Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
| +57 | SpaceX IPO - what are your thoughts | 12 | 15h |
| +28 | Should I use Claude or chatgpt? | 16 | 11h |
| +22 | Funny Things to Say to Interns | 8 | 8h |
| +18 | How did you meet your significant other/partner? | 15 | 7h |
| +18 | London's future as a financial centre | 18 | 3d |
| +12 | Playing the $10K WSOP Main this year in Vegas | 0 | 6h |
| The Great Debate | 9 | 1d | |
| +7 | E ink/electronic notepads | 4 | 2d |
| +5 | get a model before you model | 3 | 3d |
| +5 | Pity that RU athletes can still compete | 2 | 10h |
Career Resources
you'd probably outsource the construction too.
Wow, what an incredible pessimist.
When the Parthenon was built, there were probably folks like you saying "this is how far we've fallen?" Same with the Hagia Sofia and the Great Pyramids. I am sure when the automobile was created, people were saying "this is how far we've fallen?" When we first landed on the moon in 1969 was definitely a sign of "how far we've fallen." And certianly, when Ferdinand and Isabella provided the funding for Columbus people were saying "this is how far we've fallen."
Attitudes like yours are the exact reason why we are falling behind and not inspiring innovation and exploration. Human space exploration is simply the next logical step for a species that has already made massive strides on this planet. We have demonstrated an extraordinary capacity to escape from and overcome our physical constraints and make life better for our future generations like no other species on this planet. We have an obligation to make life multi-planetary. What is the logic in placing all of our eggs on one basket when we can better ensure our survival by diversifying ourselves?
Think of human space exploration and development as simply the next "discovery of the new world." Did people not make the move across the ocean simply because the ships cost money? Of course not. Human space exploration is about building a better, more exciting and fulfilling life for the future.
We are all aware of the many problems this planet faces as the human population continues to grow and use resources. It would be delusional to think we can live on just this planet forever.
Lastly, putting a significant amount of effort into space is not mutually exclusive with other goals. If we simply took 5% of defense spending, we could start colonizing Mars (Mars is the goal btw, not the moon as Gingrich says).
Thanks for calling me incredible, you're not so bad yourself.
Putting a significant amount of effort into space =/= building a base on the moon. Don't get me wrong, I would be down to take a vacation to the moon but allocating hundreds of billions of dollars to do it is ridiculous.
This is the first time I have actually really liked Gingrich.
Loathe Gingrich, but I think this is a great idea (provided we cut spending elsewhere to offset this, and then some).
This is a "changed the subject, HOLY SHIT I'M BECOMMING IRRELEVANT" move. He's desperate. There will be no base on the moon any time soon.
Dont pay attention to the naysayers like UFO, the Moon Base is important to our national progress. The Moon Base will propel us to the stars and in to the future. It is vitally important to our continuing leadership of the world, and will be of a miniscule cost as opposed to the benefits it will bring (so long as no Time Machine type plot twists end up happening).
Have you thought about why UFO says it's ludicrous? Because it IS. Gingrich IS desperate and there will be NO base on the moon ANY time soon, likely not within our lifetimes even.
Think about this economically: exploration is fueled by economic need. When Columbus or whoever discovered the "new world," they didn't decide to come here so they could party and fuck Indians (partly for the latter). They found this place, saw it had great potential for economic gain with the abundant natural resources here (farmland, woodland for lumber etc.) and decided it would be good to stay.
Us colonizing the moon is simply a waste of money. There is zero economic gain for us by colonizing space until we find a supply of natural resources we can use and cook up a means of FTL transportation and actually travel to different planets within a single lifetime.
Basically, if there isn't money to be made, it isn't going to happen.
Think about it guys. What will be the first jobs on the moon? Banking of course, they have to pay for this shit somehow.
Talk about a tax shelter. Fuck a Swiss bank account...I'm going Lunar!
Regards
We should be plowing money into infrastructure and education instead of a base on the god damned moon. Give me a break people.
By the way I agree with UFO this is an "I'm becoming irrelevant" moment, in addition to being a desperate attempt to bring back the national pride that resulted in launching a man to the moon.
This is a good idea, but I'd suggest working on a space elevator first. Or on nuclear fusion.
Getting people to the moon via rockets requires tremendous amounts of energy. And the funny thing is that it's not physics problems that are stopping us anymore. It's materials science problems.
We can get a self-sustained controlled nuclear fusion reaction. The problem is that it needs to happen in a large vacuum. We can build the large vacuum and start operating the reactor, but if the neutrons from the reaction hit the sides of the vacuum chamber unabated, it will become embrittled and fail within six months, forcing us to rebuild it.
We can also build a space elevator- a long loop into space whose length exceeds geostationary orbit and which stays tense due to centripetal force. But we need a material that can carry its weight for ~3000 miles. We're north of 1000 with existing nanotubes and can likely get to 3000 miles eventually. Once you have a wire capable of carrying up 10kg, it's very easy to extend that to 5000 kg.
Now, instead of using rockets to get into space that are less than 0.5% efficient, we can use electric power and be 90-95% efficient, dramatically reducing the cost of getting things into space. We can talk about efficiently launching large payloads like solar collectors or entire biodomes. We can talk about launching space ships with the ~500g/cm of shielding required to reduce radiation exposure on a trip to Mars.
Seriously, the one thing separating us from the dreams of the mid-20th-century is materials science.
wouldnt the centripetal force make the elevator put immense pressure at the space-side edge of the elevator, making keeping the damn thing on the ground v hard? also the consequences of added friction causing electromagnetic disruptions is probably a big hinderance. wonder what kind of problems the ozone layer will have with it. im no physicist but i dont think we have all these issues solved...
Fifteen years ago, nuclear fusion was still a physics problem. We couldn't get a self-sustaining reaction going. Now we can. The problem is that the reaction needs to happen in the vacuum of a TOKAMAK reactor and that vacuum needs to not become embrittled by neutrons.
Maybe the solution is hanging neutron absorbing plates from the sides. Or having pyrex containers holding water lining the vacuum chamber walls.
We're very close. And the coolest thing is that these fusion plants will probably wind up being less expensive than nuclear fission plants when we get them built. The spent fuel in a fission reactor necessitates a 6-foot-thick concrete containment. Not so with a fusion reactor. Run the reaction, vent the helium into space.
The main concern with fusion is that it's not a final, sustainable answer. One day, we will run out of ocean. If we have space-based solar, there's no net increase in the universe's entropy. Light that is getting sent out in space anyways instead gets beamed back to earth to create energy.
So really, the space elevator solution is a better answer than nuclear fusion. Nuclear fusion means we grow our available energy at 10%/year for the next 5,000 years and run out of ocean at the end. Space-based solar means we have billions of years of energy that's otherwise getting thrown away. From a sustainability perspective, it's a lot more attractive.
We better get our asses to the moon fast to keep the Chinese from getting there. Double the DoD budget and let the military run shit.
Shit, the Dept of Defense already has a drone space shuttle hanging out in space.
>wouldnt the centripetal force make the elevator put immense pressure at the space-side edge of the elevator, making keeping the damn thing on the ground v hard?
Actually, at geostationary orbit, the forces are all going to cancel out in terms of gravity minus centripetal force. The real pressure is at the earth-side edge, which is bearing the tension of all of that centripetal force. Don't believe me? Swing a yoyo around in a circle and hang a string off the edge. The string at the edge is slack and calm; the pressure is in the string by your hand.
The elevator would be incredibly narrow- perhaps 1 m in diameter when the earth has a circumference of about 24,000 miles.
The big issue is really just a materials science problem. Most of our big issues have been materials science ones for the last 10 years. They're not really as daunting as you'd think.
Goldman Sach & Co. - Moon Base, USA. Universal Investment Banking Division
It's got a certain swag to it.
A violent death if you walk outside with out a milion dollar suit.
Pretty much any bank in galactical quadrant's A-F. For Quadrant's F and above you need at least a Jupiter Moon internship with some high recommendations from Space Captains, Aliens and Moon Politicians.
^^^ Not back to earth. .16G really weakens the body.
A fucking moon base???? Why dont we build an underwater city while were at at. Also its bullshit we don't have time machines yet, get some people on those. Did you guys realize my ford cant even fly yet like in back to the future, shit i cant even find a decent hoverboard.
Sure, it's an improvement, but there needs to be a discussion about how we're going to manage our water resources. We can meet the world's energy needs dozens of times over simply on the flux of water from meteorites, but the problem is that exponential growth when it comes to once-through resource consumption is always unsustainable.
The cool thing about space-based solar collectors is that you build it, send it into space, and it's up there sending back energy. You don't have to use anything on earth and that energy is otherwise going into space anyways.
"He just wants to leave Earth for a younger planet" - Jon Stewart
Commodi quod libero eos blanditiis iusto amet. Nulla enim consequatur vel at unde quas et sunt. Atque cum et non aliquid quibusdam esse nobis et. Omnis quaerat maiores qui ut dolorum iusto qui. Dolorem eos dolorum voluptatum. Consectetur sapiente et dignissimos minus dolores autem. Et rerum exercitationem recusandae.
Inventore iusto minus maiores ab nisi at adipisci. Aut cum doloribus placeat amet modi delectus. Accusantium dolor consequatur quia est.
Accusantium nemo aspernatur modi qui consequatur sit commodi et. Hic facilis nam asperiores aut ut asperiores. Dolorem nam qui ad quia culpa qui. Dignissimos accusamus iste porro. Consequuntur neque possimus velit fuga ipsa.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Consequatur tempora impedit odio molestiae sit natus ut. Debitis ut eos eum nostrum occaecati quas unde. Hic iure rerum commodi. Tenetur et error enim velit quasi aut impedit. Ratione qui recusandae quia et vitae dolorem natus. Est soluta et et possimus doloremque odio.