Is it really necessary to send humans to those places just to get the knock-on benefits? Couldn’t we do those things directly, without going there?
It seems to me that, today, those who have the money to spend on these endeavors would only do so if there were perceived short-term benefits to themselves. That means they plan to exploit the resources, or increase their own power somehow.
I know the good engineers that make this happen are doing it for the challenge and in the pursuit of knowledge, and I know that’s why we poors support it, but that doesn’t “pay the bills.” What is the motivation behind the money? Why are they really doing this?
-1. The moon has HUGE reserves of Helium 3. Earth has almost none and is quickly running out. This is due to the fact that much of those reserves come from the solar wind and Earth’s magnetic field deflects that. https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Space_for_Earth/Energy/Helium-3_mining_on_the_lunar_surface
-2. It’s fairly easy to launch rockets from the lunar surface, and comparatively easy to launch things to the Moon vs. Directly from Earth to Deep space. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWhqNmJiufc
-3a. The moon blocks much of the radio chatter from Earth (on it’s far side) meaning radio telemetry and astronomy have a MUCH easier time doing research
-b. By using such methods in concert with Terrestrial installations/telescopes, it makes for a FINE “natural” interferometer for literal logarithmic fractions of the price over Conventional Lagrange point based systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_interferometer
-4. The moon is ideal for biological “life boating” (google the “Svalbard Seed Bank” to get what I’m talking about)
-5. Earth’s gravity can sometimes skew the results of VERY sensitive nuclear particle experiments. A particle collider on the moon might lead to exciting discoveries in quantum physics. Also such colliders require lots of liquid helium for cooling. (see point 1) The moon gets INCREDIBLY cold on it’s night side, which saves on energy costs to boot, and night on the moon lasts for 2 weeks.
-6. The Lunar crusts’ composition is almost identical to Earth’s which means it probably has huge reserves of lithium, gold, platinum, titanium, and palladium. The fact that it gets seeded by meteorites frequently also increases these odds.
(edit) Added some sources
uhh. dude, that’s a source?
the ESA link is in no way proof that there’s significant helium 3 reserves on the moon.
“The Apollo programme’s own geologist, Harrison Schmidt, has repeatedly made the argument for Helium-3 mining, whilst Gerald Kulcinski at the University of Wisconsin-Madison is another leading proponent.” ---- this in no way asserts that there’s actually significant amounts of helium 3 recoverable from moon mining, it’s simply stating it’s worth looking into, worth exploring.
we have no idea how much helium 3 has been deposited by solar wind onto the moon’s surface; it could be HUGE. it could be a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percentage. We won’t know until we go look.
Please, when you post links that are supposed to buttress your argument, post something that actually supports what you’re proposing. your premise:
in no way is supported by that link.
If the ESA (AKA Actual Scientists) thinks it’s worth our time, and you are still not convinced then I literally don’t know what to tell you. Lunar regolith is lose, and lunar crust is generally porous. The moon lacks a magnetosphere and so absorbs the solar wind rather than deflecting it. The Solar wind is mostly charges particles but it’s also filled with Hydrogen fusion byproducts which is mostly HELIUM.
Science is not 100% observable facts, but also a good chunk of it is learning to INFER THINGS FROM AVAILABLE DATA SETS.
what fuckin data sets? is there a link to actual data on that page?
you should have better standards. here are some articles that may support your premise beyond speculation:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70021905
https://fti.neep.wisc.edu/fti.neep.wisc.edu/pdf/wcsar9204-1.pdf
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2007/pdf/2175.pdf
here’s a good overview of the actual mining process proposed:
https://space-mining.com/a-closer-look-at-helium-3/
I hate, genuinely despise linking to reddit but here’s a fairly sane discussion on the proposed mining processes and how maybe actually mining isn’t the best extraction option -
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/pmbquj/we_cant_mine_for_he3_on_the_moon_but_we_can/
when people ask for evidence, don’t get tired and cranky like a little baby, put in some time actually searching. who knows, you might be right!
What’s up with particle physics? Is there a real possibility that we’ve just gone as far as we can go and are back where the greeks were, having philosophical debates about unfalsifiable theories?
hehe
yeah man we solved particle physics and now we wanna know what’s inside the quarks and electrons
we’re falsifying everything about dark matter so far and then we’re back to plucking the 11th dimension cosmic guitar
start with speculation and work your way up. we assume it does, but this has not been proven. please, if I’m wrong, let me know.
Added a source :)
I replied to your original post, that link is not supporting your premise at all.
To your point 5, one of the biggest problem in space is cooling heat producing systems. There are 3 ways of heat transfer:
In space there is only radiative method available which is very inefficient. The moon getting cold on the dark side is due to it lacking atmosphere to hold the heat. One of the reason convection method of heat transfer not available.
Particle collider uses liquid helium to keep superconducting magnets on. Also to cool the collider.
Cooling would absolutely not work on moon. Low gravity may give different results of particle experiment and might be helpful.
I was referring to that being a supplemental benefit. LiHe cooling would still be the main method, just that having that extra radiative “boost” would help do so with increased efficiency/speed. (even if it’s a small boost)
But on the moon you’d also have conductive, and be able to connect directly to a massive heat sink
This, but you can also build a traditional heat sink (panels) and let the fact that it’s very cold do the work for you. Yes, it would be radiative and that’s slow, but again, two weeks of night. You’d have the time for it to hit optimal temps.
Why not? You’ve got the entire moon as a heat sink.
The ground on moon doesn’t work as a heat sink just like on earth. It can however act as an insulator.
Are you saying we can’t use the ground as a heat sink on earth? You’re aware this is a perfectly routine technology in use in a lot of places?
also a heat source. It hits 250F. Belief in moon bases and mining is inversely proportional to STEM education. This is Elmo’s base of Stans.
We are supposed to carry about human endeavors in temperature extreme 2X earth where there is no possible human activity.
Much more practical to start mining the poles of the Earth.
The dark side of the moon hits 250F? Wtf you going on about?
The sunny side hits 250°F
Yes, but I’m responding to a comment that was discussing cooling on the dark side.
we’re already in space bro
Earth has 40 billion cubic metres, that we know of. We won’t run out if we don’t waste it on stupid shit like toy balloons.