Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Moon: Not Explored Enough?  
User currently offlineScallar From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 142 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1500 times:

As it's Friday, just to make things a bit less serious I'm going to quote Geekologie on the new discovery of water on the moon:

"Remember how NASA tried to blow up the moon to get at its molten cheese core? Well apparently they discovered a 'significant' amount of water in the process. Adult swim!

The discovery was announced by project scientist Anthony Colaprete at a midday news conference. "Indeed, yes, we found water," he said.
The find is based on preliminary data collected when the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, or LCROSS, intentionally crashed October 9 into the permanently shadowed region of Cabeus crater near the moon's south pole.
After the satellite struck, a rocket flew through the debris cloud, measuring the amount of water and providing a host of other data, Colaprete said.
"The discovery opens a new chapter in our understanding of the moon," the space agency said in a written statement shortly after the briefing began.

Hell yes a new chapter in understanding the moon!

CHAPTER 6: Water On The Moon

There is water on the moon. Specifically, frozen water.

THE END"


So what do you think? Should we send people to explore the moon further, or is it as Paris Hiltons private parts, explored enough? Way enough. What do you think is to be found there that we don't already know about?

Personally, I think it would be cool to see more guys going up there. To the moon. Not Paris. Hm, well...
Oh, anyway, here's to the moon.
Cheers.  veryhappy 

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1486 times:



Quoting Scallar (Thread starter):
What do you think is to be found there that we don't already know about?

We know almost nothing about the moon. We suspect and have indications about a lot, but fully explored - no way.


User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1477 times:

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 1):
We know almost nothing about the moon. We suspect and have indications about a lot, but fully explored - no way.

Agreed. Same thing can be said about other things, like the bottom of the ocean.


I think the next big step after the ISS should be having a permanent base on the moon, and have it be self-sufficient. The technology is basically already there. Also while being on the moon, we already have a massive head start to finding our way to Mars.

[Edited 2009-11-20 15:59:02]

User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2546 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1470 times:

I sure hope that the twelve men who've walked on the moon realize how damnably, maddeningly, gorgeously, impossibly, infuriatingly, explosively LUCKY they were, to go on the greatest adventure ever undertaken by Man.

I was born well after Apollo 11 so I've known that guys have walked around up there for as long as I've known that there is a Moon, but for some reason only after the 40th anniversary to-do last July have I begun to appreciate what a truly momentous episode that was in human history.







(And through it all, pancakes have remained delicious.)



[Edited 2009-11-20 16:17:46]


Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1454 times:



Quoting FLY2HMO (Reply 2):

I think the next big step after the ISS should be having a permanent base on the moon, and have it be self-sufficient. The technology is basically already there. Also while being on the moon, we already have a massive head start to finding our way to Mars.

The crazy thing about this is that the rockets we currently build are nowhere near powerful enough to reach the Moon. Sad, given that 40 years ago we had said technology.

The key anymore is complete collaboration with the Russians, because they still build rockets powerful enough, and we have the better electronics and computer equipment. There is no reason we aren't at Mars yet.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1449 times:

I think it has been explored enough and enough of the money of the USA wasted. Let’s focus on the gazillions of problems on the earth first, then check the solar system…

User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8709 posts, RR: 24
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1441 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
The crazy thing about this is that the rockets we currently build are nowhere near powerful enough to reach the Moon. Sad, given that 40 years ago we had said technology.

That will change with Aries V, currently being developed for launch in about 8 years. It will be capable of putting a 200 ton payload into orbit - twice as much as the Saturn V and 6 times more than any other launcher currently available .

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 5):
I think it has been explored enough and enough of the money of the USA wasted. Let’s focus on the gazillions of problems on the earth first, then check the solar system…

The technology and economic benefits of the Space program have far exceeded their costs. Everyone loves the idea of fuel cells for cars - where did that technology come from? How about advances in solar panels? Microchip technology was accelerated because NASA had to find ways of getting powerful computing power light enough to put in spacecraft. The list is endless.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1421 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
The crazy thing about this is that the rockets we currently build are nowhere near powerful enough to reach the Moon.

I will always remember Eric Sevareid right before the Apollo 8 launch - saying the men were sitting atop the largest non-nuclear bomb ever built - if anything went wrong.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21353 posts, RR: 54
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1403 times:



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 6):
The technology and economic benefits of the Space program have far exceeded their costs. Everyone loves the idea of fuel cells for cars - where did that technology come from? How about advances in solar panels? Microchip technology was accelerated because NASA had to find ways of getting powerful computing power light enough to put in spacecraft. The list is endless.

All of these are just myths. Pretty much none of the technologies relevant for civilian life have their actual origin in the space programs, but they certainly put a spotlight on some of them or helped them along, even though these technologies had been around before or were well on their way regardless.

Don't get me wrong: I appreciate the space programs as much as anybody and I feel we should indeed keep them a long-term priority (among others), but tangible benefits ? No, not yet. At least up to this point. Let alone fiscal profits.

We should look the fact in the eye that there are some things that just need doing even when they don't actually provide tangible benefits in the short term.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8709 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1395 times:



Quoting Klaus (Reply 8):
All of these are just myths. Pretty much none of the technologies relevant for civilian life have their actual origin in the space programs, but they certainly put a spotlight on some of them or helped them along, even though these technologies had been around before or were well on their way regardless.

I did not mean that they originated there (although a few did). But fuel cells were just a theory until the space program forced development to working, dependable models in just a few years. Because of the weight limitations inherent in space flight, they pushed the development solar panels of greater efficiency, and so forth.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineEISHN From Ireland, joined Feb 2007, 1509 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1388 times:

Moon definately needs to be explored more.

As for Mars, an impressive, yet simple plan was drawn up in the last decade as a means by which to get Man to Mars. A rocket would launch from Earth at a point where Earth are Mars are at their closest, making the journey to Mars as short as possible. The craft that would be used to travel there would be two vessels, joined by a cable of sorts, and the whole thing would spin, offering artificial gravity to the astronauts. They would then spend 18 months (I think) on Mars, and then they would leave when Earth and Mars were at their closest again. Some supplies would be sent from Earth whilst they were living on Mars.
The plan was simple (as far as space travel is concerned, and also much more detailed than what I have put down) and cost effective. But NASA chose to ignore it and concetrate on the ISS instead.



St. Flannan/ Fhlanain- She took off to find the footlights, And I took off for the sky
User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3613 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1356 times:



Quoting Scallar (Thread starter):
What do you think is to be found there that we don't already know about?

It took mankind 40 years AFTER actually going there and walking on it to realize that there is indeed water on the Moon... That should tell you how much we don't know about it yet.

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 1):
We know almost nothing about the moon.

 checkmark 

And the discovery of water there will hopefull once again attract scientific attention to it and lead to a project for the establishment of a human settlement there. The Moon has a lot of potential for future space exploration.

Quoting EISHN (Reply 10):
But NASA chose to ignore it and concetrate on the ISS instead.

You need to crawl before you walk. With a non-indefinite budget, I think it was right to focus on developing technologies that would first allow us to become familiar with life in space, rather than running head on into an extremely complex and risky project like that of going to Mars.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1342 times:



Quoting Airstud (Reply 3):
greatest adventure ever undertaken by Man.

Maybe a bit ego-centric, but when you realize how far homo sapiens has come, as a species, it's more than remarkable. Consider our closest genetically related species, the chimpanzee. They have the same social set-up as us, and a comparable capacity for learning. Yet they are quite literally in their stone age.

Quoting Airstud (Reply 3):
I was born well after Apollo 11 so I've known that guys have walked around up there for as long as I've known that there is a Moon, but for some reason only after the 40th anniversary to-do last July have I begun to appreciate what a truly momentous episode that was in human history.

I think the impact is greater on this generation, especially when you realize that your watch has greater computing power than the entire Apollo 11 assembly.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):

The crazy thing about this is that the rockets we currently build are nowhere near powerful enough to reach the Moon. Sad, given that 40 years ago we had said technology.

No, the technology is there, and we can easily and readily make them, but the demand is not.

Ah, the pitfalls of economics.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
The key anymore is complete collaboration

And this is the most important part, socially, for continued space exploration. It is a bit idealistic, but what idea isn't?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 6):
Microchip technology was accelerated because NASA had to find ways of getting powerful computing power light enough to put in spacecraft. The list is endless.

Actually, NASA was just a benefactor of technology. Don't get me wrong, it is because of said technology that we have gone as far as we have, but that wasn't the direct reason for it's creation.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 5):
I think it has been explored enough and enough of the money of the USA wasted. Let’s focus on the gazillions of problems on the earth first, then check the solar system…

We have had nearly 40 years since man last walked on the moon to put that money towards the "gazillions" of problems on Earth, and look where we're at today. Waist deep in two wars and turning a blind eye to genocide.

Quoting Francoflier (Reply 11):
You need to crawl before you walk.

To further the analogy, we jumped up and touched the cookie jar, now it's time to grow some longer, stronger legs and reach into it.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1326 times:



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 6):
Everyone loves the idea of fuel cells for cars

No.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 6):
How about advances in solar panels? Microchip technology was accelerated because NASA had to find ways of getting powerful computing power light enough to put in spacecraft.

Fair enough.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 12):
We have had nearly 40 years since man last walked on the moon to put that money towards the "gazillions" of problems on Earth, and look where we're at today. Waist deep in two wars and turning a blind eye to genocide.

Not my fault.  Silly


User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1306 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
The crazy thing about this is that the rockets we currently build are nowhere near powerful enough to reach the Moon.

Curious statement. Didn't we just send LRO & LCROSS to the moon on a Atlas V, yes I think we did... What have our Russian friends sent to the moon lately??



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5909 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Forget the moon, we haven't even explored our own planet to its fullest: http://www.ted.com/talks/robert_ballard_on_exploring_the_oceans.html

User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2546 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1269 times:



Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 12):
To further the analogy, we jumped up and touched the cookie jar

Mmmmm, cookies. ( First pancakes, now cookies....mmmmm  Smile )

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 13):
Not my fault.

I think it is quite patently obvious that all the wars, hunger, and genocide in this world are all entirely Iceland's fault.


But, didn't they only find 25 gallons of water on the Moon? Do we have an estimate of just how much water is up there in total? Might we find li'l lunar fishies?



Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13043 posts, RR: 78
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1250 times:

I think the best way of looking at technology benefits of the space program is to realize that even in the short 52 year history of it, nothing else has provided these at the rate and number of them, apart from very major wars.

(Yes, I know the space program was a child of the Cold War too, but many of the great explorations of Earth were not driven by altruism. Columbus did not set sail for the heck of it.)

Apollo did a lot more than intially planned, in part since the full up testing to the first landing attempt, Apollo's 2-11, went smoothly enough in general that the 'goal', to land, was reached using rather fewer Saturn V's than many had thought possible, before the inevitable budget axe fell.

But no mission went to the Lunar Poles, it was likely outside the reach of Apollo without major upgrades, (which were mooted but died a budget death in 1967/68).
Apollo exponentially improved our knowledge of the Moon, leading to the most likely theory of it's formation. Early solar proto planets colliding, one became the Earth, the massive debris from this impact forming into the Moon. This was not considered prior to the Apollo program.

But, it was in the end 6 sites, none too far from the near side equator, a few square miles of each (mainly in the last three 'J' missions), explored.
The Moon is a big place.

Major cuts in space exploration, the US in the early 70's, Russia after the USSR imploded, have not changed or cured any of the Earthly ills many cite.
It won't, because even if we stopped completely, the money involved is a drop in the ocean.

With Mars, interesting program of the history of Mars exploration on BBC4 recently.
With the search for any primitive life still hanging on, or relics of it, some scientists think that even the most sophisticated, 'smart' probes, will not likely provide a definite answer.
It will take a manned mission to perhaps do this.
These are people who are involved in these unmanned efforts, but they also know that human intuition on site, is a very powerful tool too.
And this is impossible to replicate in a machine, besides, that is not where computer technology went, by 2001, unlike in the movie, it was about microelectronics everywhere, from washing machines to cars, mobile phones and small computers, not 'brains' like HAL 9000.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
We've Landed On The Moon! (7/20/1969) posted Mon Jul 20 2009 05:25:30 by Fxramper
Another Winner From The GOP! Not! posted Wed May 13 2009 20:07:47 by Falcon84
EU To Allow Vegetables Not Pretty Enough.... posted Tue Dec 2 2008 10:02:12 by PNQIAD
Weightlessness In From The Earth To The Moon: How? posted Mon Jul 14 2008 21:46:42 by KAUST
The Countries Not In Ruins Yet Then... (UK) posted Wed Jun 27 2007 23:48:07 by ThePRGuy
A.net Meet On The Moon In 2050 posted Fri Mar 23 2007 20:10:15 by WILCO737
The Smallest Country In The World:not The Vatican! posted Thu Dec 14 2006 09:31:03 by RootsAir
BNE: The Sticker (not The Airport) posted Sun Sep 17 2006 16:48:28 by Ctbarnes
C.USA Officials Are Not Good Enough For Bowl Games posted Mon Jan 2 2006 20:50:14 by Planespotting
Needles Not Long Enough Due To Fat Butts posted Mon Nov 28 2005 22:25:49 by Derico