If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Hey, you abandoned it 40 years ago and haven't been using it. Dibs on the Moon   (usatoday.com) divider line 98
    More: Followup, Harrison Schmitt, Outer Space Treaty, Eugene Cernan, lunar exploration, territorial claim, other nations, military occupation  
•       •       •

8967 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Dec 2013 at 7:33 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-16 06:03:19 PM
This time they will have blackjack and hookers.
 
2013-12-16 06:27:49 PM
The moon. For several years, she has fascinated many. But will man ever walk on her fertile surface? Democratic hopeful Adlai Stevenson says so.
 
2013-12-16 06:29:29 PM
fc08.deviantart.net
 
2013-12-16 06:29:34 PM
Not gonna happen.  We're just pleased as punch to just slash budgets and buy our juvenile-produced crap instead.
 
2013-12-16 06:31:46 PM
fc02.deviantart.net
 
2013-12-16 06:33:15 PM

doyner: Not gonna happen.  We're just pleased as punch to just slash budgets and buy our juvenile-produced crap instead.


If we followed Maine's lead, we could be juvenile producing our own way back to the lunar surface.
 
2013-12-16 06:37:30 PM
www.captionite.com
 
2013-12-16 07:29:57 PM
Won't happen. The US has already made too big a commitment to killing brown people for dinosaur juice to let that go. Cheap, abundant He3 power isn't going to keep arms manufacturers and oil companies in business.

China on the other hand realizes cheap, clean, and abundant energy is just what it needs to power its manufacturing industry. After that the rest of the world is either raw materials to buy or customers to sell to. Guns and armies will be the way 3rd world countries do shiat.
 
2013-12-16 07:35:23 PM
Lets speculate on nonsensical media sensationalism... wee!!!! dumbasses
 
2013-12-16 07:36:51 PM
The next "space race" will be outsourced, cost billions more than needed, and wind up a complete failure. But, some already rich people might get a little richer.

The ideals of the 50s and 60s are dead. Look at NASA funding over the last decade.
 
2013-12-16 07:38:38 PM
we still have the plans... how long would it take us to build another Saturn V but with a far superior lander to what we saddled the Apollo guys with?
 
2013-12-16 07:41:11 PM
So China now has its own lunar landing movie stage. Congrats.
 
2013-12-16 07:41:25 PM
"Will China restart the space race?"     Who cares.
 
2013-12-16 07:42:18 PM
fc04.deviantart.net
 
2013-12-16 07:43:28 PM
I'd like to hear thoughts otherwise, but frankly, I think that '67 Outer Space Treaty should get dumped.

Like everything else in life and on this planet, people only move if survival is at stake or a buck is to be made.   If you can't own anything is space then why bother?  And don't give me that Star Trek desire to explore nonsense, humans are too greedy for that... so we should play to that motive if only it gets countries to invest in exploration rather than spending on armaments.
 
2013-12-16 07:44:23 PM
Why is everyone sh*tting their pants because of a Chinese rover? Yeah. Welcome to 1967, Cheng.

From a technological standpoint, it's not a big achievement in today's technological level. Landing a probe on the Mun when most of the country still had black & white TVs and tube radios? Now THAT was an engineering marvel!
 
2013-12-16 07:44:27 PM
Wow, really? No one gives a rat's ass that we may start colonizing and harvesting raw materials from another celestial object? Possible side-effects include fusion reactors, new tech related to space flight, and GODDAMN SPACE SHIPS!?

No wonder 'Murica is nearly dead last in science...
 
2013-12-16 07:44:33 PM
H3? didn't anyone see Iron Sky??!!??
 
2013-12-16 07:46:06 PM
Even from the moon you'll still be told your food will be ready in "ten minute"
 
2013-12-16 07:46:34 PM

bullsballs: H3? didn't anyone see Iron Sky??!!??


What H3 may look like.

static.cargurus.com
 
2013-12-16 07:46:41 PM
Sooo, China gonna throw rocks?
 
2013-12-16 07:47:15 PM

Ghastly: Won't happen. The US has already made too big a commitment to killing brown people for dinosaur juice to let that go. Cheap, abundant He3 power isn't going to keep arms manufacturers and oil companies in business.


Cheap, abundant He3 power doesn't exist.

It's all sortsa cool to talk about, but we can't sustain a fusion reaction for more than 5 seconds and for sure can't sustain a fusion reaction that doesn't require us to plunk in more energy that it generates. And that's hydrogen fusion, He is harder.

Of course, by "abundant" He-3 we mean "up to 50 ppb", so getting a ton of He-3 to send back to Earf will have us mining and refining about 150 million tons of regolith. On the lunar surface.

/I will cut the first to mention 3D printing as a hand-wave problem solving technique.
 
2013-12-16 07:47:40 PM
Great. Now they're going to produce H3 with fatal levels of lead.
 
2013-12-16 07:50:36 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Even from the moon you'll still be told your food will be ready in "ten minute"


Oh shiat. I didn't realize that it was universal!
 
2013-12-16 07:52:15 PM

Erik_Emune: Ghastly: Won't happen. The US has already made too big a commitment to killing brown people for dinosaur juice to let that go. Cheap, abundant He3 power isn't going to keep arms manufacturers and oil companies in business.

Cheap, abundant He3 power doesn't exist.

It's all sortsa cool to talk about, but we can't sustain a fusion reaction for more than 5 seconds and for sure can't sustain a fusion reaction that doesn't require us to plunk in more energy that it generates. And that's hydrogen fusion, He is harder.

Of course, by "abundant" He-3 we mean "up to 50 ppb", so getting a ton of He-3 to send back to Earf will have us mining and refining about 150 million tons of regolith. On the lunar surface.

/I will cut the first to mention 3D printing as a hand-wave problem solving technique.


Yea, but that's the great part! Someone could figure out a more efficient way to get He-3 from the regolith. Maybe have a second industrial revolution if we could only figure out how to utilize He...or produce stable fusion for starters. The last space race we had saw enormous leaps in tech in just a decade.
 
2013-12-16 07:53:35 PM
Was China even a signatory to the outer space treaty that disallowed territorial claims on the Moon? In a twisted way, I sort of agree that a Lunar resource race might do wonders to reignite the space program, I don't know if clamoring for helium-3 will really do it, at least until we have a working fusion reactor. I'd be more excited to see about extracting hydrogen and oxygen to set up a fuel depot, turning the Moon into a jumping-off point for future missions.
 
2013-12-16 07:54:12 PM
Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.
 
2013-12-16 07:54:16 PM

Frank N Stein: Heliovdrake: God I hope so, space research basically built the modern world we live in. It also has a very high rate of return when it goes back into the private sector.

lol no


I wouldn't say space research, but instead military research. We use quite a few things to this day that were originally developed for military use or as a by-product of military research.
 
2013-12-16 07:54:54 PM

DeathCipris: Frank N Stein: Heliovdrake: God I hope so, space research basically built the modern world we live in. It also has a very high rate of return when it goes back into the private sector.

lol no

I wouldn't say space research, but instead military research. We use quite a few things to this day that were originally developed for military use or as a by-product of military research.


Yeah that's what I was getting at
 
2013-12-16 07:58:37 PM

iheartscotch: Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.


Agreed. The biggest problem to face is transportation. Right now, efficiency (due to ineffective rocket fuels) in lifting weight into space is the largest problem. In order to move tons and tons of material, a more efficient engine would have to be designed that can transport the goods with minimal cost.
 
2013-12-16 08:00:26 PM
The probe includes an unmanned rover named Yutu that will spend several months exploring "geological structure and surface substances and looking for natural resources.''

Driving 15 mph below the speed limit with its blinker on.
 
2013-12-16 08:01:42 PM

DeathCipris: iheartscotch: Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.

Agreed. The biggest problem to face is transportation. Right now, efficiency (due to ineffective rocket fuels) in lifting weight into space is the largest problem. In order to move tons and tons of material, a more efficient engine would have to be designed that can transport the goods with minimal cost.


And that's what gives me a boner. The possibility of a new engine design. One that could be easily adapted for space travel to distant places, like Mars, in say, a half or a quarter of the time it takes currently.
 
2013-12-16 08:03:57 PM

DeathCipris: Yea, but that's the great part! Someone could figure out a more efficient way to get He-3 from the regolith.


Oh, outstanding. STRIP MINE THE MOON. As if we needed to give the hippies with one foot in the grave reason to start an escalating war in space.
 
2013-12-16 08:06:56 PM

gerrymander: DeathCipris: Yea, but that's the great part! Someone could figure out a more efficient way to get He-3 from the regolith.

Oh, outstanding. STRIP MINE THE MOON. As if we needed to give the hippies with one foot in the grave reason to start an escalating war in space.


Jews in space?

cabinetmagazine.org

The moon is a wasteland already, but I am sure they will find something to biatch about.
 
2013-12-16 08:11:48 PM
i860.photobucket.com"">
 
2013-12-16 08:13:35 PM
static.guim.co.uk
 
2013-12-16 08:14:44 PM

An Idiot: Sooo, China gonna throw rocks?


Heinlein nods and says, "Yep. Big ones."
 
2013-12-16 08:17:59 PM

Erik_Emune: Ghastly: Won't happen. The US has already made too big a commitment to killing brown people for dinosaur juice to let that go. Cheap, abundant He3 power isn't going to keep arms manufacturers and oil companies in business.

Cheap, abundant He3 power doesn't exist.

It's all sortsa cool to talk about, but we can't sustain a fusion reaction for more than 5 seconds and for sure can't sustain a fusion reaction that doesn't require us to plunk in more energy that it generates. And that's hydrogen fusion, He is harder.


I'll bet he is.
 
2013-12-16 08:21:57 PM
Can't be too hard to go in space if the sling blade dude accomplished it.

/he wasn't the smartest
//must've had rain man qualities
 
2013-12-16 08:23:32 PM
The seeds of the First Lunar War.
/Remember, you heard it here first!
 
2013-12-16 08:23:35 PM

iheartscotch: Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.


You really believe we landed on the moon?
You really believe there is any gold in Fort Knox?

\ tin foil hats made of aluminum foil do NOTHING, I tells you!
 
2013-12-16 08:25:55 PM
The Chinese, or anybody for that matter, landing an unmanned probe on the moon then trying to claim lunar land rights makes as much sense as me dropping a stone with my name on it off a boat while crossing the ocean and claiming I own the entire sea floor.
 
2013-12-16 08:28:10 PM
LBJ: "Aahhh, fer one, will not go to sleep by the light of a COMMUNIST MOON!"
 
2013-12-16 08:35:23 PM

iheartscotch: Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.


haven't done the math or anything, but He3 as a fusion fuel would be extremely valuable if a viable fusion reactor could be designed. to put it in perspective, the most powerful fission device mankind has ever created had a yield of 0.5 megatons (60kg of uranium). The most powerful fusion device mankind has ever created was 100x more powerful than that.

if a reliable fusion reactor can be designed that can run on He3 and if a supply of fuel can be isolated, then it might just be profitable to set up a robotic He3 mining operation on the moon and spend (m/b)illions of dollars shuttling that fuel back and forth.
 
2013-12-16 08:36:23 PM

doyner: Not gonna happen.  We're just pleased as punch to just slash budgets and buy our juvenile-produced crap instead.


Yes, like rocket-powered autonomous cranes that land nuclear powered SUVs on Mars without a last-minute redirection on where to land, 3-bedroom houses in orbit written on primarily one checking account, a whole host of "cheap" probes to planets never visited by other nations but we're just checking in again, etc...

Put your sci-fi on a slow roll.  It's easy for authors to forget a decade or two to advance the story line.  Until a viable FTL option is made reasonable, everything now is about approaching the asymptote of getting out there in the immediate area.
 
2013-12-16 08:41:26 PM

GoldDude: The Chinese, or anybody for that matter, landing an unmanned probe on the moon then trying to claim lunar land rights makes as much sense as me dropping a stone with my name on it off a boat while crossing the ocean and claiming I own the entire sea floor.


Uh, excuse me? This is a space thread, this is where we wildly exaggerate the power of "the enemy", re-write history about all the "benefits" of space research (how come Russia collapsed then? They beat you on most space research. Weird huh?), and giddily talk about sci-fi as if it's reality.

Close up pictures of the Moon from an automated camera on wheels is vitally important, and clearly the sign that Chinese take out will be available on the Moon. Just like Luna 16 was the Russian vanguard of Yvan building condos on the Moon.

No one's gonna live on the Moon. At best, *best*, China will dump untold resources into re-creating half-century old space stunts. Then, like it happened before, no one will care.

The Chinese aren't a magical species of human that can resist radiation and breathe vacuum, they also don't have access to magical technology. Space is still empty, it's still hostile, and there's still no way at all to realize all those mining fantasies.
 
2013-12-16 08:45:38 PM
Golddude:

The Chinese, or anybody for that matter, landing an unmanned probe on the moon then trying to claim lunar land rights makes as much sense as me dropping a stone with my name on it off a boat while crossing the ocean and claiming I own the entire sea floor.


Sounds about as legit as China's claim to the Spratlys.

Oh and on another note:

davidszondy.com

Get it? Hilarious.
 
2013-12-16 08:51:35 PM
Camelot on the Moon --
The last problem that almost caused a failure was a telecommunications problem.
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/camelot-on-the-moon.html
 
2013-12-16 08:53:57 PM

DeathCipris: DeathCipris: iheartscotch: Good luck making a profit mining the moon. It cost us something like $100 million 1967 dollars to get 6 landers on the moon. Assuming that there was gold on the moon and assuming we could find it and mine it; we would have had to bring back the equivilant to half the gold in Fort Knox just to break even.

Agreed. The biggest problem to face is transportation. Right now, efficiency (due to ineffective rocket fuels) in lifting weight into space is the largest problem. In order to move tons and tons of material, a more efficient engine would have to be designed that can transport the goods with minimal cost.

And that's what gives me a boner. The possibility of a new engine design. One that could be easily adapted for space travel to distant places, like Mars, in say, a half or a quarter of the time it takes currently.


V.A.S.M.I.R.
 
2013-12-16 08:55:06 PM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
Displayed 50 of 98 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report