New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#301 2026-05-13 08:26:34
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
Moon Cracks have become a major interest to me:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ … i-AA2367kI
Quote:
The moon is still alive: The shocking truth behind moonquakes
Recent findings show the Moon may still be geologically active. Cracks and moonquakes suggest ongoing internal changes.These discoveries reshape how we think about lunar stability. The Moon may not be as dead as once believed.
*You have to unmute the video.
So, with the upper layers of the Moon shrinking faster than lower layers, (Presumable from cooling), and the tides, is this a bit like a jaw crusher?
https://www.cpcequipments.com/blog/cate … -crushers/
Quote: https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.2339c820946 … ImgRaw&r=0
*You have to click the above link to see it.
So, are the Moon and Mars fracking themselves over time, with water settling into its fractures, and the Moon having rubble and gasses settle into it's fractures?
Query for more information: "The moon is still alive: The shocking truth behind moonquakes Recent findings show the Moon may still be geologically active. Cracks and moonquakes suggest ongoing internal changes.These "
The query results in this: https://www.bing.com/search?q=The+moon+ … ST&ntref=1
A question is can you burrow into the cracks deeply if over time the cracks have self fracked?
And may you access different resources and data than what is on the surface?
My notion is that the "Atmosphere" in these cracks will be more substantial and perhaps of different gasses than is true on the surface of the Moon.
Query: "What gasses may be inside of Moon cracks?"
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE
Quote:
NASA Detected a Gas Leak on the Moon — No Human Was There. Scientists Still Can't Fully Explain
YouTube
AI AstroVeo
1.4K views
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-026-01933-2
Quote:
Daily variations of carbon, nitrogen and oxygen ions in a thin lunar atmosphere
Kentaro Terada, Ryusei Nishihira, Shoichiro Yokota, Yoshifumi Saito, Kazushi Asamura, Masaki N. Nishino & Shota Notsu
So, I am wondering if the higher layers of rock cool faster than the lower ones does that cause a stress that may provide horizontal crack extensions from the vertical cracks?
Do the Moon fractures fill with gas molecules, like it seems that the Mars fractures fill with water?
As fractures extend and rock may be grinded, are gasses embedded in the crust released?
Do Gasses on the Surface including Hydrogen, Hydroxyl, water vapor and Helium travel into the pore space of the Moon cracks?
I have read that the Moon cracks may be 19 to 20 km deep. So there may be a chance if the gasses settle there in the pore space that a very small atmospheric pressure might build up in the bottoms of the cracks.
Or do solar effects cause gasses to wick out like evaporation of water from wet cloth?
I am hoping that the cracks may turn out to be a source of resource.
Ending Pending 
Last edited by Void (2026-05-13 08:54:57)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#302 2026-05-14 09:29:44
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
I am considering the possibility that there could be a way to extract molecules from a Moon crack without drilling too deep.
The nature of the molecule processes inside and outside the crack may matter.
I am making the assumption that molecules may accumulate in the cracks, sourced from deep inside the Moon and perhaps also some coming from the surface and responding to gravity. If this process were true, then there has be a point of saturation where the crack can hold no more molecules. The variables of surface temperature and tides may affect this saturation of capacity.
I think a "Dry Hot Well" method might work, along with a variable temperature adsorption/desorption process, and also electric current flows might work.
Long ago I read an article about how the Germans dried up ground using electricity so that they could move tanks, in WWII. Never could find anything about that in the recent years, I think it is not supposed to be available. Also though, if you make a plough blade a cathode, and put an anode in the ground you could attract water to the plough blade.
Today, I think I found support for this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 5266900111
Quote:
As a result of application of direct electrical current alone, water is driven from the positive to the negative electrode, where it can be pumped out and discarded.
Quote:
Reference (44)
AdamsonL.G. et al.
Some data on electrokinetic phenomena and their possible application in petroleum production
Chim. Chronika (Athens, Greece)
(1963)
AdamsonL.G. et al.
Possible use of electric current for increasing volumetric rate of flow of oil and water during primary or secondary recovery
Chim. Chronika (Athens, Greece)
(1963)
AmbaS.A.
BelluigiA.
Über die elektro-osmotische Entwasserung von Lockerboden in dreidimensionaler Form
So now I have a proper word to search for! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrokinetic_phenomena
Quote:
Electrokinetic refers to the study and phenomena of particle or fluid motion induced by an electric field.
Electrokinetic phenomena occur when an electric field interacts with charged particles or surfaces in a fluid, causing motion of either the particles or the fluid itself. These effects are particularly significant in heterogeneous fluids, colloidal suspensions, or porous media, where particles can be solid, liquid, or gas bubbles at micro- or nanoscale. The underlying mechanism involves the electric double layer (EDL), a region near a charged surface where counterions accumulate, creating a potential difference that drives motion when influenced by an external force.
Wikipedia
+2
Key Electrokinetic Phenomena
Electrophoresis: Movement of charged particles relative to a fluid under a uniform electric field. This is widely used in analytical chemistry and biotechnology for separating biomolecules.
1
Electroosmosis: Flow of liquid relative to a stationary charged surface under an electric field, commonly applied in microfluidic devices and soil remediation.
2
Streaming Potential and Streaming Current: Electric potential or current generated when a fluid moves through a charged porous medium, useful in sensors and energy harvesting.
1
Electric Sonic Amplitude: Ultrasound generated by colloidal particles in an oscillating electric field.
13 Sources
Applications
Electrokinetic principles are applied in microfluidics, lab-on-a-chip devices, capillary electrophoresis, gel electrophoresis, and electrochromatography for precise manipulation and analysis of fluids and particles at micro- and nanoscale. In environmental engineering, electroosmosis is used to remove contaminants like heavy metals from soils. Electrokinetics also underpins the design of electrochemical devices such as batteries and electrosynthesis systems.
Number Analytics
+2
Summary
In essence, electrokinetics bridges physics and chemistry by explaining how electric fields influence the motion of particles and fluids. Its study enables control over microscale and nanoscale processes, with broad applications in scientific research, industrial processes, and environmental remediation.
Wikipedia
+1
So the presumed gasses in a crack or even in the regolith are perhaps to be considered to be at a lower partial vacuum than the Exosphere of the Moon.
If it turns out to be true that a reservoir of thin gasses exist in the crack it may be possible to draw (+) ions to a cold to hot adsorption method. You would also need an anode at some distance away in the crack. The Anode (+) would repel any (+) ions of gas, but the Cathode in the adsorption method (-) will attract a positive ion flow into the adsorption device. The adsorption device would be cold during this part of the action but later it would be heated to cause a release of the collected Ions in to a subsequent concentration/collection device.
It is possible that it might be helpful to heat the Anode to more excite the gas molecules.
https://www.aiche.org/sites/default/fil … part_1.pdf
Quote:
Effects of Pressure and Temperature on Adsorption
The adsorption rate is directly proportional to the temperature, pressure, and surface area of the material. Adsorption is a process where mass transfer occurs from gases into a solid material or from a liquid surface to a solid. Adsorption can be classified into physical (physisorption) and chemical (chemisorption) processes, each with its own set of characteristics and effects on the variation of pressure and temperature. Adsorption isotherms represent the relationship between adsorbate adsorbed and the effects of temperature and pressure. The Langmuir isotherm is a common representation of the equilibrium between an adsorbent system and an adsorbate in isothermal conditions.
AIChE
Doing an electric circuit on the Moon with an insulated wire might present trouble as the vacuum can leak electricity.
I have some hopes that an anode with an heated electron gun may be able to shoot an electron beam to a cathode method some distance away, perhaps line of sight.
So, we know that things like H20 and Hydroxyl move around the Moon during the day/night cycle. We may hope that there is a concentration of those and perhaps Carbon and Nitrogen in the Lunar Cracks, but we do not know yet.
Perhaps this is a frist attempt to design a machine to collect gas molecules on the Moon, specifically (+) Ions.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-05-14 10:20:13)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#303 2026-06-07 11:05:19
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
Because of this I wonder if there could be hydrated minerals where there may once have been aquifers on the Moon.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … r-AA1MGxM1
Quote:
Chip Chick
19.8K Followers
Scientists Claim Alien Life Could Have Existed On The Moon Twice Throughout History
Story by Emily Chan • 8mo •
3 min read
Night time and high latitudes could have been a place were water might have pooled.
Query: "Hydrated Minerals on the Moon?"
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Hydrated+ … pc=EDGEXST
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Hydrated Minerals on the Moon
Recent lunar sample analyses have revealed hydrated minerals containing significant amounts of water on the Moon, challenging the long-held view that the Moon is completely dry.Discovery in Chang’e-5 Samples
In 2024, researchers identified a hydrated mineral in lunar soil returned by China’s Chang’e-5 mission. The mineral, (NH₄)MgCl₃·6H₂O, contains about 41% water by weight arXiv.org. Its structure resembles terrestrial minerals like novograblenovite (formed from basalt reacting with water-rich volcanic gases) and carnallite (an evaporite salt). The presence of ammonium suggests a more complex degassing history of lunar volcanic gases arXiv.org.Origin and Contamination Rules Out
Scientists ruled out terrestrial contamination or rocket exhaust by matching the mineral’s chemical and isotopic composition with its formation conditions. This means the water is native to the Moon and likely formed during volcanic activity when water-rich gases interacted with silicate minerals arXiv.org.Water in Sunlit Areas
The findings show that water molecules can persist in sunlit regions of the Moon as hydrated salts, not just in permanently shadowed craters arXiv.org. This expands the potential locations for water resources and changes how we model lunar water distribution.Broader Implications
Resource potential: Hydrated salts could be a source of water for future lunar bases, especially if processed to extract hydrogen and oxygen.Volcanic history: The mineral’s composition provides clues about the Moon’s volcanic degassing and the chemistry of its early atmosphere.
Meteorite link: China’s Chang’e-6 mission also found rare CI chondrite meteorites on the Moon, which themselves contain hydrated minerals, suggesting that volatile-rich asteroids can deliver water-bearing material to the lunar surface Futurism.
Summary
Hydrated minerals on the Moon — such as the ammonium-magnesium-chloride hydrate found in Chang’e-5 samples — prove that water exists in chemically bound form in sunlit areas. This discovery reshapes our understanding of lunar water, its origins, and its potential as a resource for human exploration.
The sun was perhaps only 70% to 100% as warm as it is today. Probably more towards 70% at the time of Moon water.
The Moon may have had much more geothermal heat at that time.
So, Snows rains, fogs, frosts? More at was at that time the high latitudes.
Lunar days were shorter then.
So, if dry regolith is piled on top of fossil aquifers, then much in the way of Hydrated Minerals may exist further down.
We know that Mars was very wet early on but not now, perhaps the Moon was very wet a one or two times.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-06-07 11:14:17)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#304 2026-06-09 09:31:32
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
In the prior post some claims are made that the Moon had a significant atmosphere perhaps 2 times in history.
I have recently seen an article that indicated that the Earth had a crust much earlier than was previously supposed.
There are claims that Mars had lots of water in deep fractures far below the surface.
It is possible that a worlds size determines the rate of some parts of it's aging form?
I am willing to agree that the effects of the sun will have taken away some of the atmosphere and water of Mars, but it seems to me that Mars is more like somebody pulled the bathtub plug and much of the water went underground into fractures. Why does that not happen to Earth?
I think that Plate Tectonics would tend to squeeze the water back up, and also bond many of the cracks with heat. The gravitational force would be assistive in that.
In a world where no gravity existed you could mix rocks and water and they would not settle out from gravity. No, such world can exist, but a world with 1/3rd or 1/6th of the gravity can and does exist still.
If the Earth had a crust very early then why couldn't the Moon?
If the Moon were a somewhat wet world at least 2 times in history, I expect that it "Aged" much faster than Mars.
As cooled faster in its crust than mantle, perhaps similar to Mars, crack space might have drained any pooled water into its crust.
Even if the wet phases were only millions of years in length, this could have happened.
But we seem to see lots of broken dry regolith on the surface. If there were a intense bombardment with relatively dry rock, then perhaps this is the answer to why.
I am not very hopeful of residual water in deep cracks on the Moon, but I am hopeful that if water did fill those cracks, then Hydrated minerals may have resulted from chemical reactions.
The dry regolith the Moon is covered with may be more of a mask than the true identify of the Moons character, I think.
It is possible that I am correct/incorrect in these claims.
But it would be very worthwhile to find out, I think.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-06-09 09:44:48)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#305 2026-06-20 12:36:52
- Terraformer
- Member
- From: The Fortunate Isles
- Registered: 2007-08-27
- Posts: 4,007
- Website
Re: The Moon
NH4? Ammonium minerals? Not just water? Ooh that will be *very* useful.
Use what is abundant and build to last
Offline
Like button can go here
#306 2026-06-20 16:27:44
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
Well, I would think it is worth looking into a bit: https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/a … nking.html Quote:
The incredible shrinking Moon: Cracks in the surface of our nearest neighbour reveal it is getting smaller
See more Daily Mail on Google - save us as a Preferred Source
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Updated: 06:43 EDT, 21 August 2010
Image Quote: 
Quote:
Cracking up: The unusual lobate scarps have been found in the lunar highlands by Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. (AFP/Getty)
It looks as if lose rubble has settled into a crack that has been expanding while the crust cools and contracts.
I am wondering if these cracks might have intercepted old lava tubes. If so, if water pooled on the Moon, it could have sunk into such a underground structure.
The cracks are said be as much as 19 km deep. Can it be possible dig into them by some means?
Ending Pending
Quote:
Like
Dislike
Yes, the Moon has lobate scarps, which are tectonic landforms associated with thrust faults. These features primarily occur in the Moon's highlands and were first recognized in photographs taken during the Apollo missions
Smithsonian Institution
Smithsonian Institution
+1
. Lobate scarps are formed when the lunar crust contracts, causing the near-surface materials to break and create thrust faults
NASA
NASA
. They are significant geological features that indicate the Moon's dynamic history
earthmagazine.org
earthmagazine.org
.
Many of these may be too young to have been flooded in the past, it seems: https://www.science20.com/news_articles … nking_moon
https://airandspace.si.edu/research/pro … carps-moon
However, they seem to talk about compressive forces. I was expecting cracks formed by crust contraction.
Again many of the cracks are young, and I would not expect those to have water alterations in them. Too bad. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 … 031532.htm
Query: "Very Old Deep Cracks on the Moon?"
Well it seems that the word "Grabin" has merit for my quest. Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Ancient Deep Cracks on the Moon
Recent high‑resolution images from NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) have revealed massive, deep cracks — called grabens — that crisscross the Moon’s surface, especially around the ancient Mare Humorum basin Earth.com+1. These grabens are the largest known tensional (stretching) structures on the Moon and are concentrated along the margins of large dark volcanic plains.How They Formed
Grabens form when a block of crust drops between two normal faults as the surface is stretched. On the Moon, this stretching was driven by volcanic loading. Mare Humorum, a circular basin in the Moon’s southwest, was filled with thick basalt layers (over 2 miles deep in some areas) during the Imbrian period (~3.7–3.4 billion years ago) Earth.com. As the lava cooled and contracted, the basin floor sagged inward, creating outward‑pulling stress on the surrounding crust. This stress fractured the stronger rocks into long, deep valleys — the grabens The Daily Galaxy.Scale and Significance
Number: Over 1,800 graben segments have been mapped on the Moon’s near side Earth.com+1.Size: Many run hundreds of kilometers but are only a few miles wide.
Global effect: When all grabens opened, the Moon’s radius increased by about 400 feet — a tiny change in absolute terms but a clear sign of global extension Earth.com.
Age: Most large grabens formed between 3.7 and 3.4 billion years ago, with a peak near 3.6 billion years ago Earth.com.
Other Ancient Cracks Beneath the Surface
NASA’s GRAIL mission also detected underground gravity anomalies — long, straight dikes of volcanic rock — that formed when magma pushed against the Moon’s cooler crust in its first billion years EARTH Magazine. These dikes predate most of the Moon’s cratered surface, meaning they are among the oldest known structures on the Moon.Ongoing Activity
While most grabens are ancient, some recent studies suggest that the Moon’s crust is still adjusting. A high‑resolution graben reported in 2025 may be less than 50 million years old, indicating that tectonic stress and crustal deformation can occur much later in the Moon’s history Earth.com.In summary: The “very old deep cracks” on the Moon are primarily grabens formed by crustal stretching under the weight of ancient lava seas. They are both a record of the Moon’s early volcanic and tectonic history and a testament to the fact that the Moon’s surface has been reshaped by internal forces for billions of years.
Query: "When did the Moon likely have an atmosphere?"
This seems favorable to the idea of water in the Grabins. Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
When the Moon Likely Had an Atmosphere
The Moon’s atmosphere today is extremely thin — essentially an exosphere — but geological and geochemical evidence suggests it once had a much denser atmosphere, and possibly even thicker ones at different times in its history.Early formation and Late Heavy Bombardment (4.1–3.8 billion years ago)
Shortly after the Moon formed about 4.5 billion years ago, it was molten and covered in a global magma ocean Science Mission Directorate. Around 4.1–3.8 billion years ago, during the Late Heavy Bombardment, intense asteroid and comet impacts triggered widespread volcanic activity. These eruptions released large amounts of gas, including water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other volatiles, creating a temporary but relatively thick atmosphere Astronomy Magazine+1. This atmosphere may have lasted for tens to hundreds of millions of years, with peak density around 3.5 billion years ago, when pressures could have reached about 1 kilopascal — roughly 1.5 times thicker than Mars’s current atmosphere Astronomy Magazine+1.Volcanic gas releases (3–4 billion years ago)
Studies of ancient lava flows (maria) and Apollo samples show that between 3 and 4 billion years ago, the Moon’s volcanism produced enough gas to sustain a detectable atmosphere for about 70 million years Astronomy Magazine. This atmosphere was still far thinner than Earth’s, but it could have allowed some liquid water to exist transiently in the Moon’s narrow “habitable zone” between its hot and cold sides Smithsonian Magazine.Earlier possible atmosphere
Some researchers also suggest that shortly after the Moon’s formation, during its early magma ocean phase, outgassing from the surface could have produced a brief, thin atmosphere Smithsonian Magazine. Large asteroid impacts in the distant past may have also released gas, though these events were less extensive than the Late Heavy Bombardment period Smithsonian Magazine.Summary timeline
~4.5–4.1 billion years ago: Early magma ocean; possible brief outgassing atmosphere.
~4.1–3.8 billion years ago: Late Heavy Bombardment triggers major volcanic gas releases; thick atmosphere for tens–hundreds of millions of years.
~3.5–3.0 billion years ago: Peak atmospheric density; possible transient liquid water.
~3.0 billion years ago onward: Gradual thinning; current exospheric conditions.
In short, the Moon likely had a detectable atmosphere for most of its first ~3 billion years, with the densest phase occurring around 3.5 billion years ago during its Late Heavy Bombardment period Astronomy Magazine+1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_the_Moon
So, I would suppose that with a dim sun and shorter days at that time, the best bet for liquid water would be at an appropriate latitude where snows and frosts might melt during the day near a Grabin.
It could be possible, I think. The Moon apparently also had a good magnetic field at times in the past.
Query: "When might the Moon have had a global magnetic field?"
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
When the Moon Might Have Had a Global Magnetic Field
Recent reanalysis of Apollo-era lunar rocks suggests the Moon likely had a global magnetic field only briefly in its early history, rather than for most of its existence.Key time window:
The strongest evidence comes from magnetized rocks dated between about 4.25 and 2.5 billion years ago. At around 4 billion years ago, lunar samples indicate the Moon’s magnetic field was strong — possibly above 110 microtesla, compared to Earth’s current ~50μT Wikipedia+1. This period overlaps with the Moon’s early volcanic activity and the formation of its very tenuous atmosphere.Nature of the field:
Duration: The global dynamo may have operated for only a few hundred million years, from roughly 4Ga to 2.5Ga National Center for Biotechnology Information.
Strength: At peak (~4Ga), it could have been stronger than Earth’s present field, but it weakened over time, dropping to ~20μT by 3.6–3.1Ga Wikipedia.
Later history: After ~2.5Ga, the Moon’s magnetic field became weak and localized, with magnetization mostly from crustal rocks rather than an active core dynamo Wikipedia.
Why it was short-lived:
The Moon’s small iron core (about 1/7th of its radius) cooled quickly, making it difficult to sustain a long-lived geodynamo Wikipedia+1. Instead, the strong magnetism recorded in some Apollo samples may have come from brief internal melting events or impact-induced magnetic fields, rather than a continuous dynamo casualastronomer.com+1.Sampling bias:
Most Apollo samples came from titanium-rich maria, which are more likely to record strong magnetism. This means the “strong field” signal may have been exaggerated, and the actual duration of intense global magnetism was likely much shorter than previously thought ScienceDaily.Summary:
The Moon probably had a global magnetic field only during a short window between ~4 and ~2.5 billion years ago, with peak strength around 4Ga, before its small core could no longer sustain a dynamo. For most of its history, especially after ~2.5Ga, the Moon’s magnetic field was weak and localized.
Ending Pending
So, if you had been on the Earth 3 billion years ago, Mars might have still been alive and you might have seen weather in the Moons atmosphere.
Last edited by Void (2026-06-20 17:11:44)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#307 2026-07-26 11:12:54
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
I am going to suggest a method to suggest a way to land starships on the Moon.
I am going to also use this in another topic down the road to achieve a chemical/electric-Plasma/Ballistic Capture path to Deimos/Phobos/Mars.
A reusable sky crane, that also might lift humans up and down as an alternative task.
As Starship has to be refillable to get to the Moon or Mars, the ports for refilling might also be mated to a sky crane.
The Sky Crane lifting off from the Moon, perhaps with LOX from the Moon will mate with an arrived Starship. It will mate to the propellant ports and also secure itself as a landing frame.
The partnership will descend on Raptors, but instead of translating to the landing thrusters that run on Ullage Gas, will tip to transition to such engines mounted on the Sky Crane.
The ship then presented horizontal to the Moons surface, can be lowered by mechanical means onto a sort of cart that may deliver it to a location where it can become part of a habitat/etc. activity.
The Sky Craine could have a small device for humans attached to it at times, perhaps a Crew Dragon Capsule sort of thing.
Presuming a Capsule return to Earth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am thinking of two Starships for an expedition to Mars.
1) Expendable (Not really) as a chemical booster to push ship #2. Then #1 goes to Moon orbit to be fetched to the surface by the Sky Crane.
2) A Starship modified to be propelled by Electric Rocket methods. It will need a electric power method such as Nuclear or Solar.
The launch using #1 is intended to quicken the transit, so that you don't have to spend ages accelerating with an electric propulsion.
The Use of electric in #2 is so that you might hope to achieve a Ballistic Capture to Mars.
The intention here is to use the #1 as a booster, but still get it onto the Moons surface as an item of value.
While I have specified so far that the propulsion of #2 would be electric, I think a hybrid might work.
The ship #2 would not need a heat shield or landing legs as it is intended to go into orbit of Mars, not to land on Mars.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-07-26 11:26:31)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#308 2026-07-26 11:40:06
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
To build further on the Lunar Sky Crane or Landing Frame, Starship would arrive to Lunar Orbit with very little LOX but with sufficient Methane for the landing, and a little extra as a gift to the Sky Crane effort.
Sky Crane would lift LOX from the Moon (Eventually when developed).
This arrangement will allow for more cargo to the Moon as the Starship does not need to bring landing LOX.
But of course if it brings Extra Methane that is likely to be the extra cargo.
The Sky Crane can be multi-tasked. It might go get a Starship and bring it down, or may serve as the propulsion for human landings.
Possibly humans might even ascend and descend without an additional spacecraft but just in environmental suits.
This would presume they will have a place of refuge in orbit and on the surface of the Moon.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-07-26 11:42:24)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#309 2026-07-26 11:55:40
- tahanson43206
- Moderator
- Registered: 2018-04-27
- Posts: 25,584
Re: The Moon
For Void re recent posts in "The Moon" topic....
The concept of a "Sky Crane" reminded me of the Apollo program Lunar Landing Training Vehicle:
Critical to the Apollo training program, the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle (LLTV) allowed astronauts to master the intricacies of landing on the Moon by simulating the Lunar Module’s (LM) performance. Dubbed the “flying bedstead,” the ungainly contraption is “a much unsung hero of the Apollo Program,” according to Apollo 8 astronaut Bill Anders. The open-framed LLTV used a downward pointing turbofan engine to counteract five-sixths of the vehicle’s weight to simulate lunar gravity and LM-like thrusters for attitude control. The astronauts were thus able to simulate maneuvering and landing on the lunar surface while still on Earth.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
#310 2026-07-26 20:07:14
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
We could start with a sawhorse and improve on it: https://www.homedepot.com/b/Garage-Tool … 5yc1vZc708
I don't think Home Depot makes one large enough, but this is a start: 
For the Moon the structure could be light, and does not have to be of Stainless Steel.
Mount propellant tanks on it and provide engines suitable not to excessively stir up regolith.
The "Spine" of it does not have to be nearly as stout as the picture implies. The Starship itself being fixed into the frame could provide additional "Spine" during the landing event.
Current specs imply that a Stripped-down Starship could lift greater mass to orbit than one that was designed for reuse or as a Lunar Starship.
No: Heat Shield, Header Tanks, Landing Legs.
Also, if the landing engines are to be on the landing frame then no special engines on the Starship for landing on the Moon.
Query: "How much cargo can Starship lift to LEO in expendable Starship but reused Super Heavy?"
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Starship LEO Payload in Expendable vs. Reusable Modes
In its fully expendable configuration, the Starship system can deliver about 250 metric tons (250,000kg) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) ShunSpirit+1. This is achieved when both the Super Heavy booster and the Starship upper stage are discarded after launch, maximizing propellant load and structural mass for payload.In contrast, in its fully reusable configuration, Starship is designed to deliver around 100–150 metric tons (100,000–150,000kg) to LEO ShunSpirit+1. Reusability trades some payload capacity for the ability to recover and reuse both stages, which significantly reduces launch costs and increases operational tempo.
Summary table:
Configuration Payload to LEO
NotesExpendable (both stages discarded) ~250t
Maximum payload, no reusabilityReusable (both stages recovered) ~100–150t
Lower payload but much lower cost per launchKey points:
The expendable mode is useful for one-time, high-payload missions where cost is secondary to maximum capacity.
The reusable mode is optimized for frequent, cost-effective launches, enabling large-scale space infrastructure and commercial deployment.
Payload figures depend on mission profile, fuel margins, and Starship block configuration Wikipedia+2.
If you need the maximum cargo capacity for a single launch, expendable Starship offers ~250t to LEO. For recurring, economical operations, reusable Starship can still deliver 100–150t to LEO.
So, on a guess maybe about 200t to LEO, where the Superheavy is reused and the Starship remains in orbit.
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Efficiency Difference Between Electric and Chemical Rockets
Electric propulsion systems are orders of magnitude more efficient than chemical rockets, primarily because they achieve much higher specific impulse (Isp) — a measure of how effectively a rocket uses propellant to produce thrust.Specific impulse comparison
Chemical rockets: Typically have Isp values in the range of 300–450 seconds Innovation News Network. This means they produce a lot of thrust quickly but require large amounts of propellant for the same total velocity change (delta‑v).
Electric propulsion (e.g., ion or Hall-effect thrusters): Can achieve Isp values of 1,600–3,000 seconds or more Innovation News Network+1. Some advanced systems have reached 10,000 seconds Indian Defence News, meaning they can produce the same delta‑v with far less propellant.
Efficiency gain
Because Isp is directly proportional to propellant efficiency, electric propulsion can be 10–30 times more efficient than chemical rockets in terms of propellant usage for the same mission delta‑v Innovation News Network+1. For example, a satellite needing 2 tons of liquid fuel with chemical propulsion might only require 200 kg of propellant with electric propulsion Indian Defence News.Impact on mission design
Lower propellant mass allows spacecraft to be lighter, carry more payload, and reduce launch costs Indian Defence News+1.
Longer operational life: Missions can last 5–10 years longer due to reduced propellant needs Indian Defence News.
Slower but steady: Electric systems provide low thrust over thousands of hours, making them ideal for deep space or long-duration in-space maneuvers Innovation News Network+1.
Not for launch: They lack the high thrust needed to escape Earth’s gravity, so they are used after the spacecraft is already in space Wikipedia.
Summary
Electric rockets are 10–30× more efficient than chemical rockets in propellant usage, enabling lighter spacecraft, longer missions, and lower operational costs — but at the cost of slower acceleration and lower thrust. This makes them the preferred choice for long-duration, high-efficiency missions in space.
If a propulsion to do the Lunar Starship needs 1200 to 1500 tons of propellants, doing it with electric propulsion might do it for 120t to 150t.
But you cannot land it with electric rockets. So, you want the landing frame.
Trying to translate apples to oranges is only a partial success here.
The propellant for electric rockets will need a power supply. As it happens we will want solar panels on the Moon anyway.
If the electric rocket propellant were mostly Argon with a little Xenon, that would be relatively familiar.
But ultimately, I would entertain chopping some Starships into propellant for Electric/Metal-Plasma/Engines.
Early on it might be great to move fuel and Oxygen to the orbit of the Moon by some means for the landing frame to be refilled with.
But down the road, perhaps only Carbon, and to then get Oxygen and Hydrogen from Lunar Ice and Regolith.
While some Starships might be chopped up in orbit for propellants, others may be moved to the Lunar Surface.
Anyway, it exists as something to investigate perhaps.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-07-26 20:40:01)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#311 2026-07-27 07:49:46
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
(th) said: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 60#p240560
The suggestions you make are interesting, and perhaps we can have a look at them along the way. If you want to show me how to use AI agents to provide graphics I might like that.
I think between you and I sometimes the notion of when to go deep into a patch of weeds and when to have a sky camera view are not simultaneous. But that is OK.
To look at what I am currently attempting, think of Earth as a Hearth-Place. We might think to take fire from it to light a candle on the Moon. Or actually to set up a sufficiently large presence on the Moon that it can become generative in itself of achieving and accomplishing.
So, yes the day comes when the Moon's hearthplace may grow up. But just now we are trying to light a fireplace on the Moon.
Indeed, I have implied a place for electric rockets in this development, and they may be involve in both things arriving to the Moon and departing from the Moon.
Now my particular interest in the "Sawhorse Landing Agent", is that production of rocket shells that do not return to Earth may be a parallel path to Starships that do return to Earth. And so an expended "Shell" may have value in space, but most likely that value will be to become propellant or to be moved to the surface of the Moon or to a Space Station somewhere where it will not be an impediment to navigation in LEO.
I mentioned an Argon/Xenon mix for electric rockets as I understand that social inertia, will resist the emergence of what I propose. Stainless Steel as a propellant is probably not ideal, but for many reasons it will be available for the taking from launches from Earth.
An empty Starship shell in orbit of Earth is not particularly valuable in that state, as it would require the lifting of a lot of heavy furnishings to make it into a useful space station. But if it can be either converted to propellants or moved to the surface of the Moon, it may have value. On the Moon many heavy furnishings can be manufactured from local raw materials.
To make it clear why it would be desirable to have one way Starships, there will only be a set number of landing places on Earth to land Starships and the Super Heavies. With extreme automation and robotics it seems likely to me that the cost of manufacturing basic no-frills Starships will go down.
If we could create a most efficient way to export expended Starship shells to the Moon, those shells can be converted to useful living and working spaces on the Moon. In this manner we may efficiently light a fire on the Moon and set up a productive hearthplace to further human intentions.
But indeed, that is with the intention that the Moon will become a Mass Doner to our purpose as well as this seat of power is established.
And yes electric rockets can have a place in that.
I am interested in Nuclear-Electric propulsion but here we have an option for Solar-Electric propulsions. If these shell ships would lift solar panels and provide propellants, the method to move them to the orbit of the Moon will exist. The solar panels likely will stay in orbit of the Moon, to provide power stations that can beam power down to the Moon in the nighttime. The Starship shells will be landed on the Moon and refurbished with local resources.
The "Sawhorse Lander" will be largely refilled with Oxygen on the surface of the Moon. At first Methane may be transported to the orbits of the Moon to refill the "Sawhorse Lander". Later if Hydrogen is available on the Moon just Carbon may be brought from Earth or maybe even Deimos/Phobos/Mars, or maybe Bennu, or Ryugu.
SpaceX or similar may make a mass driver on the Moon to loft materials, that is a great hope.
I also consider the potential that a Neumann Drive or Magdrive can become a matter projector. If the expelled propellant can be held to a tight enough beam, then the plasma of it could hit a target in low orbit of the Moon, and be quenched, into it's mass. Perhaps this process could be accumulative. Vacuum welding of the atoms to the target would be the desired process. But it is not certain at all if this can be made to work as I have expressed the intention for.
Morning Coffee.........
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-07-27 08:15:36)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#312 2026-07-28 10:56:44
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
I want to explore the "Sawhorse Lander" a bit more.
I wonder if "Pot-Belly" Landing bags could be included?
The ship itself if impacting sideways, will have some measure of flex in itself. If we put "Bouncy-Bags" on it they may be assistive in the reasonable survival of the structure of the object.
In landing gravity losses are to be avoided, and yet hard landing is not desired either. So, with "Air-Bags", landing at a slightly higher velocity may reduce gravity losses, and yet better insure the integrity of the object.
The bags might have a plunger that would release the slightly compressed gas under the structure on contact with the Lunar Surface.
I expect though to have a clean surface reduced of sharp rocks that might puncture the bags.
The 'Sawhorse Lander" will still have legs and of course thrusters for landing. But the legs will perhaps not have to endure as much shock if the landing bags do the initial contacting.
The Bags need to not be very flammable as I would intend them to be inflated with Oxygen gas, as it is obtainable from the Moon.
OK, this is very incomplete and quite provisional: 
The Landing Legs also being Pneumatic are inside of compressible bags.
Upon impact it is expected for the bags to burp compressed Oxygen under the assembly between the assembly and the Lunar Surface.
I choose Pneumatic Legs as they are less likely to rupture the bag if it is a hard landing.
The intention is to reuse the Sawhorse Lander itself with engines and propellant tanks, and to also use the Pneumatic Landing Geer.
Of course this could be improved on a lot. It is just a first try.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
I anticipate a future where it may be sensible to launch some portion of Starships to Orbit without the means to land back on Earth. Then I hope to see that material use to make very large spaceships, or to land on the Moon to provide base resources.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-07-28 11:25:46)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#313 2026-08-11 12:42:30
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
Gruithuisen Domes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mons_Gruithuisen_Gamma
Image Quote: 
Quote:
The Gruithuisen domes differ from typical mare domes in that they're more mountain-like in their proportions, with a higher albedo and a rougher surface texture. The lava they're composed of might be the key to why they're different. It's thought to have a higher silica content, making it thicker, slower moving and faster cooling, enabling it to pile up into these structures. Such silicic volcanism is rare on the Moon, and it's still unclear how it can occur there at all, as on Earth it requires the presence of water and plate tectonics - factors absent on the Moon.[6] This makes the region a compelling target for exploration.
So, the Moon is not all one thing, and there may even be a chance of water involved in the formation of these mountains.
https://science.nasa.gov/resource/a-lun … sen-domes/
Quote:
A Lunar Mystery: The Gruithuisen Domes
Ending Pending
Just maybe nuclear fission fuels?
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Granite naturally contains trace amounts of uranium, which can decay into radon gas and emit small amounts of radiation, but typical exposure levels are generally low and not considered a significant health risk.
Natural Occurrence of Uranium in Granite
Granite is an igneous rock formed from the slow cooling of magma deep within the Earth. During its formation, elements such as uranium (U-238), thorium (Th-232), and potassium (K-40) can become incorporated into its mineral structure as naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) due to their compatibility with the crystal lattice of minerals in granite
biologyinsights.com
biologyinsights.com
+1
. The concentration of uranium varies depending on the geological source, and even within a single slab, levels can differ
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
+1
.Radiation Emissions
Uranium in granite undergoes radioactive decay, eventually forming radium, which then decays into radon-222, a colorless, odorless gas
biologyinsights.com
biologyinsights.com
+1
. Radon can accumulate indoors if ventilation is poor, but in most homes, the levels from granite are much lower than those from soil beneath the house, which is the primary source of indoor radon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
+1
. Granite also emits beta and gamma radiation, but these emissions decrease rapidly with distance and are generally comparable to natural background radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
+1
.Health Considerations
For the vast majority of granite countertops and installations, the radiation exposure is well below levels considered harmful
biologyinsights.com
biologyinsights.com
+1
. While some granite slabs may have slightly higher uranium content, studies indicate that direct radiation doses from granite are minor compared to other sources like cosmic rays and soil
biologyinsights.com
biologyinsights.com
+1
. The EPA recommends testing homes for radon as a precaution, but granite itself is rarely a significant contributor to indoor radon levels
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
+1
.Variability and Testing
The uranium content and resulting radiation can vary widely between different types of granite. Accurate measurement requires sophisticated instruments and trained personnel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
+1
. For homeowners concerned about potential exposure, radon testing kits or professional monitoring can provide reliable information on indoor radon levels
biologyinsights.com
biologyinsights.com
+1
.Summary
Granite naturally contains uranium, which decays into radon and emits small amounts of radiation. However, typical exposure from granite countertops or building materials is low, and the main health risk from radon comes from soil beneath homes rather than the stone itself. Proper ventilation and radon testing are effective ways to ensure safety.
Ending Pending
https://skyandtelescope.org/stargazing- … nar-domes/
Image Quote: 
Image Quote: 
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-08-11 13:05:25)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#314 2026-08-14 19:15:47
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
A thought jungle I have been trying to hack though, involves Electron Beams, Particle Accelerators.
Historically electron beams used in such a way would not work as the electron beam would eventually loop back to the spacecraft. So, that is what I accepted until now.
But, Query: "Could an electron beam propel a spacecraft?"
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Could an Electron Beam Propel a Spacecraft?
Yes — in theory, a relativistic electron beam could propel a spacecraft, especially for interstellar missions where traditional chemical rockets are far too slow.How it works
A relativistic electron beam is a stream of electrons accelerated to speeds close to the speed of light. When such a beam strikes a spacecraft, the electrons transfer momentum, creating a thrust. This is similar in principle to how a laser beam pushes a light sail, but instead of photons, the beam uses charged particles MITechNews+1.Recent studies by Jeff Greason and Gerrit Bruhaug propose using these beams to push larger probes (up to ~1,000 kg, comparable to Voyager-class spacecraft) to speeds of around 10% of the speed of light, making interstellar travel within a human lifetime possible nasaspacenews.com.
Key advantages
No onboard propellant needed — energy is delivered from a distant source (e.g., a solar statite near the Sun) nasaspacenews.com.Sustained acceleration — unlike laser sail missions that only fire for a short burst, electron beams could be directed continuously over long distances Phys.org.
Higher payload capability — allows for more scientific instruments and systems than ultra-light laser sail probes Phys.org.
The “Sunbeam” mission concept
The Sunbeam mission design uses a solar statite — a platform that hovers near the Sun using light pressure and magnetic fields. It generates a high-energy electron beam via a “relativistic pinch” effect, which keeps the beam coherent over vast distances. The beam is then aimed at the spacecraft, which is protected by a sunshield nasaspacenews.com.Challenges
Beam coherence over interstellar distances — maintaining a focused, high-energy beam over light-years is difficult due to dispersion Phys.org+1.Energy requirements — generating and directing such beams demands immense power and advanced technology.
Materials and shielding — the statite and spacecraft must withstand extreme heat and radiation near the Sun nasaspacenews.com.
Feasibility
While still in the concept and simulation stage, the physics is sound. The main hurdles are engineering and energy delivery over interstellar distances. If beam focusing and power generation technologies advance, relativistic electron beams could be a viable propulsion method for scientifically capable interstellar probes.In short: Yes — a relativistic electron beam could propel a spacecraft, offering a promising path to faster, more capable interstellar missions, but it remains a futuristic concept requiring major technological breakthroughs MITechNews+2.
So, a tentative yes.
https://mitechnews.com/science/scientis … r-systems/
Quote:
Enter relativistic electron beams made up of electrons moving close to the speed of light. “Beaming power to the ship has long been recognized as one way to get more energy […] than we can carry with us,” Jeff Greason, Chief Technologist of Electric Sky, Inc, and chairman of the Tau Zero Foundation, told Space.com. “Energy is power [multiplied by] time — so to get a given amount of energy from a beam, you either need very high power or you need to stay in the beam a long time.”
>>>>>>>
But I want to change the game a little bit.
I see the Moon as a very large reservoir of Electrons. It would take a long time to exhaust the Moon electrons to the point that an excessive (+) charge would be imposed on the Moon.
The Electron Game: 
Electrons have mass, so this is using a form of Mass Driver, or as I might call it "Mass Projector".
Ben Franklin and his era considered it to be a fluid, and it is a bit like that.
The faster you accelerate the elections, the more inertia in them.
The Phrase "Relativistic Speeds" has been used.
So, if this would work it might work from the edge of the Moon "Hill sphere" down to the "Minimum Lunar Orbit".
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Minimum Lunar Orbit Altitude
The lowest possible lunar orbit altitude is generally considered to be about 15 km (9.3 miles) above the Moon’s surface, based on Apollo 10’s descent tests and the Moon’s topography 知乎. At this height, a spacecraft could theoretically fly just above the highest lunar mountains, but further lowering would risk collision with terrain.Why 15 km is the practical minimum
Apollo 10 test: The Lunar Module descended to ~15 km during its lunar orbit separation and docking rehearsal. This was the closest any crewed spacecraft came to the surface without landing 知乎.Terrain constraints: The Moon’s highest peaks are near this altitude, so going lower increases the risk of hitting mountains 知乎.
Stability and control: While the Moon has no atmosphere, very low orbits (below ~100 km) are unstable due to gravitational anomalies (“mascons”) and require constant station‑keeping to maintain altitude Wikipedia+1.
Lowest achieved orbits
PFS‑2 (Apollo 16): A small subsatellite that, due to gravity field irregularities, made passes as low as ~6 km (3.7 miles) before crashing Space Exploration Stack Exchange.Chang’e 2 (China): Achieved a periapsis of 15 km in a highly elliptical orbit Space Exploration Stack Exchange.
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO): Operates at ~20 km (12 miles) Space Exploration Stack Exchange.
LADEE: 20 km × 60 km (12 mi × 37 mi) orbit Space Exploration Stack Exchange.
Stability considerations
Below ~100 km, most orbits are unstable and require active corrections to stay in place Wikipedia.Only certain frozen orbits at inclinations like 27°, 50°, 76°, and 86° can remain stable for long periods Wikipedia.
Gravitational mascons can cause significant orbital changes over days, so low orbits are not naturally long‑term Wikipedia.
In summary: The theoretical minimum lunar orbit is ~15 km, as tested by Apollo 10, but the practical minimum for a stable, long‑term orbit is much higher, typically above 100 km, unless using special frozen orbits.
If a solar power ring were built around the Moons equator as Japan seems interested in doing, a ring of Electron Particle Accelerators might be able to assist in the alterations of the orbits of special space craft.
Now to make things more complex if the ships had a strong (-) charge, it might be that plumes of matter from a Neumann Drive or MagDrive could send substances to have the ships collect it. As the plumes will be of neutral charge, they would be attracted to the ships (-) charge.
But I admit this is pretty sketchy. Don't know if it can be made practical.
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-08-15 09:55:49)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here
#315 2026-08-15 07:02:41
- tahanson43206
- Moderator
- Registered: 2018-04-27
- Posts: 25,584
Re: The Moon
This post is about a new video from Isaac Arthur...
View Isaac Arthur’s graphic link
Isaac Arthur
Producer at Science & Futurism with Isaac Arthur, President of the National Space Society
Mass Drivers on the Moon: Enabling a Lunar Economy
https://lnkd.in/eGSVj-Dp
The Moon may be dusty and desolate, but its future could be full of traffic. In this extended edition, we explore how mass drivers, rockets, space elevators, and orbital logistics could turn the Moon into the industrial gateway of the Solar System.
Mass Drivers on the Moon: Enabling a Lunar Economy
youtube.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnQJG0FMHX0
Like all of Isaac Arthur's video's, this one features very high quality animation to illustrate the systems described.
We learned about this video courtesy of LinkedIn.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
#316 2026-08-15 10:19:27
- Void
- Member
- Registered: 2011-12-29
- Posts: 9,785
Re: The Moon
Good materials (th).
From my point of view we can call anything that moves mass from the Moon, a "Matter Projector".
I see you have been active on the subject of SiLOX. Another possible propulsion system that has been speculated on is a paste of Nano-Aluminum and LOX.
Mass Drivers as presented in the materials of your post are very desirable but have limits on types of mass they can project into space from the Moon's surface. But we want them if they are at all possible.
It is beginning to look like many types of Mass can be used in electric drive ships that may have high ISP, but low thrust and require electric power. Any means to send such a substance to orbit of the Moon might provide propellants to such propulsion systems.
Oxygen is looking to me to be a very interesting option to move bulk cargos between LEO and Low Lunar Orbit. But I expect that humans will ride faster ships requiring more valuable propellants.
But I have a desire to paste metal onto Moon orbiting targets. If we had such a platform, we might use Neumann Drive or MagDrive to project metals and in the case of Neumann Drive possibly Sili9ca to these targets.
This might be a bit like making candles by dipping into liquid wax repeatedly.
If an electron beam can also target these objects, this may help to accelerate the targets, and might also attract the metal Ions/particles.
Impact will either provide too much heat so that sublimation may dominate, but the hope would be to dissipate the heat fast enough that the impacting materials will vacuum weld to the target. If it had sufficient protection in an interior the target might have a means to return electrons to the Moon with an electron beam.
It is possible that if we could project Oxygen to the target with a Hall Thruster that we might capture Oxygen. But I think it is unlikely to work well.
>>>>>>>>
My feeling is that it would be very nice to have a means to bring Magnetite into orbit of the Moon. I don't think that can be done by the mans I previously speculated on.
It might be done with a Mass Driver.
But I think we might want to start with SiLOX propelled Ships first.
I think that a Starship with uses Metha LOX might be OK for this, as you could put Outrigger SiLOX boosters on it.
This would be a matter projector of sorts. It is all about machines and energy, and involves motors. This device would be that, and then also so is a thing we call a Mass Driver. We are more familiar with Rockets.
A Starship with SiLOX Outrigger Boosters could lift the Starship to orbit of the Moon without even firing up the Metha LOX engines.
The lifting system could bring Extra Oxygen from the Moon to orbit, and also Magnetite to orbit.
Then the Starship refilled with Methane in orbit could land using it's Metha LOX engines. Doing so it could bring the SiLOX engines back down or not.
It seems like the Hybrid SiLOX can be throttled and turned on repeatedly, but I am presuming they would run once per launch from the Moon.
In Orbit and on the way to Earth Magnetite can be split into Iron and Oxygen Neuman Drive or Magdrive can use Iron for propellant, and it appears that Oxygen can be used as a propellant using a Hall Thruster.
There may be a better method, but I think that if you have a small amount of Hydrogen or Methane, you can extract the Oxygen and reduce the Iron. If Hydrogen this would produce water. If Methane then Water and CO2.
The Magnetite is a relatively passive substance to store and transfer.
While it may seem frustrating to bring fuel from Orbit, Such as Methane, we are only going to use it for processing Magnetite, and to land a Starship, with or without SiLOX Outrigger Boosters.
The Carbon in Methane can be used to convert Iron into a form of Steel. The Hydrogen and a Solar Oven, to extract Oxygen from Magnetite.
This will provide lots of mass to propel spacecraft to LEO, possibly with cargos.
SpaceX is speculating on a situation where they might Launch 6 to 7 Starships to orbit. Only on of them will ever land back to Earth, but the engines of the one use ships and other parts might be returned to the Earth's surface using a form of "Starfall".
The excess metal of the 5 to 6 starships, might provide propellants for Metal>Plasma drives to send payloads efficiently, (But slowly) to Low Lunar Orbit.
Except to transfer humans between LEO and Low Lunar Orbit quickly, Metha LOX would not be needed with the exception of method to land a ship on the Moon.
But yes when it becomes practical a Mass Driver could supplement this process, but it may be that only certain payloads will be practical for Mass Drivers, and you may still want the Shipping methods I have previously suggested.
I see that Isaac Arthur is also advocating for Tether methods of lifting cargo from the Moon. This is another complex new technology that might still work with mass drivers and also Space Craft.
Ending Pending
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetite
Quote:
Fe2+Fe3+2O4.
While I am anticipating manufacturing Magnetite, it does occur in places on the Moon naturally:
Quote:
Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Magnetite as a Lunar Resource
Magnetite (Fe₃O₄) is an iron oxide mineral that, while considered rare on the Moon’s surface, has been found in significant quantities in certain lunar regolith regions, particularly in high-titanium (high-Ti) areas. Recent studies of Chang’e-5 soil from the Oceanus Procellarum region have revealed that submicroscopic magnetite particles are embedded in droplet-like iron-sulfide grains within impact glasses english.gyig.cas.cn+1. These particles form via an impact-induced eutectoid reaction between iron-sulfide droplets and silicate glass melt, and their abundance correlates with the titanium content of the surrounding glass english.gyig.cas.cn.Formation and Distribution
Impact origin: High-energy meteorite impacts generate localized high oxygen fugacity environments, enabling oxidation reactions that produce magnetite english.gyig.cas.cn+1.Ubiquity in high-Ti regions: The correlation between magnetite content and TiO₂ in impact glasses suggests that magnetite may be widespread in high-Ti lunar soils, providing mineralogical proof for earlier Apollo-era “magnetite-like” phase detections Science | AAAS.
Localized occurrence: Magnetite is not globally abundant; its presence is tied to specific geological settings and impact histories english.gyig.cas.cn.
Scientific and Resource Significance
Paleomagnetic record: Magnetite can preserve magnetic signatures from the Moon’s past magnetic field, offering clues to its history and geological evolution scienmag.com.Geological indicators: Its formation links to impact processes, helping reconstruct the Moon’s thermal and impact history scienmag.com.
Potential resource: As an iron-rich mineral, magnetite could be a source of metallic iron for in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) in future lunar bases, though its scarcity and localized distribution mean extraction would be targeted to high-Ti regions english.gyig.cas.cn+1.
Planetary science value: Understanding magnetite’s lunar genesis improves models of oxidation processes, oxygen fugacity, and the Moon’s deep interior composition Science | AAAS.
Outlook
While magnetite is not a major, globally accessible lunar resource, its localized abundance in high-Ti regolith makes it a valuable target for future sample return missions and in-situ exploration. Advances in analytical techniques, such as Mössbauer spectroscopy and electron microanalysis, will help map its distribution and refine extraction strategies for potential ISRU applications english.gyig.cas.cn+1.In summary, magnetite on the Moon is a geologically significant but regionally limited resource, with major scientific value for understanding lunar history and a potential niche role in future lunar industry.
If you could collect it magnetically by robot perhaps that might be OK.
But it would likely have other substances bonded to it which actually might be OK as well.
This site has lots of materials about proposed Lunar processes: https://www.youtube.com/@Anthrofuturism
Ending Pending
Last edited by Void (2026-08-15 11:05:33)
Be careful what you wish for.
Offline
Like button can go here