You are not logged in.
This is day three of the Trump Administration. The Trumps are just enjoying the weekend in the White House after moving in. I don't expect much to get accomplished in 3 days. The Dems are trying to delay the appointments of various heads of different appartments. I don't care about Trump's taxes, since I don't pay them. Since the Obama FBI didn't do much investigating of Obama and Hillary, I don't expect the Trump FBI to do much investigating of Trump. What I care about most is policy, not Trump's personal behavior, I care about things that affect me. Taxes, when somebody else pays them, are boring! I don't know who Trump is going to appoint for the head of NASA. If the Dems dig in their heels just to get back at Trump for winning the election, that can't be good!

I did a little bit of art work in my spare time. These diagrams are what the Sun would appear as in the high noon position from the surface of my hypothetical Banks orbital made out of Venus, and from Earth. The orbital shades itself, and covers a 0.20 degree strip across the disk of the Sun. I had to reduce the width of he orbital to 12,900 km from 20,000 km, because the later was giving too much shade. To create seasons on this artificial world, there is solar powered cooling from solar panels on the underside and radiator fins on the bottom to sump excess heat into space, much as a refrigerator removes heat from the inside and dumps it out radiators out the back. At high noon the Sun here shines more brightly that Earth, but this compensates for morning and evening when they orbital strip is wider in front of the Sun because its closer.
Just a little detail, not sure you would want to live on a undulating surface and getting seasick.
This is an ocean platform prison. Now I don't know why they put windmills on the landing strip, it might get in the way of aircraft trying to land.
Not all are evil....
Israeli Leader to Iran: 'We Are Your Friend, Not Your Enemy'
Trump's cabinet nominees President-elect Trump has about 4,000 government positions to fill, including some of the most important posts in the US government.
Not all Germans were evil during Word War II either, but the Germans that weren't fighting us weren't our concern, our concern was those that were. I can imagine Poland on September 1, 1939, The Germans were invading Poles are either fleeing or fighting the invaders and then someone says to them, "Not all Germans are evil."
The fact is were in a war, and have been in a war for the last 16 years, the Majority of the Muslims decided to declare war on the West, they ones in Iran are not trying to overthrow their government as it declares war on the West. The Muslims that ran away, dropping their weapons while ISIS invaded their cities were deciding that it was safer to go with the radicals and declare war on the West than to fight ISIS. I hope that comforts them when the Trump Administration decides to strike back! They are engaging a nuclear power in a bid to conquer the world. Most Muslims in these societies have not tried to stop this, even though ISIS could be leading tem towards their nuclear destruction. How destructive it is for us depends on whether we let them develop nuclear weapons or not! I'd rather have US troops invade and occupy their countries indefinitely that to face any of these radical Muslims countries having nuclear weapons. If radical Muslim countries get nuclear weapons, then a nuclear war is inevitable, its just a matter of how destructive for us its going to be. Do we wait for them to get more nuclear weapons, or do we strike them now? Do we wait for them to attack us when they think the have enough nuclear weapons to destroy us, or do we attack them sooner and suffer less destruction for it? I don't think there can be any peace with nuclear armed radical Islam, their philosophy rules out peace, their who mission is to wage a war to conquer the world and spread Islam, and they are willing to die to do this! That is why this war has lasted 16 years.
The War on Terror is not going to end at the Peace Table, it is only going to end with their destruction or ours.
The easiest land to make is over the Ocean. There is a lot of empty ocean in the Southern Hemisphere.
Now I'm ready to make an estimate of the mass of the Banks orbital, just for fun.
Earth and Venus. Image credit: NASA The mass of Venus is 4.868×10^24 kg. That is about 82% of the mass of Earth.
Reference: www.universetoday.com/22545/mass-of-venus/
Radius (R) 1,854,336 kilometers
Circumference of a circle (c) 
c = 11,651,136.7097742 km
c = 11,651,136,709.7742 m
Width (w) = 20,000 km or 20,000,000 m
Thickness (h) = 100 m
Volume (v) = c * w * h = 23,302,273,419,548,400,000 m*3
Density of Venus = 5219 kg/m^3
total mass of Orbital = 121,614,564,976,623,099,600,000 kg
Mass of Venus = 4,868,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg
Venus has about 40 times the mass needed t build this orbital.
We could use a ratio of 3:1 nonspinning:spinning to a possible range of 38:1 nonspinning:spinning. Not sure how much tensile strength will be needed to hold this hoop together. Sounds pretty fantastical. I wonder what would be harder, terraforming Venus or building this? knowing that it would take thousands of years to terraform Venus and thus we would enjoy thousands of years of technological progress while doing it. Seems to me that if we take Venus apart, it would cool off much faster, since we're dealing with so much more surface area from which to radiate heat!
Tom safety considerations do not matter to a peoples that use them as suicide bombers, human shields ....which are the extreemist of them....
Muslims, Islam or Catholic, Christanity or Hinduism, Buddihism each are off shoots of the one that was there.... http://www.wisegeek.org/which-are-the-o … -world.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r … traditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups
Which is why we need to stop them from having atomic bombs, they don't care about their own lives, but they are a threat to us, and if they play with atomic bombs they will release radioactivity, I'd rather not give them these toys, nor give them $100 million per hostage they released as Obama did, so they can buy more nuclear materials and technology! Obama's criterion seems to have been to help the Iranians develop nuclear weapons so as to deter the next Administration from invading Iran conventionally. The thing is, if Iran has nukes, we might not have any choice! If they don't care about themselves, we certainly can't deter them with our nukes, we can only kill them! Their fanaticism dies with them if we kill them fast enough before they can spread their infection, and if they do that, we have to kill more! We have to stop them before they have enough nukes to destroy us, if their mission is to destroy us with no regards to their own survival, then the only way they can do that is if they build up their nuclear arsenal to a point where they can target every one of our cities, and they won't attack us until they reach that point. If they have one or two nukes, they will wait till they have more, when they have a hundred, they will wait till they have several thousand, and when they have several thousand and they think they've reached a point where they can overwhelm our defenses and destroy all our major cities, then they will launch their attack, "knowing" in their mind that they'll go to Heaven when we retaliate! Muslims don't act like normal people, they have this all too common behavior of using suicide attacks to achieve their objectives. I don't want them having nukes. I think we should stop them no matter what I takes! We can trust them to behave the way normal humans behave when regarding their own survival! So we should assume they will not be deterred and act accordingly!
SpaceNut wrote:The issue for mars and moon is containment of the earth like water and air with artifical gravity following....
Approx. 1G is ... 1G optimum and deviation around 1G of ... dunno how much.
0.1 to 2G?
But talking about landmaking ( thus terraforming comes naturally down to 'realty development' in wide sense of the word = human HABITAT REPLICATION , i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macrolife … .27s_title ), we mustn't forget that human habitats, i.e. means for support of body functions is fractal and concentric. Scaled. Scalable... We have, the linear ranges of (roughly):
1m - clothing, furniture, ...
10m - housing
100m - garden
1000m - neighbourhood, vilage
10 000m - urban, municipal
100 000m - regional, hinterland, agri ...
1000 000m - we enter the megascale herewith, wilderness, outback, ...
... further ahead is the void where the habitat is nested.
The habitat scales are nested into each other as these russian dolls. And the outer makes the livability of the inner ones.
===
The size scaling naturally inputs definitions. Levels of 'terraforming'.
Unified system of definitions which disregards the 'toposphere' tech involved - natural planetary crust, supramundane shell, walls of a rotating cylinder ...
Speaking of which:
There is the Banks Orbital I one time thought up a banks orbital for the orbit of Venus, using the material of Venus to construct. If we construct a Banks orbital of the right dimensions and give it zero inclination of its spin to its orbit, then it will provide its own shading from the Sun.
I used this site to calculate the dimensions for a Banks Orbital that has 1-g of centripetal acceleration and a 24-hour day.
http://www.artificial-gravity.com/sw/Sp … inCalc.htm
The Banks Orbital has a 24 hour rotation period, which means it rotates 360 degrees every 24 hours, which means it has an angular velocity of 0.00416666666666666666666666666667 degrees/sec.
These are the results spin calc gave me.
Radius (R) 1,854,336 kilometers
Angular Velocity (W) 0.0041666666666666666667 degrees/sec
Tangential Velocity (V) 134,851 meters/sec
Centripetal Acceleration (A) 1-g
I'll start with a width of 20,000 km, since that is the distance from Earth's pole to pole along it curvature.
The Sun covers 0.74 degrees of sky at the distance of Venus' orbit from the Sun, which is 108,200,000 km. The diameter of a Banks orbital is twice its radius at 3,708,672, which is 0.0343 of the distance to the Sun. The diameter of the Sun is 1,391,684 km.
108200000 km/1391684 km = 77.747534641484704861161010689208 Solar diameters.
3708672 km/20000 km = 185.4336 Banks Orbital widths.
0.74*77.74753/185.4336 = 0.31026293077414233450679919928211 degrees. Is that too wide or too narrow?
I'll have to draw a diagram, the Sun is continuously under partial eclipse by the far part of the Orbital. Of course there are structural requirements. There are engineering solutions involving a part of he structure which is not spinning. I could do a calculation of how much material this would need. We would basically use the planet Venus as building material to build it taking its surface area and dividing it by Earth's surface area, we get 456.8428 Earths worth of surface area.
Tom, you're biased and stupid. The Iranian government needs power for its economy.
It doesn't have to be nuclear power though. Why do you suppose Iran is so interested in generating power by splitting atoms? Why not go with Solar or burning oil or natural gas? You haven't answered that question. Nuclear power isn't the most cost effective way to generate electricity, especially when you take all the safety considerations. Now how come the people who protested Three Mile Island, seem okay with Iran having nuclear reactors of their own, when in fact on several occasions they have stated that they deliberately wanted to harm people? They like to give explosives to Hamas so they can blow up Israelis, now you want to give them the means to manufacture nuclear bombs?
The agreement includes inspections to ensure nuclear technology isn't used for weapons.
It is much easier simply not to allow them to have nuclear reactors in the first place! Iran has on numerous occasions threatened the American people with Genocide, that is what they mean when they say "Death to America!" It is not a salutation!
Considering the German inspectors found Iraq had dismantled it's nuclear and biological weapons, and did discover and cease cannon shells designed to deliver chemical weapons, this shows weapons inspectors do their job.
Do you want your neighbor to have a pet Grizzly Bear? Do you want to let him walk his grizzly in front of your house, would you want that grizzly near your children. If your neighbor assures you that its a tame grizzly would you feel better about it? That is how I feel about Iranians and nuclear power, they are no honest, they are not peaceful, they seek to destabilize their neighbors, they seek to overthrow the government of Israel, and they have not promised to cease and desist this behavior, and you still want them to have nuclear reactors! That's crazy! Iran has promised "Death to America!" Iran wants nuclear reactors! I can't assume their intensions are peaceful given these two facts, and it is fortunate that Barack Obama is no longer President! Donald Trump may have to go to war with Iran to stop them from getting nuclear weapons, since they have promised to kill us!
When agents of George W. Bush claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, they said that because they still had the receipts. America sold them to Iraq. But the German weapons inspectors had ensure all those weapons were either seized or destroyed. So I trust UN inspectors from Western Europe more than any American Republican.
That said, yes Iran's actions are suspicious. At one point they tried to claim it was for medical isotopes. That's Canada's scam. Canada built a facility in Canada as part of the Manhattan Project. After World War 2 it was converted to medical isotopes. Canada invented medical isotopes, it was a way to use military technology for productive peaceful purposes. But specifically that Canadian facility has been maintained in such a way that the engineers, technicians, and scientists are actively practising the skills they need to make nuclear material for weapons. And they assemble radioactive material into finely machined devices that can be used by radio-medicine technicians at a hospital to produce very short-lived isotopes for medical purposes. The fact they assembly radioactive material into finely machined devices means they are practising the skills they need to assembly a nuclear weapon. Canada completely disarmed itself of all nuclear weapons, but we are the country that invented how to produce bomb grade plutonium, during the Manhattan Project we taught the United States how to make bomb grade plutonium. You could call that the ultimate case of nuclear proliferation. So Canada doesn't have any nuclear weapons, but does have a nuclear weapons factory. Actually under the previous administration it fell into disrepair, but that's another story. My point is when Iran claimed they wanted to make "medial isotopes", that's Canada's scam. Hide our nuclear weapons factory as a medical isotope factory. You can't kid a kidder.
But the next point is the US provided weapons grade uranium to Israel. I'm sure you want to defend Israel, but they are just one side of a conflict that has been going on for millennia. When Jesus of Nazareth tried to resolve that dispute it was 1,000 years old. If Jesus couldn't resolve it, why do you think you can?
In Jesus' day there were no Muslims, Islam is a more recent religion than Christianity, so Jesus never encountered any Muslims, because they didn't exist, he did however warn about "false prophets".
So giving nuclear weapons to Israel was inflammatory!
Lind of like the burning of the Reichstag was inflammatory, it served Hitler's purpose, and he claimed it was done by Jews. What you have to remember is that there is good and evil in this world, both sides are not equal, and I consider support of terrorism to be evil.
According to one UK news report several years ago, Israel had 200 nuclear warheads. I'm sure today they still have at least that many.
Has Israel ever used a nuke on anybody? Have they ever promised to exterminate anybody? Iran has done the second, how can you be sure it won't use nukes to accomplish its stated goals of wiping Israel off the map, and delivering Death to America? I'd rather be safe than sorry, if we have to invade Iran to stop them from having nukes then so be it! Sending soldiers into harms way is definitely preferable to letting the Iranians nuke our cities, whether by missile or by terrorist!
As long as Israel has them, at least one Arab country has to have them too. Just for balance.
Why does it have to be an Arab country? Russia has nukes, isn't that enough? Israel isn't threatening any Arab countries, so they have no reason to need nukes, Iran is threatening a lot of countries! Israel has behaved itself, Iran hasn't! Your argument is an argument for everyone to have nukes, and that is just stupid! Would you really feel safer in a World where everyone has nukes? Thus far the nations that have nukes have not used them in a War excepting World War II, but if you increase the nations that have them, you increase the chances of having a nuclear war. Israel has nukes, but has not used them, do you really think that ISIS, the Taliban, or Al Qaeda would use those nukes if they had them? Anybody who think he has God on his side and is willing to sacrifice his life is more likely to use nuclear weapons than someone who is more rational.
If anyone tries to use them, they can be stopped. As the president of France said, many countries have the ability to stop a nuclear missile. If any Arab country attempted a first strike, they would become a radioactive hole in the ground. I was hoping a NATO leader would say that, but other NATO leaders hushed him up as soon as he did so. But the point is if you want to ensure no Arab country has nuclear weapons, the first thing you have to do is take away all nuclear weapons from Israel? Not willing to do so? Then STF Up!
Would you rather have that radioactive hole in the ground, or would you rather stop them from getting nuclear weapons in the first place? I would rather we go to war to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons than have a nuclear war with Iran, even if it was one that we could win! Do you really want to spread the radiation around by giving nukes to irresponsible Muslims?
Don't tell me you've never been in a truck doing 70 miles per hour! As for power, how about a nice electrical motor, and a power cord on a spindle? The truck in question is moving around in a circle a fixed distance from the center of the crater. That kind of makes it easy to locate the power source in the center of the crater, you could have banks of solar cells or a nuclear reactor generating electricity, have a cable delivering the electricity to the truck, and have no need for batteries!
Tom, the deal with Iran is they get nuclear reactors for power only. Not weapons. With inspectors to ensure compliance. However, inspection is not as thorough as I would have liked.
America is becoming more polarized. Looks like it is breaking up. But also remember, America has a massive debt. To ensure domestic banks could continue to finance the federal government deficit, banks were pressured to "find a creative way" to raise funds. They created junk mortgages. That caused the banking system collapse of 2008. But politicians haven't learned. The deficit is still huge. If the budget isn't balanced soon, expect another financial catastrophe as severe as 2008. I don't know when, don't know what form it will take, but something has to give. The Soviet Union broke up due to economic collapse due to military overspending. The United States appears determined to repeat that.
May I as a "Stupid Question?" Why does Iran need nuclear power? They got oil fields, and they got plenty of natural gas to burn, seems to me that since Iran is a net oil exporter, and with all that oil drilling it has plenty of natural gas to burn, it doesn't need nuclear power! Natural gas is much safer to burn than splitting Uranium atoms. But is seems to me, Iran isn't interested in generating electricity, it is interesting in things that go boom! Plutonium to be specific. A by product of Uranium fission is Plutonium, and the Iranian government is very interested in finding new ways to kill people, preferably a lot of people! Just as you would not give a pyromaniac a match and a jug of gasoline, you don't give nuclear power to the Iranians, they have been bad boys, they supported terrorism, and nation that supports terrorism has no business splitting atoms for any reason, because we can't trust them, or have you forgotten the hostage incident that started their terrible regime?
You remember the Iranian Revolution don't you? One of the first acts of this terrible regime was to take our embassy personnel hostage! People who engage in terrorism and who threatened the lives of Americans should not be given nuclear reactors to play with! In fact they should not even be allowed to operate airplanes!
What makes you think America is in decline, Tom? The way I see it America is greater than it has ever been. There has been a reduction in basic manufacturing, leaving some areas to fall behind, just as there has been in Britain. This does not mean that America as a whole is diminished. The United States remains the richest and most powerful nation the world has yet seen.
Other nations are trying very hard to catch up, as Japan and Korea have done. The Japanese and South Koreans now face the same kind of problems as does the US, and we no longer hear about the Japanese threat to our and your industries. Instead the threat is alleged to come from Mexico and China. This is as much a myth as the Japan threat was. As soon as they get near the standards of living of the West, their advantage in cheap labour evaporates, then they will have to be smarter, more efficient and more innovative than they are at present. But these are exactly the fields where America excels and by the time they get there The US will have moved on.
Then every nation will be better off. Economics is nt a zero sum game.
Household income is down.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/daniel-mitchell/
1% annual average growth under Obama.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/1-a … nder-obama
Just look at how the National Debt is growing!
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
We first need a fast rover.
This rover looks big enough, we need to soup up the engine so it can go 70 miles per hour however. this rover looks big enough to live in. and now we need a crater.
A crater shaped like this would do nicely, the third requirement is that this crater be 200 meters in diameter. Now we pave the walls of this crater to make it nice and smooth. We drive the rover into the crater, line it up along the wall inside the crater, and then we step on the gas pedal, accelerating to 70 miles per hour and driving on the wall of the crater at a slope. Once the rover reaches 70 miles per hour and is driving along the lip of the crater, it will circle the crater 3 times per minute and generate a g-force equal to 1 Earth gravity. Now we employ self-driving car technology, the driver puts the rover on automatic and it continues to circle along the inside of the crater. The driver walks towards the back of the rover to join his family at the dinner table, or maybe he'll jog on the treadmill, do some push ups on the floor, or just sit on the couch and watch some movies on the video screen. This is his time off, the Sun has already set on Mars, there is work to do tomorrow on he surface, but for now, he can relax in the comfort of his own mobile home under a full Earth gravity.
How much would it cost to build on the Moon? Oxygen could always be regenerated mechanically, food could be grown in greenhouses like that. We'd have to alter the design a bit to account for pressurization. the glass panels would have to be heavier and thicker, but if we had robotic telepresence on the Moon, we could begin building something like that.
I guess the point is, anything sitting on the surface of the Moon is actually in space. Something does not have to be in orbit to be in space. the same Sun beats down on whatever is sitting on the Moon as anything that is orbiting the Earth or is orbiting the Sun at Earth's distance from it. he big problem with orbital space, as Bob Zubrin pointed out in his book Entering Space, is that you start out with nothing. The first step to any construction project in orbit is you begin by lifting materials to the construction site. The Moon already has materials from which things could be built. the only thing that needs to be imported to the Moon to make water is hydrogen. To make a liter of water out of lunar oxygen, you need 200 grams of hydrogen. 1 kilogram of hydrogen makes 5 liters of water. Luclily, there is a lot of hydrogen elsewhere in the Solar System, the nearest source of extra solar hydrogen besides the Moon is Mars., one can also go to the asteroid belt to get some, and there are short period comets. There are some asteroids that are in elliptical orbits that originally were in the outer asteroid belt and got flung sunward by Jupiter. And of course there is Solar Wind. the Moon is mostly out of the Earth's magnetic field, so those Solar proton hit lunar soil. They can be combined with lunar oxygen to make water!
if we could change the reflectance of the Moon to affect the climate of the Earth, then we can also affect the reflectance of the Earth itself more directly and we wouldn't need to do anything on the Moon to change climate I don't know how reflecting more light off the Moon toward Earth would be something that we'd want.
Why does Hollywood like Economic Recession? Why does it like the decline of America? Why does it like the Iranians getting nuclear weapons?
I think the whole point of telepresence is to build homes in the Moon where people can live, the point is to get people off the Earth, and the Moon is the nearest place. Instead of using precious water as rocket fuel I would use it to sustain life, water is more abundant elsewhere in the Solar System, it can e brought to the Moon to expand our colonies there. The reason we would want to go to the Moon is to reduce our vulnerability to people like this:






So long as all of humanity lives on planet Earth, they are vulnerable to some of these stupid people they tend to put in charge of our affairs. the lack of living space limits our ability to seek freedom from those who would oppress us, and everything depends on who I leaders of these various nations, sometimes men like these just grab power, and various organs run by people seek to justify their undemocratic rule. Being stuck on one planet under one of these person's rule is very unappealing, that is why we need to get out into space as fast as we can. Telepresence on the Moon is to facilitate that, in order to build those structures and mine those resources that we will need to live on the Moon and other places, it is the biggest object that is closest to Earth, and is fairly easy to colonize compared to other bodies in the Solar System, including most of the asteroids.
We need to isolate the barbarians of this World, Middle East terrorism should be a middle east problem, not our problem. I tell you, I'm sick and tired of Middle East problems coming to our country in the form of terrorism! I don't like the extra security measures we need to take to over come these special problems these middle eastern people bring with them when they come to our country. If the problem is that the people of the Middle East are too violent, and like war too much, then by coming here, they don't escape those problems, since the problem is their violent behavior. Where ever they go their violence follows, maybe they ought to work on bringing up children who are not so violent, maybe teach them right from wrong for instance.
Free floating space habitats are more vulnerable to attack than a space colony built into the crust of the Moon.
None of the Middle Eastern countries are capable of building a colony in the Moon, all they can do is complain, and they are too busy fighting each other to do much of anything else!
One strong motivation to build space colonies is to get away from these nitwits that want to die for Allah and kill others in the process of fighting their Holy war.
We need to insulate ourselves from the less civilized people of the World, that is why we need to build space colonies.
Adding more water to Venus would make the upper atmosphere more habitable for us as the availability of water is a limitation to our ability to inhabit the upper atmosphere. Venus in the past must have had more water in its atmosphere than it does today. One small change would be to have as much water in Venus's atmosphere as there is now in Earth's atmosphere, most of Earth's water is in its oceans, only a small portion of its water is in its atmosphere, as for Venus 100% of its water is in its atmosphere, that water never reaches the ground. The question is, how much water would we need to add to Venus to make its atmosphere as wet as Earth's? Water would still rain, evaporate and recondense as water droplets in clouds. We wouldn't be adding sulfur dioxide, so we would still get sulfuric acid only it would be diluted by more water and thus be less acidic. I think Venusian life can survive more water. I think water clouds would reflect more light into space, thus the surface of Venus would get darker, absorb less light and reradiate less heat that would get trapped in the atmosphere. Thickening the cloud layer with water would do this.
President-elect Donald Trump, who said in an interview that he believed that the EU 28 members of NATO was "obsolete". Its funny just how many Entertainers are dropping out of Trump Inauguration.
So we get hacked and now someone has Karma, it turns out, is a borscht. Payback? Russia Gets Hacked, Revealing Putin Aide’s SecretsA Ukrainian group calling itself Cyber Hunta has released more than a gigabyte of emails and other material from the office of one of Vladimir Putin's top aides, Vladislav Surkov, that show Russia's fingerprints all over the separatist movement in Ukraine.
Talk about medling in a nations affears... First Russia takeover of Crimea whats next taking back all of the eastern block nations that were given independance...
I wonder did they find any currier notes?Of course with great fear the Ukraine Fears That Putin Will ‘Step Forward’ if Trump Pulls Back and backs the Russians....
Europe's a "big boy" now, it can and should b encouraged to take care of itself. Europe has more people than the United States and a larger Economy. Chancellor Merkel is in a position that the Kaiser would envy, he always wanted to dominate Europe, and here is Germany's chance to lead it, it is well positioned to be the leader and defender of Europe, it just has to make some investments in its military. I think what Trump wants is for Europe to defend itself, and this requires a bit of "tough love!" We have to get the nations of Europe to believe that if they don't defend themselves, they are liable to become a part of Russia. Russia is weak, all of its aggressiveness is designed to mask its weakness. Putin is doing a rather poor job in managing Russia' economy, it has very few friends in the world that want to trade with it. The Trump plan is to get the Europeans to contain Russia and the Asian countries to contain China, take America out of this equation and let it guard its own borders, this is America First, and in order for an America First Policy to work, it needs a world where its allies are able and willing to pay the full freight for defending themselves. In this World, the United States can stay out of conflicts, when there are nearer more regional players that are willing to step in. Trump wants to delegate responsibility for maintaining the World order to America's regional allies, that would include Japan and Germany. Economically Japan is a match for China, and Germany is a match for Russia. The United States can then focus its full energies to crushing Al Qaeda, ISIS, and the Taliban!
I am afraid I need to complain. This is Panspermia, and the case for a life form in the clouds of Venus, and I did go to great efforts to also suggest that Venus itself with it's heat could drive photosynthesis.
Such organisms if they exist would be extremely valuable to study. For instance in studying them we might figure out how to build organisms which can do a different type of photosynthesis, and this might help humans inhabit a planet like Mars, or some other worlds.
Instead I receive back a plan to ignore and exterminate any life forms on Venus.
Yes, I have said it before. When the oceans of Venus evaporated, it is speculated that the temperature of Venus went to thousands of degrees on the surface, before Venus lost most of it's Hydrogen, and thus cooled down to what it is now. An impact would warm the atmosphere very hot and the added moisture if it was captured, would also elevate the temperatures severely.
I said Panspermia, not Teraforming. You have plenty of Venus terraform topics to act on if that is what you want.
Comets must have hit Venus before just like the did Earth. Seems that much of the moisture in Venus's clouds might have come from those. Just seems that Venus is kind of dry, it is a bit of a polluted planet too much sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere, I believe tha contributes the acid rain problem that Venus currently has, and global warming has gotten way out of hand!
Quote:
I really don't think a couple of generations of Lunar settlement, with a constant influx of Terran-born humans, is going to result in an anti-Terran Lunar war...
Your opinion is just as valid as mine (Although I am not comfortable with it).
Lets approach this as if it were an investment problem.
As far as legal issues, we now have a sizable body of people who maintain that removing materials from a body like the Moon then makes them property. So, legally, removal to a orbital habitat has more of a foundation of support.
As far as my original topic which was using heliostats to weather and climate influence/control the Earth, putting an indigenous population on the Moon, then creates a conflict where they may interfere with the best interests of the people of Earth.
From example we can suppose that a relatively nomadic period will precede any large scale settlements. With the improbable exception of what most of the people on this web site want to do, a last ditch "Hail Mary" to get a handful of people onto Mars to eat vegetables from a greenhouse.
And we have the issue of what will be valuable in the future? It could be Carbon from Venus and Mars.
https://www.cnet.com/news/graphene-stru … -printing/
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2017/0 … -structure
http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2017/01 … _900x600ncThese structures, while not very dense, have a large surface area and are extremely strong; one graphene sample had only 5 percent of the density of steel, but was 10 times stronger.
As far as radiation goes, I think getting rotating habitats inside the Earth's radiation belts is the best place to locate people. Having some outposts orbit in "L" locations and perhaps even a powered orbit of the Moon, also.
And so, then teleoperation. With the infrastructure I have described previously, telepresence should be an art that can be perfected and made actual. What if I could step into a virtual reality machine to link with my machine avatar body on the surface of the Moon, and engage in productive behaviors.
As an investment scheme the above is what I would currently tilt towards, hedging my bets, so as to have human populations able to interact with whatever priorities of the future emerge from new invented and perfected technologies which I do expect will happen.
We can have everything from the Moon we want and avoid a lot of the trouble in my opinion.
In reality "The future belongs to those who will be there". So, I am just offering my best hunches on how to avoid cul-du-sac's, the treachery of the people owners, slave masters.
And how to maintain flexibility for an undefined future.I think that this is the best plan to use the Moon to help get humans onto Mars as well.
It just seems to me that mining the Moon, transporting material into space to build a colony in space requires more energy than building a habitat on the Moon. (or in the Moon) The Moon is a giant rock in space, it has more material than the asteroid belt. I think he first colonies made out of the Moon would be in the Moon. The Moon is in a nice convenient orbit, unlike asteroids, the Moon is conveniently close, the launch window to it is always open. I just think we need to consider living in the Moon rather than on its surface like we do on Earth. Rather than thinking of living underground in a dank cave, think of carving out an asteroid, except the Moon is much bigger than that! It is already the right distance from the Sun. People living there would not be separated from the rest of humanity like just about any other body in the Solar System. I think the Moon has been overlooked because it is so familiar to us from the Apollo missions, but there is actually a lot we can do with it.
Each human raised on the Moon is one human not raised on the Earth, and in that sense it is useful. My diagram shows how you ca have a habitat on the Moon with 1 full Earth gravity, that way you can raise children on the Moon under a full Earth gravity, and in their spare time, they can jump around under lunar gravity if they like. A tower in the center has an elevator shaft and a mast for holding up a giant mirror angled at 45 degrees to reflect downward polar sunlight at the Moon's north or south pole. The mast rotates to track the Sun. Shutters on the dome roof open and close to give night and day. Towards the edge of the parabola, the sunlight comes in at a low angle. Beyond the spinning parabola at the edge of the crater is some lunar gravity parkland. crops can be grown under lunar gravity, we're not concerned about that. The regolith surrounding the centrifuge provides protection from radiation from the Sun and 75% protection from cosmic rays. water sandwiched between the 2 dome membrane can provide the remainder of protection against the cosmic rays, providing an Earthlike environment on the Moon in which we can raise our children, and if they want to visit the Earth, there is no reason why they cannot.
Overall the dimensions of this habitat is about the size of a football stadium, so structures of this size are not unprecedented on Earth. We would never build a mast an mirror set up like this on Earth, but the Moon has only one sixth gravity and there is no wind, so why not?