging -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. *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
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 5e15~1e16 tonnes worth of lose surface rock and dust (plus
accumulated deposits) remaining on the naked surface of our moon (not
including another good 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 its South polar crater of 2500 km
diameter.

Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts
that should have extensively solidified and 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 terrific footing and traction like no place else.

Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains (cloaked as
always politically and faith-based 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 ruse-masters and FUD-masters, as professional
media damage-control clowns working and/or manipulating the locals
into a mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many
have bought into instead of taking any logically deductive formulated
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.