Re: lunar centric orbit?

Here's another delivery of my usual word and math improvements that are
still relatively complicated and perhaps a bit dyslexic, though
otherwise intended to share and share alike in spite of all the ongoing
flak against the likes of myself.

At least this recently accomplished page as having been shared by "Alex
Terrell" offers us some traditional full-scale and thus extremely
massive as well as spendy fly-by-rocket methods worth our considering
as an alternative to using small/micro satellites until the LSE-CM/ISS
is up and running.

Exploiting the Moon (Building on Project Constellation / September
2005)
http://fp.alexterrell.plus.com/web/Constellation/Routemap%20-%20lunar%20option7.htm#_Toc113893191

>William Mook; Here's more about Lagrange points...
Thanks ever so much for these old files that still badly informs us
village idiots, as to providing next to nothing as to the hour by hour
LL1/ME-L1 interactive location as I've previously requested. It's just
MOS wag-the-dog infomercial formulated info as having been re-posted in
order to look a bit different. You and I shouldn't have to run all of
these complex numbers. So, where's the LL1/ME-L1 beef?
http://www.physics.montana.edu/faculty/cornish/lagrange.html
http://www.freemars.org/l5/aboutl5.html
http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/1976.skyhook/1982.articles/elevate.800322
All of these supposed new and improved notions of yours seems to
require that spendy and yet to be R&D CNT stuff. However, your notions
of doing everything the absolute hardest way possible and the most
spendy as well as energy consuming and thus environmentally damaging
way conceivable is rather impressive.

>A space elevator on the moon is an interesting topic. I can wax
>poetic about that.
Please do "wax" away. At least that form of waxing would be on "lunar
centric orbit?" topic.

Those "skyhooks" and other terrestrial notions of getting large masses
of substances delivered into space will likely happen within the next
century after we're dead. Of course, by then China will own the moon
and having 100% authority over the LSE-CM/ISS, and the scant remains of
terrestrial oil will bring $1000/barrel, whereas the only folks that
can afford to buy any of it will be those as already having it or
having some other energy to trade to the highest bidder. Yourself, ***
Cheney and the likes of "tomcat" should get your thoughts and whatever
agendas together, which shouldn't be all that difficult since you
already think so much alike.

By then it'll only cost $10,000/month for your residential HVAC
demands, and a gallon of gasoline at $100/gal should get your 10 mpg
Hummer down the road just fine and dandy.

By then those nifty CNT terrestrial space elevator and skyhook tethers
should only have been costing us a billion dollars/km. Of course, since
more than half the world is Muslim and they haven't forgotten, chances
are that defending our terrestrial based and thus CNT tether assisted
space explorations and of accomplishing whatever subsequent lunar
extractions via those massive fly-by-rocket landers that still have to
be R&D, whereas we'll have to be continually defended with the likes of
nukes-in-space and having dozens of those GW class of ABLs being kept
in the air 24/7. Thus WW-III, WW-IV and WW-V should manage to keep your
global populations down to something under your 9.2e9 requirement.

Your "Project Orion" is certainly another real Greenpiece killer, but
since the environment of Earth will have already become terminated
beyond the point of no return, we'd have nothing to lose.

Is there some ulterior reasons why the safe and sane Ra-->Rn-->ion
thrust isn't any part of your mad scientist plan of action?

Is there some other reason why you've excluded upon the He3/fusion
alternatives?

Is there some other reason why you've excluded LSE tether dipole
extracted energy?

BTW; start making room for at least twice your "9.2 billion people",
thus 18e9 and still growing strong by the year 2100, that is unless the
incest cloned likes of yourself and Bush/Cheney can manage invent some
additional WMD lies in order in order to exterminate more than half of
them. Remember that at the rate we're going, oceans should soon become
worth 10 meters higher, thus we'll have a whole lot less dry land to
work with and more nasty bugs than anyone can imagine. However, a
nearly ice free Greenland and Antarctica should soon become valuable
properties (buy now while it's still ice covered and cheap).

BTW No.2; the richest will not become any 1/10th of the global
population, it'll become the upper most 0.1%(18e6) of humanity that'll
be considered as rich and powerful. The rest of us will be lucky to
afford toilet paper, much less having dry land to call home.

You certainly have a nifty way of spending other peoples hard earned
dollars, and of causing the absolute most collateral damage and carnage
upon the innocent in the process, just like GW Bush and all of his
incest partners in crimes against humanity, like good old *** Cheney
and don't ever forget your Dr. Death(Kissinger).

Why can't we just accomplish the LSE-CM/ISS and essentially start
bringing home the He3 bacon?

Even from the initial station-keeping satellite platform that'll be
efficiently coasting along in a halo orbit within the LL1/ME-L1
interactive zone is offering an absolutely terrific spot for
accomplishing all sorts of Earth science and moon science. Even
astronomy improvements from that location isn't exactly a bad thing.

With regard to the radiation that's out there, especially as related to
the LL1/ME-L1 zone and of folks getting any closer to our moon;

The density of lead cuts hard-X-ray dosage by half for every 18 mm.
Ten of those layers = 180 mm = 1024:1 reduction.
Fifty of those layers = 900 mm = 32,768:1 reduction.

Our atmosphere (because of its low density and thus creating the least
amount of its own secondary/recoil impact is roughly equal to a bit
more than those 50 x 18 mm layers of lead. But then we have the vast
70,000 km Van Allen expanse or badlands that's worth at least another
100:1

On a fairly passive sort of solar day, it seems that our full moon as
having been detected from the cruising altitude of ISS is sharing a
good extra millirem/day. However, on a bad solar day and full moon,
make that extra dosage contributed from our naked moon worth 100
mr/day.

ISS isn't the least bit stationary nor is it keeping its position as
situated between Earth and the moon, but if it were there'd certainly
become any number of extra complex problems, including a bit of what
the moon shares in the form of secondary/recoil worth of hard-X-rays.
For argument sake, let us use ISS as our spacecraft that's headed for
becoming our station-keeping patform at LL1/ME-L1, and as a perfectly
good example of subsequently taking those fly-by-rocket EVA trips for
getting ourselves much closer to the surface of our moon.

386,400 -6378 -1738 -384 = 377,900 km that's between ISS as situated
384 km above Earth and remaining directly in alignment with the surface
our moon. We now have roughly 378,000 km to start our dividing in half
in order to fully appreciated the available radiation dosage.

Now we start doing the math from the basis of receiving a 100:1 dosage
increase plus half distance multiplier of 4:1 once getting yourself
through the Van Allen badlands that'll have happened once having
traveled the first half way towards the moon, being 189,000 km as what
gives us our first 400:1 increase in that original dosage from our
previously having been situated roughly 384 km above Earth as having
received that extra 0.001 rem/day.

If going in for the kill, it'll only amount to another 10+ fold of
cutting the distance in half in order to get yourself into actually
orbiting our moon to within 184.5 km of the lunar deck, and that's only
representing an extra 4^10 = 1.048e6:1 radiation multiplier.

Thus by having multiple times cut that distance to the moon in half,
and using the square of the distances as your hard-X-ray dosage
multiplier means that for each haft distance multiplies the lunar
contributed dosage by a factor of 4:1. Of course that's a wee bit testy
if the first half distance having established the radiation influx upon
your spacecraft at 0.4 rad/day, whereas obviously the only thing going
for those NASA/Apollo missions was their smoke and mirrors worth of
need-to-know soft-science and a good amount of their applied
conditional laws of physics.

Gees freaking Louise folks; now you tell me what the situations is all
about as per cruising along at 100 km off that absolutely nasty and
highly reactive lunar deck (especioally reactive if at best there's
only 2e5 atoms/cm3 getting in the way) as your craft is passing itself
directly over whatever that solar illuminated moon has to offer. Then
perhaps divide that hard-X-ray influx in half for being the average
since half the time is spent on the dark side of the moon (of course
it's not ever going to become half dosage because even the dark side of
the moon is still just as if not a bit more reactive, thus sharing a
bit of the secondary/recoil worth of whatever the cosmic influx has to
offer), but then also remembering to contribute a bit of whatever's
directly impacting your spacecraft and lo and behold, what did your
math as based upon the regular laws of physics have tell us?

It seems that even an earthshine environment of our moon is going to
remain as humanly testy if not potentially short-term lethal. If the
much lesser background and foreground radiation still doesn't manage to
get you, then whatever's passing by or God forbid impacting nearby your
nighttime moon surface at 3+km/s is still going to easily nail your
sorry moonsuit ***, especially nasty of whatever's 30+km/s stuff that
isn't slowing down all that much in that thin atmosphere, especially if
that arriving substance is offered as any typically good sort of
density/cm3, and there are certainly bound to being a few of those
head-on 100+km/s encounters that'll remain just as invisible as WMD
until it's too freaking late. Thus earthshine is only at best offering
a partial moonsuit *** saving alternative of being a whole lot less
TBI worthy.

Therefore, the surface of our moon (especially by day) is mostly suited
for robotics. Space travels outside of our Van Allen zone of death is
also of what's best suited for robotics. Fortunately, those sorts of
robotic satellites can actually be extremely small, energy efficient
and as a whole they'll take a rather nasty licking and keep on ticking
for not 0.1% the cost of accomplishing anything that involves humans.
Some of those small/micro satellites may even be configured for
surviving their impact/landing upon our moon, or for their getting into
a rigid airship mode of efficiently accomplishing Venus.

Artificially impacting our moon could easily have improved the lunar
atmosphere from being 1e6/cm3 to becoming something greater than
1e12/cm3. In fact the near surface populations of a Radon, Argon and of
sustaining a much greater CO2 matrix might easily exceed 1e15/cm3
(especially within some of the larger crater basins). It takes next to
nothing for targeting our moon with sufficient solids of CO2 packing a
hefty core of Radium and LRn. Physics-101 stipulates that the surface
impact/vaporising conversion rate of 1e6:1 into becoming a viable lunar
atmosphere has been entirely doable as of more than 4 decades ago.

Please take good notice how I'm not another anti-technology freak. I do
seem to be mindset stuck in the rut of believing that ETs and of their
intelligent design do happen coexist throughout our universe, and as
such I also believe that we're far from being the smartes of the lot.
I'm not even opposed to whatever yourself and the likes of the energy
sucking "tomcat spaceplane" has to offer. I'd even have shared on a
50/50 matching funds basis from my bank accounts that should have been
overflowing as of 5 years ago, with no limits and essentially no
strings other than your haveing to stay the course of such efforts
improving the quality of life for the lower 99.9% of humanity that's
sequestered upon this global warming Earth.

Therefore, I'll need to keep asking folks like yourself;
Good grief almighty. What the freaking sam hell is your sicko problems
that are continually orchestrating disinformation against accomplishing
our moon, or even against our better alternative of establishing the
LSE-CM/ISS?

BTW folks; why the heck do you suppose that your Third Reich
MI6/NSA~CIA and of your GOOGLE/NOVA/NASA mainstream status quo serviced
usenet that sucks and blows big-time is still (absolutely no lie folks)
hard at work delivering their spermware into my PC?

Brad Guth
~

Kurt Vonnegut would have to agree; WAR is WAR, thus "in war there are
no rules" - In fact, war has been the very reason of having to deal
with the likes of others that haven't been playing by whatever rules,
such as GW Bush.
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm

.

Quantcast