Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

news.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 284 posts

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#31

Post by omellet »

bhnmmhmd wrote: post #30
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Although the Moon is much closer and "right there" for us, it's subject to numerous meteoric incidents, some of which are disastrous enough to wipe out any settlement we set up there. Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun. This fact alone reduces available surface for settlements to only half of the Moon. While the Moon could be a temporary backup plan, in the long-term, you're going to need to te…

It's tidally locked, so you couldn't you put the settlement on the Earth-facing side and not have to worry as much about meteors?

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#32

Post by jgh »

bhnmmhmd wrote: post #30
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Although the Moon is much closer and "right there" for us, it's subject to numerous meteoric incidents, some of which are disastrous enough to wipe out any settlement we set up there. Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun. This fact alone reduces available surface for settlements to only half of the Moon. While the Moon could be a temporary backup plan, in the long-term, you're going to need to te…

> Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun.

I'm no astronomer but the moon is tidally locked to the earth and not the sun, which means that the moon should have sunrises/sunsets...

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#33

Post by Zancarius »

bhnmmhmd wrote: post #30
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Although the Moon is much closer and "right there" for us, it's subject to numerous meteoric incidents, some of which are disastrous enough to wipe out any settlement we set up there. Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun. This fact alone reduces available surface for settlements to only half of the Moon. While the Moon could be a temporary backup plan, in the long-term, you're going to need to te…

> Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun.

What do you mean by this? The moon is tidally locked to the Earth, but the entire surface sees sunlight over the course of ~a month with the exception of a handful of polar craters where small portions are perpetually in shadow.

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#34

Post by athenot »

QAPereo wrote: post #16
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Inasmuch as Mars with our current technology offers no back up for civilization, the same can certainly be said for the moon. I would argue over that the moon actually has some benefits Mars lacks, in addition to proximity it has a much lesser gravitational field and therefore a much lower delta V. Moon colony could realistically jumpstart space and vacuum industries beyond LEO, and frankly it would probably give us…

When the topic of Backup for Civilization comes up, instead of Wall-E, I tend to think of Elysium, i.e. the backup option is only for the wealthy, leaving the rest in a worse state.

https://www.space.com/22287-elysium-space-station-science-na...

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#35

Post by michaelwu »

bhnmmhmd wrote: post #30
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Although the Moon is much closer and "right there" for us, it's subject to numerous meteoric incidents, some of which are disastrous enough to wipe out any settlement we set up there. Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun. This fact alone reduces available surface for settlements to only half of the Moon. While the Moon could be a temporary backup plan, in the long-term, you're going to need to te…

> Moreover, only half of the Moon sees the light of the Sun

That's not true. There is a side of the Moon that's always facing away from us on Earth but each side of the Moon actually gets about 2 weeks of sunlight followed by 2 weeks of darkness.

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#36

Post by andars »

munificent wrote: post #25
tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

People way underestimate how far away Mars is. To give you a sense of scale, the settlers of Jamestown came from London. As the crow flies, that's about 3,790 miles. If we treat that as equivalent to settling on Mars, then for them to settle on "the moon" would have been a mere 26 miles from London. Perhaps Canvey Island on the River Thames. If we can't manage settlements that close, we really aren't ready yet for th…

In terms of distance, sure.

In terms of delta-v, the budget for the moon is upwards of 50% that for Mars.

EDIT: The 50% figure is from memory, and upon further reflection is probably not quite right, so take it with a grain of salt. I just wanted to point out that distance is not the only relevant metric.

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#37

Post by needcheapbw »

tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

Agree with all of that, been saying it for years. Even people who aren't into the whole space exploration thing do agree that the Moon would be much better for the foreseeable future.

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#39

Post by zamalek »

andars wrote: post #36
munificent wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People way underestimate how far away Mars is. To give you a sense of scale, the settlers of Jamestown came from London. As the crow flies, that's about 3,790 miles. If we treat that as equivalent to settling on Mars, then for them to settle on "the moon" would have been a mere 26 miles from London. Perhaps Canvey Island on the River Thames. If we can't manage settlements that close, we really aren't ready yet for th…

In terms of distance, sure. In terms of delta-v, the budget for the moon is upwards of 50% that for Mars. EDIT: The 50% figure is from memory, and upon further reflection is probably not quite right, so take it with a grain of salt. I just wanted to point out that distance is not the only relevant metric.

It makes much more sense to use the moon as a stepping rock. At least my KSP experience has taught me that :)

Re: Water Found Deep Inside the Moon

#40

Post by gens »

tambourine_man wrote: post #7

I've always been more excited about a Moon colony than a Mars one. I mean, compared to Mars, the Moon is ridiculously close. Many of the same benefits Musk seeks (backup for Civilization, excitement) for a fraction of the cost. Low gravity and atmosphere on a dome would be more complicated, but again, compared to Mars, it's right there . It would be a more humble and realistic first step, IMO.

The biggest problem is getting into orbit.

https://api.media.ccc.de/v/31c3_-_6180_-_en_-_saal_2_-_20141... Around 19'th minute.

Then again, Mars is far so it would take some time to get there. Then again again, most of the ships wouldn't have to have people aboard. Edit: It helps that Mars has an atmosphere of sorts.

Post reply on HN