Apollo 11 Dismembered • Hacker News Board

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#21

Post by gaius » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 3:16 PM UTC

hvs wrote: post #12

ErrantX wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that they worry foreign companies will muscle into the picture. Imagine if China landed the first Moon Base in 2020 and was wellestablished there before the US even landed another astronaut. Highly unlikely BUT the fear is there - and with that fear comes the other one; strategic habitation of the Moon establishes something of a superiority over other countries. Summary: the US govt. will guard NASA as…

I don't disagree, and considering the amount of military hardware that NASA puts up, they will be keeping NASA for quite some time. What should be done and what is actually done are usually two completely different things when it comes to the U.S. gov't.

Does NASA even do that? I thought the USAF launched US military satellites?

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#22

Post by vermontdevil » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 3:26 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #16

ErrantX wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that they worry foreign companies will muscle into the picture. Imagine if China landed the first Moon Base in 2020 and was wellestablished there before the US even landed another astronaut. Highly unlikely BUT the fear is there - and with that fear comes the other one; strategic habitation of the Moon establishes something of a superiority over other countries. Summary: the US govt. will guard NASA as…

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

Lots of cheese.

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#23

Post by ErrantX » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 3:36 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #16

ErrantX wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that they worry foreign companies will muscle into the picture. Imagine if China landed the first Moon Base in 2020 and was wellestablished there before the US even landed another astronaut. Highly unlikely BUT the fear is there - and with that fear comes the other one; strategic habitation of the Moon establishes something of a superiority over other countries. Summary: the US govt. will guard NASA as…

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

yes. A moon base established by any one country would be a massive massive coup. Your on the very frontier of space and if you get a foot hold chances you will be at that fore-front for decades.

From the economic perspective there is a massively lucrative tourist market to sell.

And above all of that you have proof of the countries dominance over the earth. Some of their residents are literally untouchable :)

EDIT: if China makes it to the Moon that would establish them and the next biggest super power. Chances are it will be them anyway but still...

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#24

Post by catfish » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 3:44 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #16

ErrantX wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that they worry foreign companies will muscle into the picture. Imagine if China landed the first Moon Base in 2020 and was wellestablished there before the US even landed another astronaut. Highly unlikely BUT the fear is there - and with that fear comes the other one; strategic habitation of the Moon establishes something of a superiority over other countries. Summary: the US govt. will guard NASA as…

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

Helium-3

In a nutshell human beings have depleted helium reserves on planet earth to the point that within 20 years we run out. Now you say, big deal, no more party balloons. But little do you realize that the manufacturing processes for just about everything super technical requires helium. It's a big enough deal that both Russia and China are developing standalone robotic systems to harvest helium-3 from moon rocks where its found in great abundance due to the suns constant bombardment of the surface rocks which creates the substance. Helium-3 is also a core ingredient in fusion reactor processes and as such is required in great quantities to sustain the fusion reactor operations.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.08/helium.html

So there is a strategic value which while not important at this moment, will likely be a driving force in space economics in 20 years...

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#25

Post by philwelch » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 4:03 PM UTC

LogicHoleFlaw wrote: post #18

philwelch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

There's always the "drop giant rocks on your enemies" approach, if you like the blunt end of things. On the other hand, once you're out of Earth's gravity well, you're halfway to anywhere.

It's far more cost-effective to bomb people from the Earth, or from low-earth orbit, than going to the fucking moon.

As for gravity wells, why not just build a space station outside of the Moon's gravity well?

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#26

Post by tybris » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 4:05 PM UTC

We should be actively colonizing space to increase our survival chances. However, behind every technical reality, there is a far more important economic reality. First, the need for a back-up planet isn't that high yet. Second, NASA isn't self-supporting. It can't amplify its achievements like business can. Putting men on the moon was the peak of what it could do without requiring an unrealistic change in the nature of people. The market needs to step in and develop a genuine space flight and colonization industry. This is a slow process, but has already started.

In general, if you think a large group of people are idiots, you should count yourself among them. People are competitive creatures and won't all step in the same direction because you want them to. They'll act in their own interest. They'll do business. That is how mankind achieves things.

Think distributed.

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#27

Post by philwelch » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 4:06 PM UTC

ErrantX wrote: post #23

philwelch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

yes. A moon base established by any one country would be a massive massive coup. Your on the very frontier of space and if you get a foot hold chances you will be at that fore-front for decades. From the economic perspective there is a massively lucrative tourist market to sell. And above all of that you have proof of the countries dominance over the earth. Some of their residents are literally untouchable :) EDIT: i…

All very vague. What is the actual strategic value in this? What would you be able to do that other spacefaring powers couldn't, and why would it matter in a strategic context?

"Some of their residents are literally untouchable"

It's trivially easy to stop shipments to the Moon. How long can a lunar biosphere last?

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#28

Post by philwelch » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 4:11 PM UTC

TheSOB88 wrote: post #19

philwelch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of any strategic value to the moon? I can't.

I can think of a few. There's supposedly fuel on the moon. He3, if I'm right. You'd be much more easily able to control space (orbital space), because you'd have fabrication plants on a place with about 1/6 of the gravity, making escaping that gravity much, much easier. It would bring you a lot closer to the goal of space colonization. Plus, lasers.

What advantage does the moon give to fabrication plants other than, say, building fabrication plants directly in high orbit as space stations?

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#29

Post by LogicHoleFlaw » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 4:20 PM UTC

AndrewO wrote: post #8

mixmax wrote: post #4

This is one of the best pieces I've read in a while. Definitely worth your time.

It was nice to get an alternative to the idiocracy theory that we're getting stupider because stupid people are having more kids. That sort of thinking is doomed to turn a grave social problem into a two sided us-vs-them culture war.

People still look at me funny when I say I'd like to have 3-5 kids...

Re: Apollo 11 Dismembered

#30

Post by pbz » Tue, Jul 21, 2009, 5:03 PM UTC

Good article, but I disagree with his future shock theory. I happen to have grown up in Eastern Europe. When communism fell you had a flood of new technology pouring in. The society, from a technological point of view, was leapfrogging tens of years in a matter of months or short years. He had computers, color TVs, calculators, more TV time than ever before, all the electronic appliances you can think of, and so on. People weren't future-shocked, quite the opposite. There was this general vibe about what new things the future may bring, a general feel of optimism, of embracing anything new, especially science and technology.

What was different? Education. The level of science education all the way to high school, and arguably beyond, was and still is much higher than in the US. In a way, the brains of most people were more ready to absorb all this new information. It's like having an athlete train in a closed room for years and all of a sudden letting him run freely. What we have in the states is not only muscle atrophy, but also brain atrophy. There are of course pockets of resistance, but the overall trend is negative. Sadly going back after years, I've noticed a similar mental laziness taking place even there. When the hunger for more is fulfilled, complacency settles in...