Thread: Is there any point? (China going to Moon)

Originally Posted by youenjoyme420

I think pretty much anybody who has anything to do with the worlds space programs considers the moon a necessary "jump off point" for any sort of long term, manned mission, Including going to Mars. That could have something to do with it.

More than anything im sure its about national pride, though. Nothing wrong with that (at least in that context).

Yes- because of the abundance of Helium 3 and the slow escape speed of the moon.

Originally Posted by jmpet

Dude- you got some catching up to do.

Tell me then, answer my stuff!

Originally Posted by Jack Napier

Tell me then, answer my stuff!

You're asking 8th grade questions. So go Wikit it for yourself and learn.

Originally Posted by youenjoyme420

I think pretty much anybody who has anything to do with the worlds space programs considers the moon a necessary "jump off point" for any sort of long term, manned mission, Including going to Mars. That could have something to do with it.

More than anything im sure its about national pride, though. Nothing wrong with that (at least in that context).

A manned landing to Mars would be good, I only hope we never find the capacity to land on any planet that has anything but plant life, water, or single cell organisms.

Let's be honest, with our long and inglorious history of inhumanity to our own species, as well as non human species on Earth, it is almost certain that any life found would be exploited, used, abused, enslaved, killed, or made extinct. Sadly, that is what we humans seem predisposed to doing.

It is criminal enough we do this to our own planet, and life here, without that ever being possible, outwith our own planet.

That is part of the problem with mankind, at large, our development in both science and tech, have advanced a great deal in a century, but as a species, we haven't, and that creates a clear problem, because you then end up with all of those fantastic sciences, but in the hands of men who are really no better, emotionally and mentally, than their distant tribal ancestors.

Mankind rightly pays attention to scientific and tech advance, I embrace that, but in order to avoid expoitation of genius, we need to pay just as much attention to our personal development, as people, as a species.

For example, while matches can be v useful, it would be entirely dangerous to give them to a small child, and a potential tragedy.

The child does not have the capacity to understand the implications of what they are doing, in their hands, a match is a genuine hazard.

By the same token that you would not logically give that match to a mind that was not emotionally developed enough to be responsible with it, why would we allow mankind to have created such terrible weapons as nukes, for example, when it is quite clear that our species, cannot be entirely trusted to have these?

Logically we wouldn't, but then we were never really asked, were we? We are always just told that it is good for us.

If there is a difference, it is that the nukes are more dangerous than the match.

I shudder to think what scientific genius of tommorow will be 'stolen' and exploited, as a new means of killing.

As I've said, the reason that happens is that our species has not kept mental development at pace with science and tech development.

Jack

Originally Posted by jmpet

You're asking 8th grade questions. So go Wikit it for yourself and learn.

I don't think there is any reason to be snooty and rude.

I am sure there are many subjects you may not be that strong on, and your questions may appear naive, to me and to others.

But I would not be rude to you, if they were genuine questions, on here, I would attempt to answer them for you, on here.

Originally Posted by Jack Napier

Okay, so it's a dust, that has value to humans, right?

And the Moon has it aplenty.

How about the logistics of it?

I am assuming it not v practical, otherwise some bright spark would be doing it, right now.

Doesn't mean to say it would not be routinely possible, in the future.

Any possible dangers of doing such a thing? Outwith the usual risk, I mean to the surface of the Moon, anything like that?

Dude- do the homework
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium-3

After all, you started this thread...

Originally Posted by jmpet

Dude- do the homework
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium-3

After all, you started this thread...

...about China going to the moon.

Not this 'dust'.

Albeit this is interesting.

Just don't assume people to know the precise same things you do, is what I am saying..

All you really need to do it bring back to Earth 500 pounds of moon rocks. Then sell them online and make a fortune- enough to offset the mission. Moon rocks are pretty rare.

Originally Posted by Jack Napier

But if it was good enough to get men to the moon before, and back, safely, isn't it better to at least still have that, than nothing at all?

I cannot see how not having the means, is better than having retained the means.

Rocket advance has no doubt changed much, but surely if what got them there before got them there, it would still get them there now, perhaps with some modifications, of course.

using modern equipment to build an outdate/discountine products mean everything has to maunfacture from scratch. if you buy an 486 computer today, and ask manufacture to make it vs make modern computer the price difference is huge. for starter the old technology/parts in the 486 PC are not manufacture by any company any where right now. think how much time and $$ you have to spend to build an 60's chevy vs current generation of chevy. all those parts are non-existing, you have to start from scratch.

its same with rocket, we have the blueprint, but we dont have engineer that has knowledge regarding 60's rocket design.
1. we need train current generation of rocket engineer to familar with the old apollo rocket design, which is not efficient, not stable compare to current generation of rockets. this take ALOT time & resource.
2. once we have the engineer/scientist, we need ask manufacture to make these old design for EVERY parts of rocket, since they don't make these parts anymore, they have to start from scratch NOT offshelf products. ALOT time and $$$$.
3. we have to incorporate new technology into old technology both has to work seemlessly.

in the end this will cost more time and $$$ compare to building a current generation of rocket where most parts/knowledge already exist.

I have vague memories of Reagan and what was called his 'Star Wars' programme.

Sure, I could Google it, but that would be no fun for a forum, huh?

So, anyone on here recall it well, and what the thrust of it was?

Was it a concept or made a reality?

What did it cost?

What did it achieve?

Further, do you think there is any serious incentive for a nation to place weapons on the Moon?

Or is this impractical/the use of fearmongering, for political reasons?

It's just that if it were so, you could argue that those that control the skies, control the World, huh?