Re: Value of lunar infrastructure
- From: "Brad Guth" <ieisbradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Jul 2005 16:37:16 -0700
There's great vlaue in a lunar infrastructure. However, why bother
impacting the likes of Tempel-1 when the same if not far better results
and thus better science, as well as on behalf of our moon and future
lunar explorations can directly benefit from our nearby moon being
impacted for perhaps 1% the cost per delivering a similar 372 kg if not
per tonne.
DEEP IMPACT / Tempel-1 at supposedly 333 million via Arthur Andersen
need-to-know bucks X 2 = 666 millions worth of actual hard earned
bucks, plus one hell of an amount of added pollution for mother Earth
that the next few generations get to pay for with their lives.
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA02124
Notice how there's nothing as artisticaly suggested (excluding the
impact debris itself) as coming off that extremely dark/dirty comet,
thus obviously of what we perceive from Earth as a visually bright
comet is of whatever's getting dragged along for the ride by the
extremely slight gravity and/or more than likely created by the
horrific displacement formed tsunami of an energy shock-wave is perhaps
what's representing the affects from the terminal velocity aspects of
Tempel-1 traveling itself at nearly 60 km/s through space of < 1e9
atoms/m3 = 224e9 * 60e3 * 1e9 = 13.4e24 atoms/s displaced in addition
to whatever solar wind. As for having a mere 1.5 m/s/s escape velocity
seems rather unlikely that anything of physical substance remains as to
what we observe as a bright comet that is more than likely the pressure
wave and/or wake of mostly space gas/particles (perhaps as few as
1e9/m3) and not of the actual substance as excavated away from the
comet, that is until it gets into a bit closer than Mars to the sun,
whereas at 1.5 AU should begin sluffing/sublimation as to some degree
of a dry-ice coated and perhaps involving a possible internal core of
H2O/ice as vacuum extracted from within a highly poris rock as having
become a nearly coal black comet surface, that is unless the
surrounding shock-wave and/or electrostatic created energy field is
somehow insulating and thus shielding the surface from excessive solar
influx.
There's damn little associated gravity and thus little if any
measurable atmosphere associated with even a nearly stationary object
of such slight mass (at most 250e12 kg), however much less atmosphere
is possible if any as it's making a relative velocity of 60 km/s plus
having to encounter the likes of a somewhat typical 100+km/s worth of
solar wind which only gets a whole lot worse off as approaching the
sun. If the SM were of 1e9 atoms/m3, therefore the near surface
atmosphere of Tempel-1 can't hardly be ten fold greater. Our moon is
essentially a very large meteor that just so happens to be orbiting
Earth, whereas our moon that's also without any remainder of surface
ice that's just as likely due to it's having to travel at roughly 30
km/s and having been much closer to the sun as well as from the
secondary IR of earthshine, plus it's getting the brunt force trauma of
up to 1200 km/s worth of solar winds, whereas perhaps due to the lunar
gravity and existing slight atmosphere still doesn't manage to create
any comet like trail, at least not until getting sufficiently impacted
by loads of much smaller than Tempel-1 class of meteors, whereas
extremely small (under one kg) and even micro meteorite impacts have
from time to time released vast clouds of yellowish sodium and many
other such light-weight elements as having been created by the sort of
naturally occuring small and micro-deep-impact process (plus taking a
few of our NASA/Apollo related impacts), whereas such events have
vaporised many tonnes worth of lunar basalt, whereas the proportion of
sodium having been worth roughly 2.5~5% the mass of basalt(3.1~3.5
g/cm3), thereby affording as much as 0.1~0.15 g/cm3 as pure sodium,
plus there's nearly 50% the worth of basalt that's actually O2 which
hasn't been thus far recorded as any comet like trail because of the
somewhat O2 transparent deep green color and greater mass of the O2
element which should have remained as sufficiently attracted by the
lunar gravity, thus O2 gets trapped near the surface until a greater
than 600 km/s solar wind velocity excavated amounts of such O2 away.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/multimedia/0701-sunshine.html
Thus far it looks as though Tempel-1 is mostly coated or incrusted with
the likes of extremely dirty CO2 and CO that's possibly surrounding a
semi-solid core that's obviously affording much less density than
frozen H20. If there's rock to being had, it's extremely porous if not
of a significant hallow geode like configuration.
http://www.planetary.org/deepimpact/tempel1.html
An albedo of roughly 0.04 (4%) is clearly suggesting a somewhat if not
nearly black as coal object, thus the NASA DEEP IMPACT teams have
obviously utilized another great deal of extremely high sensitivity B&W
CCDs plus PhotoShop spin and skew upon their view of this comet as for
suggesting such as being somewhat more ice friendly, when in fact it's
more coal or dark basalt like and quite porus or most likely that of a
pumice. In fact, it's extremely low density of less than 1 g/cm3 has
been suggesting either a hollow item or that of a somewhat pumice rock
substance that's merely impregnated with a little ice, then an outer
layer of extremely dirty dry-ice having that top coating the likes of
carbon soot, iron and titanium dust that's very much like the nasty
substances upon our dark moon.
The 10.2 km/s impact was just the differential that's related to the
DEEP IMPACT, not the velocity of that comet.
http://www.planetary.org/deepimpact/di_crater.html
The orbital velocity with respect to our frame of existence is actually
up to 60 km/s, having an average relative velocity of 48 km/s has
clearly indicated as to what such a massive 14.4 by 4.4 by 4.4 km comet
as having an average frontal surface area of roughly 100e6 m2 (similar
to that of an 8.1 km sphere of 278e3 km3) creates quite an impressive
visual show as to the terminal velocity aspects of space travel.
Imagine what 10%LS or 30,000 km/s is going to cause, and I believe
that's the bare minimum we'll need to be traveling ourselves or at
least our robotic probes, that is if to be leaving our home solar
system in pursuit of another nearby alternative exoplanet that's
hopefully not going nearly as mainstream postal as Earth over their
remaining fossil fuel reserves that have for us been LLPOF taking us
into the nearest space-toilet.
BTW; Tempel-1 is not likely losing a required tonne/second, as by now
there wouldn't have been half as much much left from a 500e9 m3 volume
after less than 8,000 years. I believe solar wind is what shapes and/or
distorts the visual comet head and trail and shifts the vector as away
from the sun. However, the ionized gases surrounding, as well as for
those partially ahead and of course trailing are most likely caused by
way of such objects exceeding the natural terminal velocity or slug
value of space travel, as the slight friction of getting through a
nasty cosmic soup mix of 1e6 to 1e9 atoms/m3 plus countless micro
debris as going every which way but lose to boot. Essentially, without
a surrounding atmospheric or of some electrostatic induced buffer zone,
space travel at speeds much greater than even 30 km/s is going to suck,
and obviously much worse by a factor of another million to one for the
daunting task of making 30,000 km/s.
On behalf of Martin 53N 1W; your following statement might also suggest
that our moon should be creating some of it's own comet like
atmosphere, and for gravity keeping more of it closer to the surface.
> This might explain why comets last so long in that they create their own
> 'atmosphere' that protects them a little.
Of course, I'm thinking comets tend to last so long because they have
very little raw ice to dispose of unless it's having been well
protected within their core. Keeping one's distance from the sun seems
rater imperative if there's any surface amounts of raw ice getting
continually nailed to a fairlywell.
http://www.planetary.org/deepimpact/di.html
Impact mechanics: Relative velocity between impactor and comet: 10.2
kilometers per second (22,800 miles per hour) Impact energy: 19
Gigajoules
According to their crater impact displacement figures, their 19
gigajoules is per m3 impactor roughly accomplishing 1e6:1 as per the
physical displacement/vaporising ratio of whatever DEEP IMPACT should
have accomplished at 10.2 km/s (per 372 kg including it's 144 kg copper
wedge) and, is that darn good crater results for vaporising mostly rock
and a little dry-ice or what?)
Obviously this next link has been offering somewhat entirely bogus
moon-science because, DEEP IMPACT at merely 10.2 km/s has supposedly
accomplished way better than a 100:1 diameter crater, possibly as great
as 200:1 as per charging itself into or rather being run into by an
extremely porous/pumice like low-density surface of perhaps less than
0.9 g/cm3, of which within it's porous rock contains certain amounts of
frozen CO2 and CO along with only a slight amount of H2O/ice that's
likely a bit deeper within.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/science/craterstructure.html
"Comets and asteroids strike the Moon at a wide range of impact speeds,
with 20 kilometers per second being typical. Such a high-speed impact
will produce a crater that is 10 to 20 times larger in diameter than
the impacting object."
20+km/s is essentially 4 times the KE value of what DEEP IMPACT had to
work with. However, since the moon is already making 30 km/s (+/- 1
km/s) and actually has an amount of gravity in it's favor of pulling
stuff in, whereas the same 372 kg impact at the differential of 20 km/s
(which just as well could become 50 km/s) should have amounted to 74
gigajoules and thus creating at least a similar 100+meter crater since
the lunar surface is roughly four times as dense as Tempel-1.
Perhaps unlike Tempel-1, the extremely nearby moon can offer every bit
as small of a target as you'd like to make it. Pick out as little as an
existing 100 meter crater and nail it right in the pie-hole. You could
probably hit that sort of pie-hole 100 times for the honest price tag
of one DEEP IMPACT.
There's no actual limits as to what can be tossed at the moon
(supposedly no protesters on the moon), from that of tossing extremely
big spheres or cylinders of dry-ice packing the likes of a frozen
Rn-222 core, to that of a few of those aerobreaking 9 mpg Hummers or
merely tossing old flashlight batteries at the sucker. A bullseye
effort via final SBR or ION thrusting should not have any problem
exceeding 60+km/s from the starting nullification point of ME-L1(60,000
km away from the moon), thus 36 fold better energy results than DEEP
IMPACT and all of that for perhaps not more than 1% the cost ($6.6
million) for a similar 372 kg delivery.
Why are folks still avoiding our moon like the plague?
What the heck are you folks so afraid of;
Saving way too damn much hard-earned money?
Saving Earth from getting excessively polluted via NASA dog-wagging?
Contributing to honest to God moon-science and Earth-science that
matters?
Cutting down of the usual mainstream flow of infomercialism of
wag-the-dogs worth of spin, hype and otherwise need-to-know conditional
physics that sucks?
What's the point of our being continually dounbfounded about our moon?
Isn't this actually all damn good and extremely spendy as well as
polluting fun?
~
This is about my basic Township, Bridge & Tarmac upon Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
China/Russian LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
A few alternative topics from wizard Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Griffin Wants Inline SDLV and 5 Segment SRB/CEV
- Next by Date: Re: And we have the first lawsuit (Was: Re: Deep Impact Hits)
- Previous by thread: Re: Value of lunar infrastructure
- Next by thread: Re: Value of lunar infrastructure
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
