Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Void · 2022-10-02 15:11:05

Well, as I have said I have my eye on Proxima-d, rather than Proxima-b.

I am also interested in our Moon.

There seems to be a possible progression of relatively small worlds between the two. Relatively small indicates smaller than Earth, for this post at least.

Time Latency for our Moon is relatively small, for Proxima-d it is very large, but not as large as for other star systems I would think, unless, possibly for a Rogue Planet which we do not now know of.

Tesla Bot when it reaches a certain level of development will be very important for the Moon.

From there a progression of known worlds. And beyond that perhaps a progression of additional worlds in the Kuiper Belt and perhaps the Oort Cloud.

This article suggests that the Oort Cloud may extend to 3.2 Light years: https://planetseducation.com/oort-cloud/ Quote:

What is outside the Oort cloud
The Oort cloud itself is the outer part of the solar system. As suggested by many scientists it may be extended up to 200,000 AU (almost 3.2 light-years).
After this region, our sun does not affect the gravitational pull on the objects. Even at its outer edge the distance between the OCOs is more than a billion kilometers.
As the outside of this region, other stars start affecting the region by their own gravitational pulls. The nearest star Proxima Centauri is located only 4.2 light-years away from us. So on one side, this star can affect the region outside of the Oort cloud. Whereas on the other side, other neighboring stars can own it.

If Proxima Centauri does have an Oort Cloud, although I do not know, I expect it to be much smaller than that for our sun.

Some estimates are rather high for the number of small worlds that may be in the Oort Cloud, possibly as large as Mars, and maybe even Earth, in rare cases. There is no proof of that though.

This is a very interesting diagram that indicates that the Solar wind does not encompass the Oort Cloud: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/ … fographic/
Their claim may indicate a smaller limit to the size of the Oort Cloud.

A thing that interests me is that a sizable object outside the Solar Wind, might accumulate an atmosphere of Hydrogen and Helium, like it is thought that some Rogue Planets might.
https://appalachianimaging.com/can-rogu … 20Contents
Quote:

Can rogue planets have an atmosphere?
AUTHOR
admin
READING
3 min
PUBLISHED BY
2022
A thick atmosphere, unstripped by the gravity of a star, could maintain heat and pressure in a rogue planet's atmosphere. Even a thick ice layer could maintain subsurface oceans that could possibly support life, like the one in Europa.

Well, maybe. We certainly don't have proof yet.

So, to get to these without drives that are currently far beyond our reach even in models.

We have the Orion Nuclear Drive possibly, and maybe magnetic Braking.

One I like a lot that might work with those could be a Laser Highway, and Isaac Arthur has spoken of that.

Here is one, but I am going to watch it, to make sure it is what I was thinking of :
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … M%3DHDRSC3

I will pause to watch it......................

Sure, I guess that will do well enough.

So, then the possibility of steppingstones to the stars, and plausible methods to travel, not now, but ages from now, as far as my generation might think.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 16:30:29)

Void · 2022-10-02 16:33:30

A possible thing for Oort Cloud objects of some size may be that they might accumulate an atmosphere, of Helium, Heavy Hydrogen and Hydrogen, I think those are the progression of weights.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/ … fographic/

I am supposing that interstellar winds will be less erosive than the Solar Wind, so possibly an Oort Cloud world might be enriched in Heavy Hydrogen. In my imagination I would hope that a Mars or Earth size object might even collect such an atmosphere.

Somewhere around 1 bar pressure max, if I am to be wishing And let's have an under-ice ocean. Maybe even Plate Tectonics. Since I am a demanding little brat, let's have geothermal energy.

But of course, less is more likely that all of that, in most or all the cases.

But if we might have a concentration of Heavy Hydrogen, let's have Fusion Reactors. But if small ones don't work, let's use a Hydrogen Bomb reactor.

Such would be a little ocean, which you dropped the bombs into on a periodic basis, and your Tesla Bot crew would be able to harness the heat to generate power by rejecting it to the Universe.

The nice thing about this is you might have a virtually eternal supply of Heavy Hydrogen from interstellar space.

I am interested in talking more about the Moon, and Proxima-d, but I am tired, I need a brake.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 16:40:35)

Void · 2022-10-02 18:05:03

So, then Tesla Bot on the Moon......At this point I should look for other people's materials on that matter.

Query: "Tesla Bot on the Moon"

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Tesla+Bot … 0eb34e47f6

Well, you can have a look. I did not get too much from it yet.

So, I guess I am going to go on my own on it. Obviously, time latency is not that bad of a problem if the eventual more "Grown Up" version can become available. It really makes sense to consider it for the Moon.

It might have challenges with thermal variances, but not as much perhaps at selected locations such as well lighted polar uplands, or Lava Tubes and the skylights for those. Power needed however in a Lava Tube.

I am not thinking of small numbers of them eventually, but a skylight expedition of them would not need to procure water, or not much of it. If a cart with solar or nuclear power could be wheeled over to the edge of the skylight, perhaps Optimus could put a seat for a cable run on the edge and could ride the cable down. The Cable might include electric power, and it might be that Optimus could get some distance inside the lava tube. Maybe even pull extension cord with it. It would be nice to at least look at one of them. Optimus might be able to survive the lunar days and nights inside of that.

So obviously you could bump up the labor force for the Moon very quickly. If at the South pole, perhaps all you would need to keep Optimus "Alive" during a perhaps 4-day lunar night might be a te3nt, and a battery inside of it.
Mabe some rocks to offer thermal storage. Maybe a place to crawl under, to reduce radiation, during bad situations.

Of course, dust will be an issue that has to be mastered. Frankly I think it might be silly to permanently put people on the Moon before many "Bots" are there.

So, maybe a tent, and a arch inside where the bot shoveled regolith on top of it. A battery well protected, of course a source of energy, which maybe could be nuclear, but also could be solar. The arch could have heaters on it, so that the regolith shoveled over it would be heated a bit. In times of unusual stress, cold, hot, radiation, maybe even impact events on the Moon, the Tesla Bot(s) could crawl into such.

And then to build things up even more, until suitable for rugged type humans to do some staying and research time. Eventually evolving into a production facility.

So, that is an interesting test for the future. Can Tesla Bot of the future run a #2 shovel. That was the name for a certain labor job in the Mines. Good money for a honest job, but blisters also, until you got used to it.

-----------------------

I think that Tesla Bot should be tested with a Rickshaw wagon as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickshaw
You see, on the surface of an alien planet with lower gravity, it might afford walking stability, and Tesla Bot could have tools and supplies in the wagon. Two legs, two wheels. Of course, it might help of the wheels had assistive power as well.

Such a cart could also go into the tent during times of stress, or if caught out in the open perhaps Optimus could get under it for shelter.

Oh, actually Optimus could have hooking methods on its hips, so that its hands could be free while hooked to the Rickshaw.

-----------------------

Now about Proxima-d.............Of course I will not be alive when and if humans and/or their machines might get there. But fun to think about.

All that is known is that it would be a planet about twice the mass/size??? of Mars, and that it orbits a Red Dwarf, and gets more sunlight than Earth or Proxima-b. It is almost certainly rocky.

Internet Research: Query: "Proxima-d"

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Proxima-d … c79eb918d0

Specific Response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri_d
Quote:

Proxima Centauri d
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Proxima Centauri d
Artist’s impression of Proxima d (close-up).jpg
Artistic depiction of Proxima Centauri d, with Proxima Centauri and Alpha Centauri A & B visible in the background
Discovery[1]
Discovery site VLT-ESPRESSO
Discovery date 2020
Detection method Radial velocity
Orbital characteristics[1]
Semi-major axis 0.02885+0.00019
−0.00022 AU
Eccentricity 0.04+0.15
−0.04
Orbital period (sidereal) 5.122+0.002
−0.0036 d
Semi-amplitude 0.39±0.07 m/s
Star Proxima Centauri
Physical characteristics[1]
Mean radius ≙0.81±0.08 R?
Mass ≥0.26±0.05 M?
Temperature 360 K (87 °C; 188 °F)
Proxima Centauri d (also called Proxima d) is a candidate exoplanet orbiting the red dwarf star Proxima Centauri, the closest star to the Sun and part of the Alpha Centauri triple star system. Together with two other planets in the Proxima Centauri system, it is the closest known exoplanet to the Solar System, located approximately 4.2 light-years (1.3 parsecs; 40 trillion kilometres; 25 trillion miles) away in the constellation of Centaurus. The first signs of the exoplanet emerged as a weak 5.15-day signal in radial velocity data taken from the Very Large Telescope during a 2020 study on Proxima b's mass. This signal was formally proposed to be a candidate exoplanet by Faria et al. in a follow-up paper published in February 2022.[2][1]
Proxima d is a sub-Earth at least one-quarter of the mass of Earth (or twice the mass of Mars), orbiting at roughly 0.029 AU (4.3 million km; 2.7 million mi) every 5.1 days.[2] It is the least massive and innermost known planet of the Proxima Centauri system. It is the least massive exoplanet detected with the radial velocity method as of 2022. Proxima d orbits too close to its star to be habitable—assuming an Earth-like reflectivity, its equilibrium temperature may reach 360 K (87 °C; 188 °F).[1]

I am guessing that with or without an atmosphere, the dark side would be cooler, if it is tidal locked.

But it might have a curious 2/3 rotation relationship, I sort of understand, like Mercury.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(planet)
Quote:

Mercury rotates in a way that is unique in the Solar System. It is tidally locked with the Sun in a 3:2 spin–orbit resonance,[17] meaning that relative to the fixed stars, it rotates on its axis exactly three times for every two revolutions it makes around the Sun.[a][18] As seen from the Sun, in a frame of reference that rotates with the orbital motion, it appears to rotate only once every two Mercurian years. An observer on Mercury would therefore see only one day every two Mercurian years.

In that case we can hope that its polar areas are milder and might contain craters with ices deposited.

So, that might be the easiest interstellar planet orbiting a star, that humans and their machines might access.

Gravitationally much better than Proxima-b.

Possibly mass drivers might work for it.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 18:49:04)

Void · 2022-10-03 14:02:15

If humans and their machines do manage to have a progression, today I am interested in Neptune and Titan, and associated objects.

Isaac Arthur has a video on Neptune, but I will have to study it again, so see if it mentions Triton: https://isaacarthur.net/video/outward-b … g-neptune/

But I have had my own thoughts about Triton, and perhaps it's L4 & L5 locations.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/nept … /in-depth/

Other members have considered creating thin atmospheres for small worlds, to stop small impactors, or burn them up. Triton has that already.

The current thinking has it that the Guisers are solar powered. Maybe they are.

It is considered that if this object was captured, there was a lot of tidal heating of the world. There may still be some tidal heating in reaction to Neptune and the other moons of Neptune. So, a continuing source of heat.

But I have my eye also on the retrograde motion of Triton through the spin of Neptunes magnetic field. I think that that could be quite an energy source, and perhaps also provides some additional heating of the Triton.

Now this again: https://www.fossilhunters.xyz/disruptiv … xchange%29.
Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether
Tethers as Generators: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrody … generators

While you could have space tethers, rising from the surface into space, I am more thinking of laying conductors across the surface. And perhaps also having some type of generator in positions L4 & L5 of Triton.

Where Isaac Arthur has at times suggested Laser propulsion, this would also be a way to deliver energy to Triton.
Then you might also have Nuclear Fission and/or Fusion.

While the surface of Triton will likely lack the number of metals and other materials that would be desired, I anticipate that solar sails propelled by lasers and the sun, may do lithobraking into Triton.

Burning into the atmosphere and then even impacting, still the materials will likely be recoverable.

The sources would likely be rocky bodies further in from the solar system.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/nept … /in-depth/

The question of an Ocean: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/nept … /in-depth/
Quote:

It’s a rocky moon, not a gas giant. It’s geologically active, which means that it could contain a liquid underground ocean. We already know that the surface of Triton is coated, in part, with frozen water. We also know that the surface of Triton is partially coated in frozen methane, which can be evidence of life.
Is There Life on Triton? - Mysterious Universe
mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/07/is-there-life-on-triton/
mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/07/is-there-life-on-triton/

So, if there is an ocean or if one can be created, it may be possible that it would be liquid all the way down, which might allow mining the rocky core.

As far as power beamed in with lasers, the oceans would be an excellent heat sink, but also could be cooled by radiating heat to the universe. In both cases also generating electric power.

I don't know what the rate of atmospheric loss on Titan is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospher … %20edit%5D
Quote:

In the thermosphere the temperature rises reaching a constant value of about 95 K above 300 km. The upper atmosphere continuously leaks into outer space due to the weak gravity of Triton. The loss rate is about 1 × 10 25 nitrogen molecules per second, which equals about 0.3 kg/s. Weather [ edit]
Atmosphere of Triton - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Triton
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Triton

So, not that bad.

So, I would see it as a likely place to launch missions to the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud, perhaps. It could probably be a rather rich place, I think.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-03 14:38:46)

Calliban · 2022-10-03 15:18:52

Titan is tidally locked with Neptune. You could extend cables up to and beyond the synchronous point of Triton orbit. They would essentially hang towards Neptune. As the planet rotated beneath, the cables would cut the field lines generating power. You could generate power the same way on the Jovian satellites.

In the case of Triton, generating 1000GW for 65 million years would consume 1% of its orbital kinetic energy around Neptune. So this might be a viable energy source for terraforming. The same should be true for Europa. We could harness the induced electricity to melt and electrolyse the water ice, producing an oxygen atmosphere. Europa has twice the mass and 20x the kinetic energy of Triton. The only problem I can see is that the Jovian moons are in resonance. Screwing with that by sucking orbital kinetic energy out of one of them may not be the best idea. But assuming it can be done, 65 billion GW-years, should be enough energy to produce a thick atmosphere. We would need 270 million GW-years to produce a minimal breathable atmosphere on Europa. That is 0.2% of Europa's orbital energy.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-10-03 15:40:37)

Void · 2022-10-03 19:54:50

A wonderful post Calliban! I like the 65 million years/1% calculation.

It may be an Ocean world: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/moons/nept … /in-depth/

In general, having a store of Nitrogen is a good thing.

I suppose in wishes, the ocean would not be so deep that strange form of ice would form on its bottom. Such Ice would not be a total showstopper, as I have read that that might mix with rock. It might not be impossible to reach that ocean floor with robotics. But also, it might be very possible to pull minerals from salty water.

I anticipate reaching that ocean through oil in a shaft, which would have the specific gravity of the ice it would pass through. This is borrowed from a Sci Fi author, about mining the Moon. I read it when I was young. It might have been Aurthur C. Clark???

In addition to the electrical generator, you spoke of, we have also in the past talked about Ice balls constructed as habitats, each with a sea in them, and habitation in those. They also could have the generator method, and they would be retrograde in orbit, if they would derive from the materials of Triton.

Those actually could be like a spherical layer cake, with metal, ice, water, rock, air, as might suit the inhibitors/constructors.

This could be a way to "Thin down", Tritons Ocean.

A retrograde moon, in a prograde Ice Giant's magnetic field, would be a maximum electric generation method.

Having a look at the Jupiter system, we can implicate Io, Europa, Ganymede, and possibly Callisto, in the prograde version of this. In this case the ultimate energy consumed, is the spin of Jupiter.as the moons are heated by tides, the maintenance of their orbital energy comes from the spin tide of Jupiter itself.

I think that it is really great if we can have a massive hub for a projected civilization in the Neptune system on the edge of the Kuiper belt.

Pretty good stuff, I think.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-03 20:11:17)

Void · 2022-10-03 22:38:05

I scan a bit before bed. I suppose I should resist it, but I want this article.

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang … re%20items
Quote:

STARTS WITH A BANG — AUGUST 16, 2022
Most planets in the Universe are orphans without parent stars
Known as orphaned planets, rogue planets, or planets without parent stars, these "outliers" might be the most common planet of all.

Quote:

Most planets in the Universe are orphans without parent stars
As far as we can tell, once you have a certain critical mass of heavy elements in the Universe, you're going to form planets anywhere you form stars.
But many of the early-stage planets that form around stars will get ejected, destined to roam the Universe forever as rogue, or orphaned, planets.
More items

Quote:

Over the past few years, we’ve begun to find these orphan planets — sometimes called rogue planets — in the spaces between stars. Based on what we know of stars, gravity, and cosmic evolution, we can make a ballpark estimate of the total number of planets in the Universe, and it likely outnumbers our stars by anywhere from a factor of 100 to 100,000. Space is full of planets, and most of them don’t even have stars.

So, it may be that the Oort Cloud extends 2 to 3 light years out. Oort Clouds for Red Dwarfs might be smaller.

So, I am guessing that the Oort Cloud may contain loosely bound Dwarf Planets, and perhaps even some large objects, but it may be that Rogue Planets pass though Oort Clouds, fairly often.

So, if various methods of energy and materials utilization covered in part in some of the recent posts here, traveling though interstellar space may only occasionally involve proper interiors of star systems, but most worlds will be quite far from a star, and possibly not bound to one gravitationally.

So, taking the low number estimate of number of planets as 100 per star, and guessing 10 planets per star, 90 might be bound in an Oort Cloud or be a Rogue Planet.

If there are 100,000 planets per star, then that would be completely mind bobbling.

Done.

Kind of exciting.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-03 22:48:51)

Void · 2022-10-04 08:39:38

So, when solar systems condense, they also sort out the unstable objects with collisions, and ejections.
A notion for the Moon: https://phys.org/news/2022-10-giant-imp … tists.html
Quote:

Giant impact could have formed the Moon more rapidly, scientists reveal in new simulations
by Durham University

Some stuff gets consolidated into other orbital objects, some gets consolidated into the Sun, and Some gets ejected to more outer orbits, or to beyond a star's gravity well.

So, that leaves civilizations the star orbiting objects, the Rogue worlds, and Star lifting. I did not so much like the notion of Star Lifting, but that was probably because I am old. So, I will seek a reference. Star Lifting is still not my thing, but here is a video from Isaac Arthur: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … &FORM=VIRE

I am going to take a pause to view it, and then when I come back, I really want to deal with worlds that are beyond the solar wind(s) influence.

Pause.......

So, it does not hurt to have the big picture, and then drill down on a specific item. I really have nothing to add to Star Lifting, and many members and others have worked on the puzzles for objects that orbit the sun within the orbit of Neptune and more.

I am interested in significant sized objects that are beyond the solar wind. This is where I want to "Drill Down".

I am interested in objects that can facilitate the condensation of interstellar gasses and dust, beyond the solar wind, or perhaps even in the locations where the solar wind and the interstellar medium collide.

So, objects that orbit our sun but are in those locations, and also Rogue objects.

I think that professional opinions about the Oort Cloud are very conservative, and that is understandable. Opinions about the number of Rogue planets is rather large. This article allows for asteroids to have been sent out into the Oort Cloud, and perhaps some of those could be large: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Well, this article suggests a Mars sized object beyond Neptune, but that is not yet beyond the solar wind: https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/3 … hinted.htm

So, I guess we might think about any of the worlds of our solar system we may know of and wonder how they might behave if Flug out beyond the solar wind.

Gas Giants may behave much like they do now, but they might have lost their moons.

Mercury, Venus, Earth, Moon, Mars, Ceres? Well, they are aged, and so not quite the nature they might have been billions of years earlier.

I like Venus, no significant magnetic field. CO2 would condense, and then Nitrogen and Argon, and then likely freeze. But what about the in fall of Hydrogen, Helium, and other materials?

It is speculated that some Earth sized planets would eventually get a Hydrogen atmosphere with pressures like the bottom of the ocean, and that then it might be warm enough from geothermal heat to melt water.

Sooner than that Nitrogen and CO2 would evaporate and melt under that Hydrogen layer. And I suppose the chemicals would interact.

For an Earth, Mars, Ceres sized worlds, various outcomes. The thing about a world with a Hydrogen and Helium atmosphere, is that it would be very easy to get rid of some of that atmosphere. Hydrogen Bombs, or lasers, it would be easy to pry it away.

Doing that you might retain heavier concentrations of Helium, Helium3, Heavy Hydrogen.

So, you would have a very long-lasting accumulator and concentrator of those substances.

If it was a world like Earth, then frozen over oceans with possibly some liquid water deep down. You might pick isolated bodies of water to explode Hydrogen Bombs in. The Caspian Sea, the Dead Sea, perhaps. These would be bounded by solid rock. But you might be able to bound the Black Sea with an ice dam. Your bombs may include Helium3, so that there would be less of Neutrons, and also you may be able to keep them from exceeding the surface of the ice/water basin. And you might be able to limit most of what the bombs would interact with to sea water, maybe even fresh water, say a Great Lake.

But of course, I am of hopes that humans and machines can do better than that and create what we might consider proper fusion reactors.

So then if fusion, then energy for any length that we might presume humans or their machines, or of course Aliens and their machines, might last.

While Proxima-d is a goal, these may be closer ones and perhaps even better ones.

Done.

Atmospheres for Rogue Planets: https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sc … gue-planet
Quote:

Hydrogen
If the rogue planet had a dense atmosphere of hydrogen, this would also act as a blanket, even allowing liquid to exist on the surface rather than under a thick ice sheet. Or if planet was ejected from the orbit of a star with a moon still tethered to it, then the moon could remain warm from the friction caused by the tidal forces from the planet.
Can Life Exist on a Rogue Planet? | Discover Magazine
www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/can-life-exist-on-a-rogue-planet
www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/can-life-exist-on-a-rogue-planet

Done Done

Last edited by Void (2022-10-04 10:07:59)

Void · 2022-10-04 10:48:09

I guess I am full of something today. It is more fun to do this than to do responsible things

The Moon is primarily my focus in this post, and Dragon, and Falcon 9, Blue Moon, New Glen, Vulcan, Dream Chaser, etc.

It is frustrating waiting for SLS and Starship. I realize the reason is that these are extremely hard things.

I know that Dr. Zubin has done this: http://newmars.com/2018/03/moon-direct- … our-years/

Perhaps that is a good notion still. But I really would prefer to drop back to the Falcon 9 or it's approximate equivalent. If we consider Optimus Sub Prime as both the test article for the Moon, and the astronaut of firs resort, then can we put her there using a daisy chain of Cargo Dragons?

Probably for this reusability would be dispensed with.

So, I am under the impression that a modification of Cargo Dragon could land on the Moon, but not then take off. That could be OK. If it could bring Optimus, (Tesla Bot) to the Lunar surface, the Cargo Dragon might be a relatively safe place for the Robot to retreat to when things get too hot or cold, and also if Optimus could shovel regolith on top of parts of the ship, then perhaps also to protect from solar storms.

If a version of Cargo Dragon could be converted to be more or less just about propulsion, then you could daisy chain as many as needed to get the lander to a position where it could land.

This would perhaps be the method requiring the least amount of new hardware, I think. And it would supply test information about both Optimus, and the locations of the Moon where a need for information is most existing.

Probably many Optimus might be sent before a human landing involving SLS and Lunar Starship. And the Tanker Starship would not be needed to do this.

Of course, other hardware from other space entities could be involved as well. I did mention some possible of such earlier in this post.

This would also allow the discovery of working with the Moons "Time Latency".

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-04 11:01:57)

Void · 2022-10-05 12:55:54

I like this video, as review of the Tesla Robot: "Tesla's AI robot slammed - 4 things everyone missed, The Electric Viking"
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Te … M%3DHDRSC3

While I have had some ideas about testing the robot on the Moon, with things like a rickshaw. Maybe not the best possibility.

How about the Apollo solar electric cart?
https://www.scifacts.net/space/nasas-mo … ic%20motor.
As I recall in one case a fender fell off or broke off, and so dust spewed on the Astronaut. But a version not quite as light weight working with a Tesla Bot, (An upgraded version), might be a good partnership.

I bet that there are a lot of young people who are not even aware of this:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ap … M%3DHDRSC3

So, a newer version might not be as light weight, and come to think of it, since it is a car, perhaps it should have self-driving features, and perhaps some arms to grab rock samples. A Tesla Moon Buggy.

In case you are worried that this is then an effort to write humans out of the Moon effort, no, these would be assistants, but also could be established prior to human landings. For some cases, at least in the beginning, it would make sense for a combination of buggy and Tesla Bot to survey the situation and gather samples, perhaps even do some lower-level testing of the samples, to confirm assumptions.

This will help to build a tool kit for other worlds as well. In general, it appears that the world's most desirable might have attainable Nitrogen as well, of course other materials.

Kind of a quiet day, I guess for the moment that is what I am thinking.

Done.

I guess I like this person's video as well. Lots of good points, very perceptive about details of practicality: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=An … &FORM=VIRE

This person revealed many very important things. I have never interviewed for a job where I needed to do a back flip, or to dance to music. I am glad that Boston Scientific, did the work they did, but her point about the battery charge is also important. If I applied for a job but notified the agents to hire me that I needed a time interval to charge myself every hour. And of course the relative costs of the machines.

Done

Last edited by Void (2022-10-05 13:45:33)

Void · 2022-10-05 19:10:53

Well, I am going to get a bit weird tonight. Essentially, I have come to think that the existing Dragon and Trunk system(s), may be compatible with alternate processes, to accomplish the notion of putting Optimus Sub Prime on the Moon, with tools, and perhaps elsewhere.

I am not sure at all that anything I will suggest will be done as I might puzzle it, but I want to do the walk though of what is in my head about it.

I had previously suggested that perhaps multiple Dragons + could be daisy chained together, to possibly allow a modified Dragon to land on the Moon with Optimus and some tools. That will allow all of the dragons perhaps to dispense with the heat shields. I really don't have to do calculations to know that this "Could" be a path to something of use. A relatively cheap and attainable method to explore a place on the Moon, and a testbed for Optimus on another world with less gravity. Valuable information perhaps in the making of the Robot.

But it now has occurred to me that Starship could bring a modified Dragon to orbit, along with extra consumables such as propellant and perhaps drop tanks. And legs for the Dragon. So, in other words because Starship has a large fairing streamlining is no longer necessary for operations from Lower Earth Orbit. (Maybe higher than standard LEO), to the surface of the Moon, a sort of one way, (Probably), Moon express.

It looks like Starship is going to consume a whole lot of "Elon Time" to arrive at a point where even the tankers can be reusable. That seems to me to be a thing that probably prevents any travel of a Starship to another world. I am not criticizing SpaceX or Elon Musk. Chances are that they are going to get there, and we will not get there without people of their sorts. It just may take more time than we might like.

So, I am thinking about Starship as expendable or somehow as space station materials, a repurpose. Those missions would help to prove the system to some extent.

But even when Starship is full-fledged as reusable, still I would think that a method to send a Dragon with an Optimus to have a look at a place on the Moon, may have value, but might not justify landing a Starship for that mission.

I think landing things on the Moon early would also help with the P.R. and as I have already said you would get data from a location on the Moon, and also test an Optimus at that location on another world.

I am very excited that if recordings are made of what Optimus sees, then people including children may look through its eyes to see what it sees. This would then be a step in the direction of an "Avatar" on the Moon.

Eventually people may be able to ride or even drive an Optimus Avatar. Eventually its sensory abilities may mimic a human to some extent.
Ears in the feet , Eyes of course, maybe even a transmitted sense of touch. So, people could walk on the Moon. But there would need to be many areas that would be off limits to tourist level interest. But still the Moon is a big world. It should be possible to find the appropriate level of regulations for that.

All this then may sharpen some tools for the next world which we think would be Mars.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-05 19:30:05)

Void · 2022-10-06 09:49:01

Isaac Arthur has this video, which centers on the rings of worlds like Saturn. Two things I more like about it is like our absent member Karov, he does not seem to mind thinking of solar energy for the rings of Saturn. And he is not afraid of the notion of mega structured habitats.

https://isaacarthur.net/video/colonizin … ary-rings/

But I am more interested today as to how the human race and its machines might get to the point of accessing Saturn. And in the now time, I am most interested in robots on the Moon.

There has been a history of arguing about Mars vs. Moon. This made some sense when we were trapped in the Space Shuttle to SLS transition. Or it seemed sensible to choose Mars and drop the Moon, but we can see that at this time is seems extremely unlikely that either the Moon or Mars could be settled in a profitable manner with just the SLS alone. This whole idea of approaching the question as if it were a sports game, and you pick a team, is not worthwhile in my opinion. It is a bit like having debate teams also which I think can be rather silly for many problems to solve.

It is not now an "Or", but an "And". Mars offers Aerobraking, but the Moon does not require it. And of course, the Moon is nearby. Mars offers better long-term habitability, per bulk chemistry, but the Moon can be mostly of robots and a few humans and might be economically productive.

So, I am thinking about various launch systems seeming to be emerging at this time, and their potential compatibility with robot dominated activity on the Moon.

The ones I am thinking of are Dream Chaser, Vulcan, New Glen, Neutron, Terran-R, and of course Starship.

Dream Chaser would not directly send things to the Moon but would be a supportive device of good use.

Vulcan and New Glen have the engine bottleneck at this time but may get over it.

Neutron really interests me because it does not have an apparent emphasis on an Earth recoverable 2nd Stage. This might be just fine, if you want to simply launch something to land on the Moon which does not have an atmosphere.

Terran-R appears to be a Mini-Starship, and I expect that for it to go to the Moon, it will need a fully re-usable tanker ship.

Starship of course needs a fully re-usable tanker ship to go to the Moon.

Some of these once they have the tanker ships might bring swarms of robots to the Moon. The Starship might stay there as well.

But I am really interested in the possible upsizing of the Neutron Rocket.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab_Neutron

I like the main configuration, for purposes other than going to Mars. And in particular for going to the Moon with robots.

If the first stage can be fortified to endure the rigors of flying above most of the atmosphere, and yet falling back into it, then it might lift a 2nd stage that is not made for atmospheric operation which is appropriate for the Moon. Perhaps no refueling required.

I don't want to screw things up for Rocket Lab, but I was thinking that other rockets 1st stage or maybe even 1st and 2nd stages could be adapted to do something like that.

So, then some variation where the Neutron method, is sized up to the extent that it can deliver a useful robot mass directly to the Moon.

The 2nd stage then not requiring operability in dense atmosphere.

And we have hopes that as time passes, the emergence of Dream Chaser, Terran-R, Starship, and others as capable as an option of full reusability.

But to be able to deliver at least one Robot to a location on the Moon, I would think could be very valuable to get a better picture of what the Moon is and what it's potentials are for our aspirations.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-06 10:22:18)

Calliban · 2022-10-07 06:19:50

Interesting video by Isaac Arthur regarding colonisation of rings. Rotating pressure habitats are hollow rotating pressure vessels. Humans and their buildings occupy the inner surfaces. For a 500m diameter Bernal sphere, the mass of the pressure shell would be on the order of a few hundred thousand tonnes. However, the cosmic ray shielding, atmosphere and interior structures would mass millions of tonnes. The shielding itself would mass at least 3 million tonnes. It can be made from pure ice. Assuming a 1 bar O2/N2 atmosphere, this will mass about 80,000 tonnes. A lot of water would be needed for the interior vegetation, rivers, ponds etc. I think we can assume at least half a million tonnes. So around 90% of total mass will be ice, water and air, which is produced from ice. So icy rings or small moons would be ideal places to build pressure habitats.

Most of these bodies have at least some silicate component. We need glass for windows and for glass fibres to make tensile cables. Silicate sand can be compressed and sintered to make compressive components for internal buildings and silica waste from metal processing can be used to make sand, soil and rocks for the interior landscape. So rings could provide most if not all materials needs. The only issue with ring systems is that they tend to be located deep within gravity wells. This makes it expensive to get to and from the rings. Tidal forces may make large mirrors difficult as well. So I am inclined to view the outer irregular satellites as more promissing candidates than rings. Bodies tens of km in diameter have negligible gravity.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-10-07 06:33:02)

Void · 2022-10-07 09:27:04

That seems a reasonable evaluation.

I included it as Isaac Arthurs materials often contain things that are somewhat new to me at least.

It is beginning to seem to me that for a human race and its machines which will not waste it energy on parasitic circling, the cosmos offers a string(s) of worlds. Our cultures seem to quickly seem to sink into simplified visions of reality, that then become dogma, the minds turn down their intensity and no longer seek. I don't care for this when there is so much of what is outside, out there to consider. Naval gazing is efficient for the parasites but eats away at human capabilities.

You see, you did then from his prompting think about it. I consider that to be gain.

In a similar form, I am also trying to prompt the notion of an Earth<>Moon method efficient for the delivery of robots perhaps similar to Tesla Bot, and tools and supplies it might be able to do productive actions with on the Moon.

I this were to become a motion, then what can be expected is that the parasites will approve of such motions, as they can hope to suck the life out of it. They do not actually value SLS for instance for what it's final accomplishments might be. They have been more than happy to keep changing what that is, as long as they can keep the siphon running, and they can tap life out of the effort.

Supposing that Tesla and others do develop such a Lunar actuator device, I feel that a similar accomplishment in transit hardware for the device could occur long before the leaches have embedded themselves into the process. It likely can be accomplished before it becomes a farm animal for the Leaches.

And so, I attempt to stir the imagination of others about it. It is not a diversion from Mars, but could become assistive to Mars.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-07 09:39:01)

Void · 2022-10-07 10:50:02

A thing I think I see, is that by making a humanoid robot, and then putting it to activities on the Moon, the virtual reality is also stimulated, as the perspective of the robot can be reviewed by those who may wish to experience/learn.

The robotics program on Mars, has achieved very important science, but struggles with time latency that is relatively large.

Tesla Bot activity on the Moon would rejoin robotic exploration with human experiences.

It is so hard to not start complaining, but I choose to look on the bright side instead and ignore a bit longer what I consider having been the misuse of the intentions of those who do and did productive work in our societies.

In this new thing people will be on the Moon, virtually perhaps in the thousands. Over time the art of this process will accumulate to sharpness of performance. We will certainly want to know what real humans on the Moon can do as well, and the robots could assist their productivity.

And this art will almost certainly translate to activities of humans and robots on Mars as well.

And for the down to Earth people, indeed, probably lots of robot assistance on the Earth itself.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-07 10:55:58)

Void · 2022-10-07 12:15:16

I like his materials: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Te … &FORM=VIRE

Teslabot has WON The RACE Already! Humanoid Robots are Essentially a Solved Problem Now!! AI Day 2
YouTube · 26 views · 2 hr ago · by Dr. Know-it-all Knows it all

Maybe not, a Gramer issue.

Maybe experience. If Tesla bot accepts riders, then they are riding the avatar live. But they could also experience a recording of riding an avatar. And then some Earth based humans or computers could help to direct a Tesla Bot avatar. And over time it might be possible to simply have Tesla Bots that do a task requested with great autonomy, and beyond that, perhaps even a self-directed Tesla Bot, maybe even finding its own questions to get answers for?

The Moon would be a good place to evolve those levels sequentially.

A Tesla Bot with a car, on the Moon. Select a rock, pick it up, brush it off, apply some sort of testing. Perhaps discard the rock or put it in the trunk after having good identifying photography of it.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-07 12:41:51)

Void · 2022-10-08 18:04:04

I believe that this is rather a long video, partly about Tesla Bot and Dojo. I am trying to get a little more up to speed, from a crawl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbbRkQuZA8A
Quote:

#Tesla #TSLA #Stocks
Tesla AI Day, Optimus, Dojo w/ James Douma #34 (Ep. 675)
23,049 viewsOct 8, 2022
Dave Lee on Investing
228K subscribers
I'm joined by James Douma as we discuss Tesla AI Day 2022, Optimus humanoid robot, progress of Tesla FSD Beta, Dojo training supercomputer, and more.

To justify this as for Para Terraforming and/or Terraforming, will be my objective next.

As I have previously indicated, I see the robots as being suitable to attempt to Para Terraform the Moon, and the Moon to be a precursor for similar for Mars. In that I do not indicate the need to wait to access Mars, rather a parallel action.

For the Moon, what I have in mind, is to add a leaking magnetic field, where one pole is at a frigid north and the other at a frigid south crater. My notion is then to spray Hydrogen Peroxide on the surface, with the intention that it might freeze, and that protons may contact/impact it and water might be created.

For substances that the Moon may emit, such as Argon and Carbon, perhaps they will collect in the cold as well.

Some parts of the Moon are expected to vent Argon.

Some parts of the Moon seem to emit Carbon. https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 … %20surface.

In addition, small impactors may also bring Carbon, and can be infused by protons from the solar wind.

The locations in these craters might house heated quarters for some of the robots to do work of whatever kind.

I suppose energy would be "Beamed" in from some location to certain places in the craters.

So, that will require transportation to bring Robots, other Machines, and humans to the Moon.

So, I also have my mind on that.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-08 18:24:09)

Void · 2022-10-09 13:22:41

I absorbed a bit of this, of course not all of it: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ho … &FORM=VIRE

Quote:

How in the Heck Will TESLABOT TRAINING Work?? Robotics Experts Explain. AI Day 2
YouTube · 1,000+ views · 6 hr ago · by Dr. Know-it-all Knows it all

A fairly long video.

I do expect that much of the training of the humanoid Robots will occur on Earth. But of course, the Moon would be a great place to help adapt to low gravity worlds.

So, this will be an "AND" thing not the typical "OR" thing where things useful will be thrown away because the purpose is to divide and conquer.

You have to understand the difference between entities which wish to make a bigger pie, and entities which want to rule the pie, and will damage the pie if it gives them more power over it.

OR, the divide and conquer method is likely an enemy of our needs.

To some extent is a problem of excessive Alpha Male and Hypergamous Female behaviors.

In my opinion damaging the common people intentionally.

Robots to the Moon would be a testbed along with that of the Earth. "AND".

The only reason I include what I consider the above social problem is that it can get in the way of human progress, particularly that of the manipulation of objects.

So, I am interested in any spacecraft that may provide method for setting this up on the Moon and other places.

We know something about the product of SpaceX. Nice stuff!

But I am interested in Terran-R, Neutron and also things also coming from more traditional sources as well. "AND".

This is an interesting animation: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Te … %26ghpl%3D

A thing that interests me about it is though it is sort of a "Mini-Starship", it seems to have taken some different pathways. Should it remain sort of true to this depiction upon production of a real device, I can see some interesting things about the notion of it.

For instance, this might be compatible with sending things to the Moon as well, while not sending the 2nd stage even to orbit the Moon.

It might also be compatible with Ballistic Capture to either the Moon or Mars. Such a payload sent may or, may not utilize electric propulsion. In the case of the Moon, it might have a 3rd stage which is not compatible with atmospheric entry.

Translating that to Starship, it might be that using modified components of the 2nd stage of the Falcon 9 system, you could fashion a sort of 3rd stage, I think, with relatively small investment. This would likely be a one-way system to send robots and the assets they need to the Moon's surface.

This may not require orbital refueling to accomplish, and so, then I hope that prototypes of the Lunar Starship without atmospheric entry properties might be tested first. The 2nd stage in this case would most likely not be reused, but also would not require a heat shield, Flaps and Motors, or fuel and tanks for landing. So, more mass could be devoted to the payload to be going to the Moon. It is possible that the 2nd stage might be repurposed in orbit also.

In my opinion the propellants Starship would be the next version to build, but it might have some room for solid cargo's. On landing, it would be the lightest weight of any other version to enter the atmosphere, and so should have the greatest forgiveness of the rigors of entry and landing.

During this time the Dragon series would likely still be in use. Also, it is possible that things like the Dream Chaser would emerge as real.

I guess that is a part of how I think things could emerge.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-09 14:18:02)

Void · 2022-10-10 19:48:50

It is timely that this would show up about the Moon now:

Our Moon May Have Formed In Just Hours According to New Study
YouTube · 53 views · 3 hr ago · by Anton Petrov

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=OU … M%3DHDRSC3

Apparently from NASA:

Oct 4, 2022
Collision May Have Formed the Moon in Mere Hours, Simulations Reveal

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/lunar … imulations

So, to me this model would suggest that there might not have been that much time for Volatile substances to have parted from the Moon rocks. Some models suggest that the Moon was formed from already existing liquid magma, some seem to say from discreet rocks also.

I suppose also that some surface materials arrived later.

In order for Volatiles to exit liquid rock, they would need to be in an appropriate gravity field, and also not be covered by a "Lava Column" of significance. "Lava Column" would be similar to other liquids in nature, but would be a heavy fluid relative to water.

Here is something about Volcanic gasses.

https://www.sandatlas.org/volcanic-gase … rature%203.

So, if rocks from the Earth were solid, obviously they would not outgas much in a few hours.

If all the materials were of liquid magma from Earth, then they would experience a brief period of extreme compression which should keep volatile substances in solution. Should they then experience microgravity, then any bubbles would not be subjected to gravitational separation. Upon forming the body of the Moon, they should experience variable forces of impact, and then gravitation, and then also likely burial under more materials, with the exception of the last arrivals which might stay on the surface and outgas.

And so, then we can return to this:

Soviet Moon Lander Discovered Water on the Moon in 1976

https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/0 … to%20Earth.

And.......

The moon is emitting carbon, raising questions about how it was formed
SPACE 6 May 2020
By Donna Lu

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 … %20surface.

So, just possibly if humans and their machines were to bore into the Moon in some places, they might find volatiles locked into the rocks.

It probably disserves a look(s)

Perhaps Tesla Bots could be involved in getting new samples and deeper samples.

Done

Last edited by Void (2022-10-10 20:19:19)

Void · 2022-10-10 20:47:52

Continuing with the materials of the just previous post, I have been liking the results of this query:
"How much water is in deep Moon rocks?"

Lots of very interesting general results:https://www.bing.com/search?q=How+much+water+is+in+deep+Moon+rocks%3F&form=ANNTH1&refig=b6dbe5a828e746c4b39a997dcb42764e

Quote:

Water found in Moon rocks
BY LEWIS BRINDLEY9 JULY 2008

This specific one is interesting: https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/wat … 20research.
Quote:

This leads to an estimate that lava deep within the Moon contains water at up to 745 parts per million - similar to that in Earth’s upper mantle.
’Our model is not perfect - so although we know there is water there, we cannot be sure exactly how much,’ said Alberto Saal, lead author on the research.

For Ice:
This is also interesting: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-spac … 180967751/
Quote:

The LCROSS impact. On October 9, 2009, the empty Centaur upper stage of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launch vehicle was deliberately slammed into the floor of Cabeus crater, near the south pole of the Moon. The cloud of debris resulting from this impact was observed by both the satellite following it (which then itself hit the Moon) and by the orbiting LRO spacecraft. The satellite observed the interactions of sunlight with the ejecta plume and measured the absorptions of that light in the near infrared. Both water vapor and water ice (H2O) particles were detected, along with a variety of minor components, including carbon monoxide (CO), ammonia (NH3), methane (CH4) and some simple organic (carbon-bearing) molecules. The spectra from the LCROSS infrared observations indicate an abundance of about 5.6 ± 2.9 percent by weight (wt.%) of water. In contrast to widespread belief, this estimate is still valid eight years after the event, and has not been adjusted.

Report an ad
Adjustments have been made to estimates of ejected volatiles from the Lyman Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP) experiment on LRO. LAMP is a far ultraviolet spectrometer, operating largely in the wavelength range of 100-200 nm. LAMP found clear evidence for a variety of elements and two molecules—CO and H2 (not water, but molecular hydrogen)—in the ejecta. Because we have much less operational experience with interpreting UV fluorescence data than we do for near IR absorption spectra on the Moon, the results published by the LAMP team were corrected a year after initial publication. The new estimates lowered the quantities of elements present in the LCROSS ejecta plume by a factor of 5.47—for all species except H2, which increased from 1.4 wt.% in the preliminary analysis to 3.7 wt.% in the refined estimate. To give some perspective, the global mean concentration of hydrogen in the lunar soil is about 50 parts per million (or 0.005 wt.%), so in the LCROSS ejecta, hydrogen is enriched over non-polar lunar soils by a factor of 740.

One article I fond and misplaced, indicated that one pole might have enough water to launch a space shuttle every day for 2200 years, and that actually the amount may be a magnitude more than that.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-10 20:59:13)

Void · 2022-10-11 08:49:11

I hesitate to start a new topic for "Metal Propellant Propulsion", so I will do a trial posting here.

A post from other members stimulated this: "Index» Interplanetary transportation» Spin Launch SpinLaunch or Vacuum Launches or Centrifuge Launched Sate" http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=10224

Posts #17-#20.

Quote post #18:

Calliban
Member
From: Northern England, UK
Registered: 2019-08-18
Posts: 2,113
Email
Impressive tech. I am amazed that it actually worked.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinLaunch
The company's goal is to launch payloads at 2km/s, essentially eliminating the booster stage and allowing the presumably solid propellant booster to ignite at 200,000' in a vacuum.
The problem with this concept is that peak acceleration is 10,000g. Only dumb payloads can survive that. But there will eventually be a market for dumb payloads launched cheaply. If we want to send water, metals and food into space in large quantities, we don't neccesarily need a man rated rocket to do that. I think building a rocket with guidance system and maneuvring thrusters that can survive 10,000g acceleration will be difficult. But assuming it can be done, the Starship can return the empty rockets to Earth after they are intercepted in orbit.

On the moon, this machine could deliver bulk regolith payloads to either L1 or L2 without need for any booster or bursting disc. Spin launch will find it's greatest calling on the lunar surface, providing materials to space manufacturing industries in high Earth orbit.
Last edited by Calliban (Today 06:58:12)

------

The idea of Metal Plasma Thrust is very interesting, but the descriptions up to now are about small sats, for the most part.

Here are some materials:
Breakthough Plasma thruster willl canabalize zombie satellites for fuel
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Breakthou … 1e&pc=U531

This still mentions small sats, but does suggest that just plain iron from Asteroids, and I presume the Moon could work.

This one makes more promises: http://www.rocketeers.co.uk/node/6574#: … propulsion

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/06/uk- … maneuvers/

I guess what can be said is, this looks promising, which also leaves the future requirement that it become real.

If something of valiue does emerge, then, I see many things it might facilitate to become of use.

-It might be tied to CALLIBAN's notions about the Moon in particular.

-In Asteroid mining metals like Iron are generally thought of as being low value, but in this thrust method of course they would earn their keep.

-This European effort might not only produce Oxygen on the Moon but metal alloys, that might possibly be suitable as propellants: https://indianexpress.com/article/techn … the%20moon.

https://www.3dprintingmedia.network/mak … -the-moon/
Quote:

Metalysis has a commercially proven electrolytic technology that can reduce metal oxides and ores into pure metals and alloys. Here on Earth, the Metalysis wet chemistry refractory metal refining facility can achieve unique control over oxide powder characteristics, including morphology, purity and a chemical mixing system for pre-alloy oxide feedstock. The process utilizes a proprietary solvent extraction system to reduce metals such as tantalum, aluminum-scandium, titanium-aluminide and bespoke novel alloys. By having exacting control over oxide production Metalysis can control particulate properties and prepare precision feedstock products of high purity or multi-element mixtures resulting in bespoke morphologies and metal powder characteristics from the subsequent molten salt de-oxidation process.

-It is thought that space junk can be made into propellants for the metal thrusters.

-But I am also looking at variants of Starship, which is made of Metal.

A Starship without orbital reentry capability might suit this, either as propelled with a 1st Stage Super Heavy, or maybe even SSTO: (These are older materials) https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comment … ches_from/
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/05 … s-pad-39a/
Qkuote:

SpaceX considering Starship test launches from Pad 39A
written by Michael Baylor May 17, 2019

Quote:

Mill Shive
·
May 18, 2019
@MillShive
·
Follow
Replying to @ChrisG_NSF and @jdeshetler
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't @elonmusk state a few times that StarShip cannot do SSTO on Earth? Did I miss an update? Are the raptors more powerful than earlier thought?
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
Follow
It technically could, but wouldn’t have enough mass margin for a heat shield, landing propellant or legs, so not reusable
1:05 AM · May 18, 2019

It also would not have any tanks of landing propellants.

It might be desired to retrieve parts to different uses. Some as metal propellants, some for repurpose in orbit, and some to returned to the surface of the Earth somehow. Probably engines and avionics to return to Earth, if possible.

So, this might be a different type of tanker starship. It might bring some Oxygen and Methane to LEO, but mostly would assist operations in space as metal propellants.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-11 09:37:47)

Void · 2022-10-11 09:56:44

So, pertaining to the later parts of the last post, SSTO Starship, expendable might lift some Oxygen and Methane to orbit, and it's metals also would become propellants.

For Expendable Starship with boost from Super Heavy, what is the possible payload?

OK, who knows how optimistic this is, or is not: https://www.techtimes.com/articles/2669 … rocket.htm
Quote:

SpaceX Starship Payload: 250 Tons to Orbit As Expendable, 150 for Reusable Rocket Says Elon Musk
facebook
twitter
reddit
Comment
Isaiah Richard, Tech Times 20 October 2021, 08:10 pm

So, being optimistic, could that be 250 tons of propellants, plus parts of the ship as also metal propellants, or repurpose, or retrieval to the Earth by a Reusable system?

So, now consider a smaller spacecraft system to go to the Moon and maybe even back again "Filled" from these methods. This could possibly be derived from the upper stage of Falcon 9 and Dragon, or maybe Terran-R.

It does presume an LEO presence for transferring propellants, and also cutting up Starships for the propellants, and repurpose and returns.

Yes, it is speculative, for sure.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-11 10:05:41)

Void · 2022-10-11 19:48:39

Of course, what will really be done is not necessarily like any of the things I suggested. Sometimes I just like to browse the options.

Done

Void · 2022-10-11 20:30:03

I have been on the Moon for a while and I know that is frowned upon by the holy books of New Mars. Sorry.....Not sorry

But I have something for Mars. It is a rehash of some previous things but with at least one new factor.

Historically we used to fuss a lot about UV and plastic domes. It turned out that SeaDragon had something good to offer.

Quote from: "Index» Human missions» Construction technology for Mars?"

SeaDragon
Banned
From: Merry Old England
Registered: 2020-07-25
Posts: 32
Email
louis,
Casey Handmer is amazing but I'd like to add a technical fix to that fluorine access problem for ETFE.
The call for ETFE is based on the impression that UV damage would destroy other types of plastic which is not necessarily true - it's mostly the production of oxygen based free radicals that causes the issue (for quick reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_degradation ). If you can stop oxygen from inside diffusing into the plastic then UV degradation is greatly reduced and the inclusion of hindered amine light stabilisers (HALS) as copolymers, even making up as little as 0.25% of the total plastic, this can be greatly reduced yet further.
So:
- With a thin layer of something like poly(ethyl vinyl alcohol), usually written EVOH, the majority of oxygen transmission into a plastic habitat skin can be stopped
- A small amount of HALS copolymers stops initial free radical compounds made just after UV absorption in the plastic from propagating and leads to spectacular decreases in corrosion rates before any oxygen that does get through can make things worse.
With these fixes we can just use PET or a similarly cheap and easily produced plastic with no crazy elements like fluorine needed at all.
If we reinforce with basalt fibre (very nearly as good as Keflar but far far cheaper than Keflar) instead of Keflar or equivalent we'd be able to build this sort of thing at an industrial scale using only the resources we have on hand + a few low mass imported extras like HALS copolymers, accounting for perhaps 400 tonnes of plastic per 1 tonne of HALS or something.
Last edited by SeaDragon (2020-08-01 09:14:35)

Well, I am sort of a "Water Baby", and so I am thinking of domes within domes, which is not as magnificent I expect as "Wheels within Wheels".

I recently stumbled on a reference that indicated that Argon blocks some UV wavelengths. I will try to get a reference, but it was very hard the last time I tried.

OK, I got lucky: https://www.houzz.com/discussions/58698 … eed-shades

Question:

Do low "e" windows block enough (84%) sun that you don't need shades?
Jeff Smith2 years ago
Will a window with low - e argon block enough UV light so we don't have to use sun-shades? We don't want to use sun-shades in winter because the south sun will give us free heat! BUT we don't want to fade the floor, furniture, art, etc. Note: our sun-shades are Insolroll 3% gray/black.

Pella says our windows block 84% of UV. (U-factor .29, SGHC .27). So I guess this means that 16% of UV from the sun still comes in? Is that significant? Will stuff fade?

We have Pella Architect type glass doors and windows, with some facing south, some west. See pics.

What I consider to be a very favorable answer:

Windows on Washington Ltd
2 years ago
Low-e will block the vast majority of the UV spectrum...but keep in mind, UV isn't the only thing that fads finishes. Visible light fades finishes as well. So, if your goal is to protect them as much as possible, you are going to still have to deploy the shades.
Jeff Smith thanked Windows on Washington Ltd

So, I anticipate using a combination of Argon, Ice, and water itself to help filter UV. I have seen references that say that Ice does block some UV as well, and also it seems that water selectively blocks UV more than visible light, but it has to be a fair amount of water.

I think that this agrees: https://emfadvice.com/water-block-radiation/
Chart from the above: https://emfadvice.com/wp-content/upload … _water.png

Here is a version:

I would also consider the notions of Calliban per anchored domes.

In this depiction, the Argon filled dome would perhaps have a domination of Argon which should not be reactive to the plastic, and as I have said should help block UV. But it might get heat from the UV??? I think.

The water in the Outer Dome may be a few degrees warmer than the ice, so at will, perhaps during the night it could be stirred to melt the ice and yet let new ice form before morning.

The inner balloon should never experience frost, unless a global dust storm occurs. It might also be a radiator for a Nuclear Fission power plant, in which case it might never freeze at all.

The pressure of Argon might only be a little above the outside Martian Ambient Pressure, but could be more.

The pressure in the inner dome will be determined in part by the ice and water column above it's top.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-13 10:25:53)

Void · 2022-10-13 10:24:03

Look at this again:

I have come to think that if you could transport the Antarctic Ocean to Mars, it would not instantly boil. It would shed moisture as evaporation, and ice over. Without sufficient energy input, it would eventually freeze almost completely depending on the depth of the water.

If you put a moisture barrier above it, and supplied sufficient heat, you could maintain a large body of water on Mars. It would be quite cold, lower than the freezing point of fresh water, but as it has salt, it could be largely liquid, indefinitely.

So, the reason for no apparent liquid oceans on Mars, (Ice Covered), is first of all a lack of heat. If you split the ocean, you transported half to each pole, then heat would be the only obstacle. Since at the current tilt of the planet, the "Poles of Cold" are well aligned with the spin poles, any evaporating water from anywhere on the planet will tend to condense at the poles. And so, ice covered oceans supplied with sufficient heat, would persist.

And according to one article, there may be one at the south pole, maybe a small one: (I posted this earlier on "Index» Water on Mars» Liquid water confirmed on Mars", Post #25):

This is new to me..........
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=NA … M%3DHDRSC3
Quote:
NASA Reveals MAJOR NEW Discovery On Mars!
YouTube · 3,000+ views · 6 hr ago · by The Space Race
It sounds fairly real, strangely enough.
They think geothermal heat, I also speculate ground currents.
For instance, the Solar wind creates a Proton Aurora. Also, the dust storms and dust devils have electric properties.
A liquid solution including water can be conductive, particularly if it has salt/ions.
But it seems that we are looking for how a liquid could exist, they seem to think a liquid does exist.
Done

If it is true and not fake, then it is a very big thing.

Using the double dome scheme shown at the beginning of this post, I suggest that much of the surface of Mars could be converted to an assisted water habitat(s).

While the water of the outer balloon, would usually be cold, that of the inner dome might be warmer.

I also suggest that the waters of the outer dome be maintained largely sterile to life. No nutrients added, and also as little Oxygen and CO2, CO, etc. that life might be favored by to be eliminated to help keep sterility.

The objective is clear ice, possibly as clear as window glass, and also clear water.

Query: "How far can light go down in clear water?"

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=How+far+c … 8fb666eee1

Specific Response: https://www.globalseafood.org/advocate/ … ble%201%29. Quote:

10 meters
Light is quenched rather quickly even in clear water. Only about 25 percent of incident light reaches a depth of 10 meters in the open ocean, where water is very clear. The visible spectrum consists of wavelengths between 390 and 750 nanometers (nm, Table 1).
Light penetration in water - Responsible Seafood Advocate
www.globalseafood.org/advocate/light-penetration-in-water/
www.globalseafood.org/advocate/light-penetration-in-water/

I am an American Hil Billy, so I like feet: Curiously 10 Meters = 32.808399 feet.

That is a special number sort of.

So, the inner balloon could have its top, 10 Meters = 32.808399 feet below the top of the ice. (Approximately said Mediocrities ).

That might be OK, but the lighting at that point would be approximately .25% of Martian light, which is approximately 1/2 that of Earth, so
~10,000/2 = 5000, 5000 x .25, then might be about 1,250 Lumens.

I asked a question: "How many lumens of light do plants need?",

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=How+many+ … ea317aeef5

Lots of ambiguity.

This one is rather harsh for my plans as so far described: https://greengardenist.com/demystifying … ant-needs/

OK, so I asked a question in a stupid fashion, got what I deserved.

LUX: https://herbswithin.com/lux-for-plants/ … 0or%20less
Quote:

From sunlight (at least six hours a day):
High-light or full-sun plants need at least 60,000 lux
Medium-light or partial sun plants need at least 35,000 lux
Low-light or partial shade plants need at least 15,000 lux
Very low-light plants or heavy shade plants need around 1000 to 5000 lux or less

How much LUX in Sunshine? https://www.bing.com/search?q=How+much+ … 32240638b2
Quote:

32,000 - 100,000 lux

So, raw sunshine on Mars might be about 18,000 = 50,000 lux, I am estimating.

And then if attenuated by balloons and ice and water, perhaps 9,000 = 25,000 lux. (Under 10 Meters or ~32 feet of ice/water).

So, for the scheme as I planned it so far, using 10 Meters of ice/water, it does not look that good, for many plants.
But it would not be worthless.

For one of my favorites: How many lux does Hydrilla need to grow?

General Answer: How many Lux does Hydrilla need to grow?

I haven't gotten the answer yet, but I have this: Quote:

Medicinal uses of Hydrilla
Hydrilla is known to have many digestive and health benefits. The plant contains vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants, as well as being useful for fighting indigestion. The plant is also known for its extremely high concentration of calcium, vitamin B-12, iron and magnesium. As such, the plant has become an extremely popular "superfood"[22]

The vitamin B-12, is unusual as I usually expect it to have to come from microbes, or animals that humans eat?????

Query: "How much Light does Hydrilla need to grow?"

Well, very little precise info. This though: https://www.myaquariumclub.com/growing- … 80570.html

A answer of sorts:

Still, as it is a very low light demanding plant, you can try planting a small bunch in the part of tank that is directly under the light unit.

------

Enough of that! It appears that indeed the top of the inner balloon could be at 10 Meters / ~32 feet, and some agriculture could be possible.

The reason I like 10 Meters, or 32 feet is that on Mars, that is about 333 millibars pressure. Tolerable for humans to some extent.

.38 * 1010? Earth Sea level pressure = "1,013.25" millibars. So, ~385.035 millibars, but the atmosphere of Mars and the outer balloon will add some pressure as well, so ~385.035 + 20? millibars??? = ~405??? millibars.

But a relatively human safe condition could be maintained with water inside the inner balloon, if the human stayed on the bottom of the inner balloon, or if they had a pressure suit. In that case the top of the inner balloon could be closer to the surface than 10 Meters, 32 feet,
so that more light would be received by plants within.

Certain sources including Robert have suggested that less than 100 millibars, is harmful to vascular dry land plants. As for vascular aquatic plants, or Algae, or Cyanobacteria, those limits may not apply. It is not known by me.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-13 11:32:05)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#526 2022-10-02 15:11:05

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#527 2022-10-02 16:33:30

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#528 2022-10-02 18:05:03

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#529 2022-10-03 14:02:15

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#530 2022-10-03 15:18:52

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#531 2022-10-03 19:54:50

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#532 2022-10-03 22:38:05

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#533 2022-10-04 08:39:38

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#534 2022-10-04 10:48:09

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#535 2022-10-05 12:55:54

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#536 2022-10-05 19:10:53

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#537 2022-10-06 09:49:01

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#538 2022-10-07 06:19:50

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#539 2022-10-07 09:27:04

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#540 2022-10-07 10:50:02

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#541 2022-10-07 12:15:16

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#542 2022-10-08 18:04:04

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#543 2022-10-09 13:22:41

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#544 2022-10-10 19:48:50

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#545 2022-10-10 20:47:52

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#546 2022-10-11 08:49:11

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#547 2022-10-11 09:56:44

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#548 2022-10-11 19:48:39

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#549 2022-10-11 20:30:03

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#550 2022-10-13 10:24:03

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Board footer