6 ms·

>Doing anything ambitious in space would require a lot of material, which has limited our ambitions since the 1970s. We go to the moon because materials are ch

>Doing anything ambitious in space would require a lot of material, which has limited our ambitions since the 1970s. We go to the moon because materials are cheap because... we want to build what?

TeMPOraL 9y ago
An industry in space. To send larger probes around the Sol system. To build larger orbital laboratories, LEO or otherwise. To build all supporting infrastructure for that. To manufacture things that benefit from microgravity conditions (like optical fibers, see [0]) to be used both on Earth and elsewhere. To enable large-scale Mars missions, including eventual habitation. To eventually access more raw resources than we've ever imagined. -- [0] - http://madeinspace.us/mis-fiber/ http://madeinspace.us/mis-fiber/
- phillc73 9y ago
  If the benefit of manufacturing optical fibre cables in a low gravity environment was so great, would it be more economically viable to build a 'low gravity' factory on earth?
  - RikNieu 9y ago
    How would one produce low gravity on earth?
    - smoll 9y ago
      Go to its center?
      - lmm 9y ago
        Much, much harder than going to the moon.
    - perilunar 9y ago
      Two methods: the vomit comet [1], and shot towers [2]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_tower
      - bonesss 9y ago
        You want to put a delicate-cable factory on an airplane and figure out how to shape all materials from start to finish in 30-second bursts while also compensating for turbulence, additional Gs on ascend, flight adjustments, and proper stowing for takeoff and landing? ... Oddly, that's the more practical of those suggestions, because forming a few kilometers of perfect glass by letting it cool while dropping would seem to require a tower impressive in its own right... More relevant, there are QA demands with fiber-optics that don't seem to jive with a "let it hit the ground and throw out the lumpy ones" approach, much less the handling while in full gravity (which is where the issues are).
BonsaiDen 9y ago
Factories in Orbit, pretty much. There might not be many products today which will benefit from this ability, but a free fall environment brings many benefits to things such as crystallization of materials. For example, the last resupply mission of Space X to the ISS included an experiment to product optical fibers onboard the space station, the goal is that these fibers will have a much lower number of defects in their crystalline structure then their earth produced counterparts, this means less refraction, which results in less signal loss over a longer distance which reduces the number of repeaters which reduces increases the overall signal speed. Now, of course if you wanted to deploy these things on a world wide scale you'll need to set up a bigger shop then the ISS - which most likely will go out of service within the next decade anyway... And while the moon does not provide a free fall environment such as LEO, the gravitational influence is still much lower than on earth itself and scaling up on a surface will most likely prove easier in the long term than doing so in orbit around the earth.
- adrianN 9y ago
  Getting to Moon orbit from the Moon is also much easier that getting in LEO.
solatic 9y ago
That's like going back to the 17th century and decrying the exploration of the New World because you're not certain just how much gold there may be and you can't predict what the New World economy might look like. Barring drastic efficiency increases in launch technology (to a Star Wars style level of ease) a lunar base is essential to enabling a space economy not suffocated by heavy shipping and transaction costs incurred by the cost of fuel and launches. When the cost of shipping materials around in space isn't drastically more expensive than Amazon sending you a package, then you'll find out exactly what we want to build.
- make3 9y ago
  Except that back then they couldn't see what was in the new world. Now we can (on the moon), and know that there isn't much. Also, it would take a lot more than just sending people there for them to be mostly be self sufficient like in the 17th century, because: - there is no oxygen, - there is no food, - there is no water, - there is no magnetosphere.
  - bonesss 9y ago
    We can make [oxygen from moon rocks](https://phys.org/news/2009-08-scientists-oxygen-moon.html https://phys.org/news/2009-08-scientists-oxygen-moon.html). There is [water on the moon](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Mini-RF/multimedia/feature_ice_like_deposits.html https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Mini-RF/multimedia/featur...). With oxygen, water, and power, we can make food. Appropriate radiation shielding is a matter of construction, which could occur on the moon itself using local materials ideally, or building underground enough to be shielded. Moon habitation is something that makes little sense for its own benefit, but immense sense in an orbital supply chain for... I dunno... harvesting a few trillion dollars worth of minerals. Space exploration will not be easy. Navigating accurately across thousands of miles of ocean on [a homemade raft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesian_navigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesian_navigation) with only a coconut named Wilson and your hands isn't easy either :)
    - IdeaHamstir 9y ago
bonesss 9y ago
A giant radio telescope on the 'dark side' of the moon to let us peer into the depths of time without interference from the noisy monkeys in unit 3a ;) Ships, structures, and anything heavy that we could avoid pulling out of earths gravity well would be big cost savers if we're putting around the solar system or putting up shop anywhere. There are also some high-energy applications that could get dicey on earth but wouldn't be too bad to setup on a neighboring geographic area with no atmosphere or food chain to worry about. Oxygen generators, habitats, water refiners, nuclear reactors... Ideally from autonomous building robots, these would be the foundation of long term habitation.

>Doing anything ambitious in space would require a lot of material, which has limited our ambitions since the 1970s. We go to the moon because materials are cheap because... we want to build what?

TeMPOraL 9y ago

An industry in space. To send larger probes around the Sol system. To build larger orbital laboratories, LEO or otherwise. To build all supporting infrastructure for that. To manufacture things that benefit from microgravity conditions (like optical fibers, see [0]) to be used both on Earth and elsewhere. To enable large-scale Mars missions, including eventual habitation. To eventually access more raw resources than we've ever imagined. -- [0] - http://madeinspace.us/mis-fiber/ http://madeinspace.us/mis-fiber/

phillc73 9y ago
If the benefit of manufacturing optical fibre cables in a low gravity environment was so great, would it be more economically viable to build a 'low gravity' factory on earth?
- RikNieu 9y ago
  How would one produce low gravity on earth?
  - smoll 9y ago
    Go to its center?
    - lmm 9y ago
      Much, much harder than going to the moon.
  - perilunar 9y ago
    Two methods: the vomit comet [1], and shot towers [2]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_tower
    - bonesss 9y ago
      You want to put a delicate-cable factory on an airplane and figure out how to shape all materials from start to finish in 30-second bursts while also compensating for turbulence, additional Gs on ascend, flight adjustments, and proper stowing for takeoff and landing? ... Oddly, that's the more practical of those suggestions, because forming a few kilometers of perfect glass by letting it cool while dropping would seem to require a tower impressive in its own right... More relevant, there are QA demands with fiber-optics that don't seem to jive with a "let it hit the ground and throw out the lumpy ones" approach, much less the handling while in full gravity (which is where the issues are).

BonsaiDen 9y ago

Factories in Orbit, pretty much. There might not be many products today which will benefit from this ability, but a free fall environment brings many benefits to things such as crystallization of materials. For example, the last resupply mission of Space X to the ISS included an experiment to product optical fibers onboard the space station, the goal is that these fibers will have a much lower number of defects in their crystalline structure then their earth produced counterparts, this means less refraction, which results in less signal loss over a longer distance which reduces the number of repeaters which reduces increases the overall signal speed. Now, of course if you wanted to deploy these things on a world wide scale you'll need to set up a bigger shop then the ISS - which most likely will go out of service within the next decade anyway... And while the moon does not provide a free fall environment such as LEO, the gravitational influence is still much lower than on earth itself and scaling up on a surface will most likely prove easier in the long term than doing so in orbit around the earth.

adrianN 9y ago
Getting to Moon orbit from the Moon is also much easier that getting in LEO.

solatic 9y ago

That's like going back to the 17th century and decrying the exploration of the New World because you're not certain just how much gold there may be and you can't predict what the New World economy might look like. Barring drastic efficiency increases in launch technology (to a Star Wars style level of ease) a lunar base is essential to enabling a space economy not suffocated by heavy shipping and transaction costs incurred by the cost of fuel and launches. When the cost of shipping materials around in space isn't drastically more expensive than Amazon sending you a package, then you'll find out exactly what we want to build.

make3 9y ago
Except that back then they couldn't see what was in the new world. Now we can (on the moon), and know that there isn't much. Also, it would take a lot more than just sending people there for them to be mostly be self sufficient like in the 17th century, because: - there is no oxygen, - there is no food, - there is no water, - there is no magnetosphere.
- bonesss 9y ago
  We can make [oxygen from moon rocks](https://phys.org/news/2009-08-scientists-oxygen-moon.html https://phys.org/news/2009-08-scientists-oxygen-moon.html). There is [water on the moon](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Mini-RF/multimedia/feature_ice_like_deposits.html https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Mini-RF/multimedia/featur...). With oxygen, water, and power, we can make food. Appropriate radiation shielding is a matter of construction, which could occur on the moon itself using local materials ideally, or building underground enough to be shielded. Moon habitation is something that makes little sense for its own benefit, but immense sense in an orbital supply chain for... I dunno... harvesting a few trillion dollars worth of minerals. Space exploration will not be easy. Navigating accurately across thousands of miles of ocean on [a homemade raft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesian_navigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesian_navigation) with only a coconut named Wilson and your hands isn't easy either :)
  - IdeaHamstir 9y ago

bonesss 9y ago

A giant radio telescope on the 'dark side' of the moon to let us peer into the depths of time without interference from the noisy monkeys in unit 3a ;) Ships, structures, and anything heavy that we could avoid pulling out of earths gravity well would be big cost savers if we're putting around the solar system or putting up shop anywhere. There are also some high-energy applications that could get dicey on earth but wouldn't be too bad to setup on a neighboring geographic area with no atmosphere or food chain to worry about. Oxygen generators, habitats, water refiners, nuclear reactors... Ideally from autonomous building robots, these would be the foundation of long term habitation.