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?

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    In space there is only radiative method available

    But on the moon you’d also have conductive, and be able to connect directly to a massive heat sink

    • TheStaffmaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.