Our Earth Orbiting Moon (La Luna)

[Txur’Itan]

Neil Armstrong is in a small circle of people with a very unique experience even in terms of what Astronauts have done.  He is still alive now.  Articles like this will be in history books someday, and they don't even cover the vast possibilities of research into our closest astronomical neighbor.

A walk on the Moon

Exploring the moon in greater detail, trying to find out it's whole geological history would be an interesting endeavor I think.

There is not OIL there, and maybe for now no one wants to mine it, probably for sentimental reasons.  

But, surely there must be interest in studying it up close.  

And no, I don't count probes, probes can not tell us what interested them, they can't tell us what they saw and never explored, they can never tell us how it feels to be there, probes can not wander aimlessly and find a beautiful lunar structure and take an evocative photograph.

I am personally surprised other governments have not decided to fund missions to go.  

[Kekerusey]

I think the greatest use the moon will be is as a launch platform for further voyages into the cosmos ... by this I mean that I think building things on the moon (assuming we can get past the fuel/distance stuff) would be in many way easier than building in orbit IMO.

Keke

[Eyawng te Klltepayu]

I think the greatest use the moon will be is as a launch platform for further voyages into the cosmos ... by this I mean that I think building things on the moon (assuming we can get past the fuel/distance stuff) would be in many way easier than building in orbit IMO.

That's a contentious issue ATM. Lunar expert Paul Spudis is very much on your side, but other people including Bob Zubrin and Buzz Aldrin think that the Moon is a diversion and our (humanity's) energies would be better spent on Mars, NEAs and the Martian moons. They've had some very entertaining debates.

Neil Armstrong is in a small circle of people with a very unique experience even in terms of what Astronauts have done.  He is still alive now.  Articles like this will be in history books someday, and they don't even cover the vast possibilities of research into our closest astronomical neighbor.  

IIRC, of the 24 people who have been to the moon, 18 are still alive. None have died since 1999. 9 of those 18 have walked on the moon.
Given their ages expect to see this number start dropping rapidly.  

Very sad only.

[Human No More]

Blame the current US government for all but killing humanity's only real hope of space exploration for at least the next few decades.

[Dreamlight]

A lunar mission is insanely expensive.  The one that was done was done mainly to prove that it can be done.  Most governments, even ones with space programs, have other things on their agendas.
This is not to say that the idea is not interesting.  It is, and it may be feasible if several governments cooperate on a project of sending a team of scientists to the moon.  This would make sense not only financially, but diplomatically as well--a shared interest in expanding horizons.  Such cooperation would of course require, well, cooperation.  Is this possible for such an ambitious project?

[Kekerusey]

Blame the current US government for all but killing humanity's only real hope of space exploration for at least the next few decades.

I don't think it's the US government (don't froget they actually brought us the space age in the sense that everyone really appreciates it) but a more modern social mindset linked to globalisation where money is the be all and end all of everything ... to give an example, IMO it wasn't technical issues that killed the last shuttle crew, it was management cutting back on finances and this kind of things goes on everywheree, the diffrence is that in some sectors (medicine and space exploration for example) cost-cutting can kill. It's hard to empirically justify that but it is what I think.

I wish I had a spell checker on this damned browser (Firefox 4)  but I suppose that's the peril of betas!

Keke

[Kerame Pxel Nume]

There is not OIL there, and maybe for now no one wants to mine it, probably for sentimental reasons.    

Oh, the plans are there. Helium-3 is what they're after. Extremely rare on earth, but prsent in noteable quantities in on the lunar surface. It's actually not a resource of moon itself, the lunar dust just "collected" it from the solar wind over billions of years.

And what's the use of it: Source of energy in aneutronic fusion.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

And what's the use of it: Source of energy in aneutronic fusion.

Problem is that Helium-3 fusion will be even further away than the current Deuterium-Tritium reactions seeing as it would be harder to make He-3 fuse. That said, as soon as private companies start investing in fusion (hopefully not long after ITER gets running and demonstrates that it can produce energy on a reasonable scale at reasonable cost), I expect this will become a larger factor in driving the idea of returning to the moon forward.

[Human No More]

The other use for the moon is for assembling large spacecraft for the deep solar system or other systems,since it has a much lower gravity and no atmosphere, it allows assembly on a surface then a much lower energy cost to get it all into space, and straight away into a much higher orbit than possible with components being launched from Earth and avoiding the complex (and extremely slow) process of assembling something in orbit.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

The other use for the moon is for assembling large spacecraft for the deep solar system or other systems,since it has a much lower gravity and no atmosphere, it allows assembly on a surface then a much lower energy cost to get it all into space, and straight away into a much higher orbit than possible with components being launched from Earth and avoiding the complex (and extremely slow) process of assembling something in orbit.

I thought about this a while ago and, whilst at first it seems to work, it doesn't. At least, not if your material's still coming from earth as then you'd still have to gain the same amount of potential energy. That said, you do save a little on fuel mass but there'd still be quite large initial costs of getting the assembly equipment up there.

If you get the material from the moon then you'd have an even larger initial cost because of getting the mining equipment up there, but you could potentially start with very little up there and have it build the rest of the equipment it needs.

[Kekerusey]

The other use for the moon is for assembling large spacecraft for the deep solar system or other systems,since it has a much lower gravity and no atmosphere, it allows assembly on a surface then a much lower energy cost to get it all into space, and straight away into a much higher orbit than possible with components being launched from Earth and avoiding the complex (and extremely slow) process of assembling something in orbit.

Yeah, I said something like that above ... earlier SF books by Heinlein and similar tended to be full of such stuff.

Keke

[Human No More]

The other use for the moon is for assembling large spacecraft for the deep solar system or other systems,since it has a much lower gravity and no atmosphere, it allows assembly on a surface then a much lower energy cost to get it all into space, and straight away into a much higher orbit than possible with components being launched from Earth and avoiding the complex (and extremely slow) process of assembling something in orbit.

I thought about this a while ago and, whilst at first it seems to work, it doesn't. At least, not if your material's still coming from earth as then you'd still have to gain the same amount of potential energy. That said, you do save a little on fuel mass but there'd still be quite large initial costs of getting the assembly equipment up there.

If you get the material from the moon then you'd have an even larger initial cost because of getting the mining equipment up there, but you could potentially start with very little up there and have it build the rest of the equipment it needs.

There are very few useful resources on the moon other than a lot of Helium-3 (which is VERY useful, but only for fusion reactors, not for construction ). The point is that it can be used for assembly of large spacecraft that would be too large to practically launch from Earth complete, allowing them to subsequently be launched far more easily due to the moon's low gravity (look at the size of the rocket needed to get the LM to the moon compared to the one needed to get them off it), after having been constructed in a (relatively) more hospitable environment, which allows manual work without the complexities of an EVA from an orbiting spacecraft and also allowing far more people to work concurrently.
Also, at least theoretically, sending resources from Earth to the moon can be accomplished via designs similar to railguns, or just build a space elevator of course (Arthur C Clarke once said 'the first space elevator will be built 50 years after people stop laughing at the idea').

[Toruk Makto]

Lunar resources? One word: water.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/main/prelim_water_results.html

[judytuna]

I am here to give Buzz Aldrin some love. http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/2kpi

He's got no beef with the earth walkers.

[Txur’Itan]

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/16mar_supermoon/

[Nyx]

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/16mar_supermoon/

Thanks for the info I was out this evening trying to take pictures of it. Got a few good ones of just the moon but there wasn't much stuff around for a perspective that'd show how big it looked (I did however lose a cell phone and get my pants full of snow, successful evening...) I might try a bit later again ^^

[Eyawng te Klltepayu]

I watched 'In the Shadow of the Moon' again recently. Such a wonderful film.