|
On June 17 2015 03:06 Acrofales wrote:Agreed. We need to pool some money and buy a sufficiently large plot of land for our operations, before real estate gets too expensive. https://www.moonestates.com
Yeah, we made up a lot of excuses but there's a reason why we always planted US flags when we went to the moon. This moon is taken, find your own.
|
If you take a close look, you will find that you actually surrendered to the moon. All of your flags up there have long gone white.
|
On June 17 2015 05:41 Simberto wrote:
If you take a close look, you will find that you actually surrendered to the moon. All of your flags up there have long gone white.
Additionally why would you even put a flag with stars on the Moon, like wtf. Learn some Astronomy, Americans !
|
"are you weed because you're the only thc"
can someone explain this joke to me
|
Why are we replacing the moonrocks with ocean? What good does it do to bring moonsurface back to Earth?
|
hi just stupid question but can thinking
u all believe earth moving around sun ?
if earth moving around sun, how about satelite outside earth. he still move follow earth ?
how about spaceman going the space outside earth? when spaceman stay there around 3-4days. the earth will move away from the space there. They need chase earth before far away
|
|
|
On June 17 2015 12:45 icystorage wrote:
Gravity
All here know there is no gravity outside earth.
|
On June 17 2015 12:50 nsfazimi wrote:All here know there is no gravity outside earth.
Seriously, icystorage. Didn't you know that?
|
On June 17 2015 13:29 Epishade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 12:50 nsfazimi wrote:On June 17 2015 12:45 icystorage wrote:
Gravity All here know there is no gravity outside earth. Seriously, icystorage. Didn't you know that?
Lol he thought there is gravity outside earth?? Lololol. :D
For the original question, yeah, that is why space walks are so dangerous. See the movie "gravity" as example. Note that the title of the movie refers to the seriousness with which space walking should be taken, not the force that we all know doesn't exist outside earth.
|
On June 17 2015 12:31 Epishade wrote:
Why are we replacing the moonrocks with ocean? What good does it do to bring moonsurface back to Earth?
Because we want to get rid of the oceans and dump them onto the moon, and if we don't have such an apparatus that is incredibly energy intensive. Basically, we bring down moon rocks to save energy.
|
|
|
Since they appear to be able to rent the place out within a few weeks of listing it, that does not appear to be the case.
|
The flaw with Capitalism is that it assumes there is no correct or wrong cost to any object.
|
On June 17 2015 15:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:The flaw with Capitalism is that it assumes there is no correct or wrong cost to any object.
Well to be fair, how would you put a correct or wrong cost to an object?
|
On June 17 2015 01:35 Simberto wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3NE6JlR.jpg) I drew a picture. I forgot to link all of the train cars up, though. They should all be attached to each other with a long line with wheels at each end.
That's great! I think you need to add some balloons to the train cars to get green light from xmz though. 
|
as a physicist, this thread is the most hilarious thing i've read in a long time :D
|
that picture is obviously flawed. the phrase "same mass at same gravity levels" doesn't mean much. even if they have the same mass, they'll have different weights('cause they'll be in different gravitational fields). you'll need to prove that Xmass at 9.8 moves at the same speed as Xmass at 1.6.
i think you'll fail, get different speeds/accelerations and your L1 will move/shift. it can not be balanced unless actively changing the loads per need/time.
i'll move to this now:
On June 17 2015 02:24 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 02:04 xM(Z wrote:On June 17 2015 01:35 Simberto wrote:I drew a picture. I forgot to link all of the train cars up, though. They should all be attached to each other with a long line with wheels at each end. meh, but then you have to use energy to move them ... (instead of using energy to move the water you also use energy to move the dust). hmm, i don't really get that idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
the space elevator won't work either since it requires energy to push something up the wire/ribbon; BUT, let's assume the energy required is negligible(very low).
- we assume that magic will keep the water liquid on the moon and we have the means to transport and dump it in liquid form.
- we assume that the elevator will withstand the moon's gravity when it passes by it(with the load attached to it)...
- we assume we can compensate for the moon's elliptical orbit and just let go to some more wire...
- the elevator is fixed on earth which means it will pass by the moon once a day (a little more than a day since the moon orbits in the same direction as earth rotates so that will add some more time/day)
- the weight, at any one time, that can be moved up the ribbon depends on how much the ribbon can take and not break; (the current proposed material = carbon nanotubes)
- hmm, how the fuck do we get the load back to earth?; nvm, after unload we just dump it in space. who cares!.
we load the thing with water; we give it momentum; it goes up the wire; reaches geostationary altitude; when the moon get's closer to the load we push(consuming energy) the load to enter moon's gravitational pull(to skip/overcome any L1 shenanigans); we fail ... (we would need to constantly consume energy to land(WE NEED TOUCHDOWN) the same mass but of different weights in a different gravitational pull. even if we ignore all the mass/weight/speed/acceleration/drag/resistance bullshits, we would still have to consume energy to beat earth's rotation timer with respect to the moon. (there's a fixed amount of time in which the earth passes by the moon; if we don't unload in that time, we're useless).
just, just ... repeat this until you believe it - + Show Spoiler +
|
No need to buy land on the moon.
If we just declare ourselves the owners of the moon, no one can do shit about it.
NASA doesn't even have money to get to the moon.
We just need to be the first to install an army on the moon.
Missile turrets would certainly be a plus.
Until the water transfer is accomplished, this would help fending off Greenpeace activists and aliens with a vested interest in moon real estate.
|
On June 17 2015 18:38 xM(Z wrote:that picture is obviously flawed. the phrase "same mass at same gravity levels" doesn't mean much. even if they have the same mass, they'll have different weights('cause they'll be in different gravitational fields). you'll need to prove that Xmass at 9.8 moves at the same speed as Xmass at 1.6. i think you'll fail, get different speeds/accelerations and your L1 will move/shift. it can not be balanced unless actively changing the loads per need/time. i'll move to this now: Show nested quote +On June 17 2015 02:24 Acrofales wrote:On June 17 2015 02:04 xM(Z wrote:On June 17 2015 01:35 Simberto wrote:I drew a picture. I forgot to link all of the train cars up, though. They should all be attached to each other with a long line with wheels at each end. meh, but then you have to use energy to move them ... (instead of using energy to move the water you also use energy to move the dust). hmm, i don't really get that idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator the space elevator won't work either since it requires energy to push something up the wire/ribbon; BUT, let's assume the energy required is negligible(very low). - we assume that magic will keep the water liquid on the moon and we have the means to transport and dump it in liquid form. - we assume that the elevator will withstand the moon's gravity when it passes by it(with the load attached to it)... - we assume we can compensate for the moon's elliptical orbit and just let go to some more wire... - the elevator is fixed on earth which means it will pass by the moon once a day (a little more than a day since the moon orbits in the same direction as earth rotates so that will add some more time/day) - the weight, at any one time, that can be moved up the ribbon depends on how much the ribbon can take and not break; (the current proposed material = carbon nanotubes) - hmm, how the fuck do we get the load back to earth?; nvm, after unload we just dump it in space. who cares!. we load the thing with water; we give it momentum; it goes up the wire; reaches geostationary altitude; when the moon get's closer to the load we push(consuming energy) the load to enter moon's gravitational pull(to skip/overcome any L1 shenanigans); we fail ... (we would need to constantly consume energy to land(WE NEED TOUCHDOWN) the same mass but of different weights in a different gravitational pull. even if we ignore all the mass/weight/speed/acceleration/drag/resistance bullshits, we would still have to consume energy to beat earth's rotation timer with respect to the moon. (there's a fixed amount of time in which the earth passes by the moon; if we don't unload in that time, we're useless). just, just ... repeat this until you believe it - + Show Spoiler +
Your understanding of physics is quite lacking.
The phrase "same mass at same gravity level" means exactly what you claim it does not. It means that there is the same mass, for example 1 ton of water moving up and 1 ton of moonrocks moving down, at the same height above earth. Which means that the gravitational acceleration at that point is the same for both of them. Meaning the total force on a looped tether is 0, since you have the downwards-moving moonrocks pulling generating energy by giving up gravitational potential, while the water consumes energy by gaining gravitational potential, and the total difference in energy is 0.
You are still making the same error that i mentioned earlier, and that i thought my picture with giant red circles showing you which masses to compare made very clear is not necessary. You do not need to compare the mass that moves up at earth with the mass that moves up on the moon. (Of course, if you just sum up ALL of the force on the different train cars with at the same time, the result will still be 0, but you are not doing that either). You simply select two random train cars, see that the forces on them are not equal, and thus decide that the total force can not be 0, which is obviously nonsense.
You also have this idea that moving things needs energy. That is incorrect. Accelerating things needs energy. Changing the potential of things needs energy. Moving things does not. For an example of this, take a look at earth. As you might know, earth is rotating around the sun, and quite quickly. It has been doing that for a few billion years (Or a few thousand if you are a creationist  ) If it were constantly using up energy doing that, it would have long fallen into the sun, and you wouldn't be here discussing this.
Of course, this is not consistent with your everyday experience, because in your everyday experience, you are used to friction. Friction means that if you move something, you are constantly accelerating some other things (mostly air molecules) to get them out of the way of the thing you are moving. Which requires energy. This is generally not a problem in space, as there are no things that need to be moved out of the way.
Regarding the Space Elevator, obviously it requires Energy. That does not mean that the thing doesn't work, it just means it requires you to put energy into it to move things up. Moving things up always requires energy, as you are changing their potential (Workaround see above, but there we still require the energy, we just get it from moving other stuff down). The whole point of a space elevator is that it will require a lot LESS energy to move stuff up compared to our current way of doing it, which is using grossly inefficient rockets, constantly fighting against a lot of friction, and moving up additional fuel to move more fuel further up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
