Did we really land on the Moon?

Page 13 of 16 [ 248 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

08 Aug 2017, 10:21 pm

auntblabby wrote:

the problem with mars is that its irregular magnetic field offers no protection from the fierce solar winds that stripped its atmosphere away in the first place. no amount of terraforming can fix this. fix mars' magnetic field first.

Is that even possible?

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

08 Aug 2017, 10:29 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

Is that even possible?

a level 1 [Kardachev scale] civilization likely could swing it.

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

08 Aug 2017, 10:34 pm

In theory giant superconducting electromagnets can produce an artificial planetary magnetic field using amounts of power that humans can generate. Such a device would have to be pretty huge (like, a cubic kilometer) but it's no more far fetched then teraforming an inhospitable world like Mars.

By the way, Venus doesn't have much of a magnetic field either. It rotates incredibly slowly at a rate of once per 243 Earth days (which makes it a pretty poor transforming candidate even though the atmosphere could be made Earth-like) and that means that the same Coriolis effect forces responsible for Earth's magnetic field can't do their job.

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

08 Aug 2017, 10:37 pm

mikeman7918 wrote:

In theory giant superconducting electromagnets can produce an artificial planetary magnetic field using amounts of power that humans can generate. Such a device would have to be pretty huge (like, a cubic kilometer) but it's no more far fetched then teraforming an inhospitable world like Mars. By the way, Venus doesn't have much of a magnetic field either. It rotates incredibly slowly at a rate of once per 243 Earth days (which makes it a pretty poor transforming candidate even though the atmosphere could be made Earth-like) and that means that the same Coriolis effect forces responsible for Earth's magnetic field can't do their job.

in your estimation, assuming [presuming?] that we humans don't blow it all up somehow, how many years in the future will we have to wait until we achieve such tech abilities?

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

08 Aug 2017, 11:19 pm

auntblabby wrote:

in your estimation, assuming [presuming?] that we humans don't blow it all up somehow, how many years in the future will we have to wait until we achieve such tech abilities?

It's more of an economical barrier then a technological one, and the time scale depends on how motivated we are to do it. After putting humans on Mars for those important first steps (which if all goes well will be in ~13 years) I believe the most likely thing is that a permanent base will be created on the Moon to test and develop technologies that will help create the first Mars base (which is optimistically 50-100 years in the future). Then of course comes said permanent Mars colony, and considering the expense of sending things from Earth to Mars they will have to start manufacturing things there at some point. As more colonies appear and grow there will come a point where teraforming Mars is cheaper then building more pressurized habitats with life support and all, and that is when we will finally have a reason to get started. I'd say that is maybe 200-300 years from now.

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

08 Aug 2017, 11:31 pm

mikeman7918 wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

in your estimation, assuming [presuming?] that we humans don't blow it all up somehow, how many years in the future will we have to wait until we achieve such tech abilities?

2-300 years, like what gene Roddenberry thought [distance from the present day that his star trek was set in the future]. do you think by dint of achieving that, we'd graduate to being a level 1 civilization?

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

09 Aug 2017, 12:39 am

auntblabby wrote:

Well, it certainly would help. On Mars we would have to learn to power cities and transportation without fossil fuels because there are none there, and that is also something that we will need to learn before we can become a type 1 civilization.

Some people say that we need to get our crap together here on Earth before colonizing Mars, but when has Earth ever had it's crap together? I believe it would actually help the people living on Earth and it also acts as a contingency plan so that even something like a nuclear war would not be the end of humanity.

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

09 Aug 2017, 12:48 am

mikeman7918 wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

that all reminds me of "the martian chronicles." I sure wish somebody would make a good movie out of that, btw.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Aug 2017, 2:12 am

auntblabby wrote:

mikeman7918 wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

that all reminds me of "the martian chronicles." I sure wish somebody would make a good movie out of that, btw.

I remember The Martian Chronicles as a TV mini-series staring Rock Hudson, back when I was a kid. I don't know how it's aged, as I haven't seen it since, but at the time I thought it was pretty cool.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

09 Aug 2017, 2:16 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

mikeman7918 wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

that all reminds me of "the martian chronicles." I sure wish somebody would make a good movie out of that, btw.

I have that on DVD, it was well-meaning but also written/produced by committee, so it lacks focus, and in the words of ray Bradbury himself, it is "boring." it was like they took the book and medicated the drama out of it.

Pieplup
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2015
Age: 23
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 2,658
Location: Maine

09 Aug 2017, 8:38 am

EzraS wrote:

CzigBot wrote:

EzraS wrote:

The answer always seems to boil down to that it's just impossible these days. Not just for the US, but for anyone, 50 years later. When I turn 69 years old it will be a century ago.

I'm not into any of the conspiracy stuff and haven't spent time on conspiracy websites or youtube channels or anything like that. Just at face value it seems debatable after all this time.

What exactly seems impossible about it? The main thing that's improved since then are computers, as far as rockets go we're still using the same thing for the most part. Computerized manufacturing means stuff can be designed more precisely and cheaper, but it's still fundamentally the same stuff. We're still using the same old chemical thrusters and metal hulls, nothing fantastic like fusion torches or nanomaterials. All it really takes to get to the moon is a rocket big enough, and the Saturn V is a hell of a big rocket.

As for putting labs and colonies on the moon, as I said in my previous comment it just isn't worth it economically. We had a much bigger ambition to go to space back then, so it only seemed natural that after the moon landing a Mars landing and moon base would only be natural. But the government didn't agree and their funding cuts put an end to those goals for a long time.

I'm not saying impossible. Just that it seems more debatable as the decades continue rolling by, that absolutely no one is anywhere close to being able to achieve it by the first quarter of the 21st century. And it seems more likely than not even by the first half of the 21st century nothing like it will occur. How long are the excuses supposed to hold up for?

Flash to 2069: "Well yeah we did that several times a hundred years ago, but these days it's just not feasible".

It's not feasible, because there isn't enough of a reason to.. Also, come on tin foil hat mafia.
:wink:

_________________
[color=#0066cc]ever changing evolving and growing
I am pieplup i have level 3 autism and a number of severe mental illnesses. I am rarely active on here anymore.
I run a discord for moderate-severely autistic people if anyone would like to join. You can also contact me on discord @Pieplup

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

09 Aug 2017, 8:30 pm

There's no reason to go to the moon: That's why there were seven Apollo missions.

It's too expensive to go to the moon: That's why there were seven Apollo missions.

No wonder those guys were covered in tin foil.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Aug 2017, 10:39 pm

EzraS wrote:

So it was just cheaper to fake it?
And in the end, those silver space suits (which weren't tin foil) were replaced with those insulated white space suits.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

09 Aug 2017, 10:55 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

So it was just cheaper to fake it?
And in the end, those silver space suits (which weren't tin foil) were replaced with those insulated white space suits.

Yeah the fake spacecraft was covered in gaudy gold tin foil instead.

mikeman7918
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Mar 2016
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Utah, USA

09 Aug 2017, 10:59 pm

Do you know why Apollo space craft were covered in reflective material? It's so they won't overheat in the Sun, itreflevts sunlight instead of absorbing it.

_________________
Also known as MarsMatter.

Diagnosed with Asperger's, ADD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder in 2004.
In denial that it was a problem until early 2016.

Deviant Art

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,295
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Aug 2017, 1:02 am

if we didn't go to the moon, then who put that laser mirror reflector thing up there?

Page 13 of 16 [ 248 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Next

Jump to:

Did we really land on the Moon? Post Reply New Topic

Did we really land on the Moon?