I'm doing research in to habitats on the moon for school and would love anyone who is willing to talk about this with me, of course it'd be a bonus if you have some knowledge of this area but it's not necessary. My main research question is "What is the optimal design for a foundational lunar habitat with plans of expansion into the residential sector?"
With that in mind, I have, for the community, these questions:
1. Are you interested in living on the moon?
2. Do you believe that the benefits coming from space exploration outweigh the large costs associated with these programs?
3. What do you think are the major concerns of a habitat on the moon?
4. Should we be focusing on the Moon when there are other options for dealing with overpopulation here on Earth and on Mars?
5. What materials do you think are optimal for building in space?
6. Do you think 3D printing will be a valuable asset for lunar construction?
7. How would you transport materials from the Earth to the Moon?
8. What does the general public stand to gain from living on the Moon?
9. How much funding should the US put into this project?
10. Should the US even be the ones to do this, or should a more collaborative approach be taken with multiple countries participating?
And that's it! I appologize if this is breaking any forum rules that I am unaware of and thank you! I'm looking forward to what eveyone has to say!
Non Sequitur
Jun 3, 15 11:34 am
Perhaps... I'd be a god at hacky-sack. Besides that, not sure what other advantages there are.
Space exploration does not equal living on our nearest natural satellite.
Space itself plus I hear no atmosphere equals bad sunburns
Moving people to the moon is by far one of the least practical solutions to overpopulation ever thought-of in the history of everything. It's right after eugenics on that scale.
Interesting physics question as the lunar gravity is less that earth's. Lack of stress from wind and earthquakes might yield some unconventional shapes unavailable to us poor earthlings.
Probably cheaper to ship things in parts and have robots assemble them on site.
Where else would materials come from? Look into the space elevator project
Nothing but an expensive gated community and travel destination.
zero
They have bigger issues and they have fallen way behind in the whole science department.
anonitect
Jun 3, 15 11:55 am
1. Not me, but I think that future people will want to. I think that robotic exploration is the first step - for the next 50-100 years, we don't really need to send people past earth orbit- and they will really just be guinea pigs to see how the human body responds to living in zero G.
4. No. We are at 7 billion, no way off planet colonies will be able to take billions of people for thousands of years, even with aggressive development.
6. Probably
7. Transporting materials from the Earth seems like a non-starter. What can be mined on the moon or from asteroids?
10. We won't want to perpetuate the cluster-fuck of Earth politics in space. Collaborative approach.
kickrocks
Jun 3, 15 1:21 pm
1. No.
2. Dr. Smith: "Oh, the pain, the pain." As long as its private capital, I don't need to worry about ever having the chance to be out there. If it's public funds, I'll be long dead before average people are colonists of anything.
3. First of all, how do you breathe? Energy, supplies, the initial kinks that if done incorrectly, leaves you stranded a la Castaway.
4. See #2. Colonizing another planet is not a solution, it's like carbon offsets or believing there is no climate change, the cheap fast way or denial.
5. It has to be light enough to ship from Earth or whatever can be mined from the Moon. Although cheese isn't that strong structurally.
6. Yes, but it's about getting the raw materials right first. 3D printing is like any printer, the ink refill costs more than the damn machine.
7. Good question. Many people are trying to figure that out economically. NASA cites $10,000 per pound. You can send a package cross-country for about $4. Let's meet at $1000.
8. Nothing. You get to see your superiors swimming in craters and assume the American dream can go beyond conquering any Earth-bound country.
9. Little to none. Because we regular folk won't be going, it's best to look on ways to not have all funding benefiting the privileged.
10. It won't be a government venture. The question is if more private ventures should share their patents and such so that instead of a race-against-all, the currently progressive companies (SpaceX, Galactic) can collect all their nuts in a basket and accelerate development.
austen
Jun 4, 15 2:06 pm
Wow the responses are leading toward the opposite of where I thought they would. All great answers!
Hi everyone!
I'm doing research in to habitats on the moon for school and would love anyone who is willing to talk about this with me, of course it'd be a bonus if you have some knowledge of this area but it's not necessary. My main research question is "What is the optimal design for a foundational lunar habitat with plans of expansion into the residential sector?"
With that in mind, I have, for the community, these questions:
1. Are you interested in living on the moon?
2. Do you believe that the benefits coming from space exploration outweigh the large costs associated with these programs?
3. What do you think are the major concerns of a habitat on the moon?
4. Should we be focusing on the Moon when there are other options for dealing with overpopulation here on Earth and on Mars?
5. What materials do you think are optimal for building in space?
6. Do you think 3D printing will be a valuable asset for lunar construction?
7. How would you transport materials from the Earth to the Moon?
8. What does the general public stand to gain from living on the Moon?
9. How much funding should the US put into this project?
10. Should the US even be the ones to do this, or should a more collaborative approach be taken with multiple countries participating?
And that's it! I appologize if this is breaking any forum rules that I am unaware of and thank you! I'm looking forward to what eveyone has to say!
1. Not me, but I think that future people will want to. I think that robotic exploration is the first step - for the next 50-100 years, we don't really need to send people past earth orbit- and they will really just be guinea pigs to see how the human body responds to living in zero G.
4. No. We are at 7 billion, no way off planet colonies will be able to take billions of people for thousands of years, even with aggressive development.
6. Probably
7. Transporting materials from the Earth seems like a non-starter. What can be mined on the moon or from asteroids?
10. We won't want to perpetuate the cluster-fuck of Earth politics in space. Collaborative approach.
1. No.
2. Dr. Smith: "Oh, the pain, the pain." As long as its private capital, I don't need to worry about ever having the chance to be out there. If it's public funds, I'll be long dead before average people are colonists of anything.
3. First of all, how do you breathe? Energy, supplies, the initial kinks that if done incorrectly, leaves you stranded a la Castaway.
4. See #2. Colonizing another planet is not a solution, it's like carbon offsets or believing there is no climate change, the cheap fast way or denial.
5. It has to be light enough to ship from Earth or whatever can be mined from the Moon. Although cheese isn't that strong structurally.
6. Yes, but it's about getting the raw materials right first. 3D printing is like any printer, the ink refill costs more than the damn machine.
7. Good question. Many people are trying to figure that out economically. NASA cites $10,000 per pound. You can send a package cross-country for about $4. Let's meet at $1000.
8. Nothing. You get to see your superiors swimming in craters and assume the American dream can go beyond conquering any Earth-bound country.
9. Little to none. Because we regular folk won't be going, it's best to look on ways to not have all funding benefiting the privileged.
10. It won't be a government venture. The question is if more private ventures should share their patents and such so that instead of a race-against-all, the currently progressive companies (SpaceX, Galactic) can collect all their nuts in a basket and accelerate development.
Wow the responses are leading toward the opposite of where I thought they would. All great answers!