SPACE

[axel000]

Another nice pic of Phoenix from MRO, this time landed with its panels deployed.

[Dio]

Your reply only was saying, basicaly "its very hard".
That dosnt contract the fact it has to be done one day, and it will take a long time to develop.
It also dosnt counter the fact that directly developing space technology will get you a hell of a lot further then just waiting for earth tech to happen to help you along. Which may never happen.

This is just a guess, but I'm thinking you don't have a science degree? Like I said, it's not that "it's hard", it's that "it's impossible without some new science and we have no idea what that new science might be". It's far less progression from James Watt to Wernher Von Braun than from where we are now to where we need to be - I mean, the majority of the physics that is needed for modern space exploration dates from Newton (well, not quite, but you know what I mean).

I don't think we'll be mining space for titanium. There's rather a lot of it here on earth.

Solar cells don't seem to be much of an answer to energy budgets to me. Last I knew, we hadn't got past the breakeven point (they cost more energy to manufacture than they produce in their lifetime, note that you have to take the overnight storage mechanism into account); although that might have changed now. But, of course, no amount of solar energy can help win the colonisation game (an array providing a useful amount of power will be too large to be useful).

A space elevator is the only game-changing technology on the horizon, and I'm happy to bet £10 we won't see that in my lifetime. Even then, though, I'm not sure it really helps for anything beyond the moon or perhaps Mars. Titan at the very outside.

If you think colonists need planets, then yes. I, however, think that living in environments in space is what we should do.

To me that seems to make the problem harder, not easier. At least on a planet there will be the resources needed for construction and expansion, given an infinite amount of energy, there's going to be aluminium and oxygen available in plenty on pretty much any rocky planet... I can understand you might create a few small closed-loop systems as 'lifeboats' but they'd live on an absolute knife-edge.

[zip accident]

I don't think we'll be mining space for titanium. There's rather a lot of it here on earth.

Wikipedia agrees with that. I remembered this, or something like it:

the titanium bought by Lockheed to make Blackbirds had to be imported from the Soviet Union.

So I assumed it was scarce.

Solar cells don't seem to be much of an answer to energy budgets to me. Last I knew, we hadn't got past the breakeven point (they cost more energy to manufacture than they produce in their lifetime, note that you have to take the overnight storage mechanism into account); although that might have changed now.

Who was talking about solar cells? They are not the only way to get energy from sunlight.

A space elevator is the only game-changing technology on the horizon, and I'm happy to bet £10 we won't see that in my lifetime.

That's one thing I don't like about them.

If you think colonists need planets, then yes. I, however, think that living in environments in space is what we should do.

To me that seems to make the problem harder, not easier. At least on a planet there will be the resources needed for construction and expansion, given an infinite amount of energy, there's going to be aluminium and oxygen available in plenty on pretty much any rocky planet... I can understand you might create a few small closed-loop systems as 'lifeboats' but they'd live on an absolute knife-edge.

It seems to me they'd be on a knife edge anywhere. The air on the moon or Mars isn't breateable. If there's a problem, you have to get up through a gravity well to get away from it. There is quite a lot of junk in earth orbit that could be salvaged, though you'd probably need some sort of furnace to make use of it, which does imply something a bit more massive than the ISS. Further out, the asteroid belt is at pretty nearly zero gravity, and consists of rocks of various rocks which could be mined.

[Dio]

It seems to me they'd be on a knife edge anywhere. The air on the moon or Mars isn't breateable. If there's a problem, you have to get up through a gravity well to get away from it. There is quite a lot of junk in earth orbit that could be salvaged, though you'd probably need some sort of furnace to make use of it, which does imply something a bit more massive than the ISS. Further out, the asteroid belt is at pretty nearly zero gravity, and consists of rocks of various rocks which could be mined.

What air on the moon? Seriously, though, there's plenty of oxygen there, just tied up in the rocks. Put up an electrolytic smelting plant and you might be able to extract all the aluminium and oxygen that you needed, if you've got enough energy. Enough to create a sustainable society? Dunno. Hydrogen (for water) and carbon's significant issues on the inner planets - less so if you go to Jupiter, but that makes solar power even more problematic... seems more viable than just floating around, we're talking generations here. Unlikely either way.

[zip accident]

What air on the moon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon

Wikipedia wrote:

The Moon has an atmosphere so thin as to be almost negligible, with a total atmospheric mass of less than 10^4 kg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_the_Moon

[Istar]

... since we seem to do everything in our power to encourage kids to want to be actors, producers and managers, and nothing whatsoever to try to get them to do things that are actually useful and difficult...

Better get busy building Ark B then...

[Dio]

OK, you can have both molecules, I'll worry about the rocks .

[Sir_LANs-a-lot]

So has it started digging about yet and/or discovered life then?

[axel000]

Digging begins probably tomorrow, I think more self-checking and photography today.

[Crystal_sword]

Hmm, Wonder if they find something New to add to the Periodic Table.

[Dio]

That was last month. (Actually was, too).

[Zoot]

Solar cells will be more efficient on the moon than on earth, won't they, so power will be easier to generate?

[Sir_LANs-a-lot]

Solar cells will be more efficient on the moon than on earth, won't they, so power will be easier to generate?

Just think how good they'd be on the sun!

[Dio]

Solar cells will be more efficient on the moon than on earth, won't they, so power will be easier to generate?

Storage becomes even more of an issue, though, because it's dark for two weeks of each month for most of the surface...

[axel000]

Solar cells will be more efficient on the moon than on earth, won't they, so power will be easier to generate?

Storage becomes even more of an issue, though, because it's dark for two weeks of each month for most of the surface...

Its light all the time at the poles though, isn't it ? I think thats the planned location for the lunar base for that exact reason.