Our 0.1<1% hollow moon, and near infinite vacuum of Selene L1 / Brad Guth
in [Physics]
|
Prev: best way to trashcan Nebular-dust-cloud is **neighborhood star ages** Re: (use in 4th) Earth about 10 billion yrs old; Atom Totality theory (use in 4th)
Next: Eric Gisse promotes my web·site ( www.JeffRelf.F-M.FM ).
From: BradGuth on 25 Jan 2010 03:02 On Jan 22, 4:43 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 22, 3:55 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > How many tonnes/day of carbonado can we produce within the Earth-moon > > L1(Selene L1) that offers perhaps 3e-21 bar (3e-19 kPa)? > > CVD diamond making only needs a vacuum plus electrons, and there's no > place better suited than Selene L1, along with carbon that's easily > extracted from the moon(Selene). > > ~ BG Perhaps I should be discussing this option of making tonnes of large scale carbonado diamond with Debeers. ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 26 Jan 2010 17:05 On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Wheres the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least > > bit hollow? > > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1 > > (Selene L1) environment? > > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible, > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science? > > > ~ BG > > Whats not holding up that robust lunar crust? > > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 > psi: > 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ > m2) > > Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 > Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = > 62 t/m2 > > Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently > fused molecular kind of solid thats only leaking sodium, whereas > 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar > basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its > tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious > amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention > whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by > rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. > > Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having > allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, > whereas even I might doubt that wed get anywhere near that kind of > result, but its certainly fun to ponder. > > Seems its going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have > those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified > geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under > that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that > supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%) > towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon > saturated farside crust. > > The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated > basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the > metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely its > only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed > iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the > greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. > > Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is > ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at > 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course > better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or > voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldnt be unexpected. > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet Why not utilize at least the relatively failsafe interior of our moon, that otherwise has such an abundance of nifty surface elements to offer, as well as likely voids and/or low density (only slightly compacted) material inside to deal with, including brines that should have been trapped within/under that robust basalt crust. Otherwise, you should ponder as to how much of our moon(Selene) is carbonado? Would you like to see those natural surface minerals, as merely natural hue saturation enhanced in living color? (isnt UV fluorescence unavoidably nifty) http://www.coronaborealis.org/images/full_moon_color.html Heres a somewhat less-saturated color/hue version http://web.telia.com/~u18524382/moon_color.jpg As long as we hold onto our moon(Selene) we can't possibly have another ice age, not to mention those added TeraWatts worth of our mostly sooty energy plus artificially vaporized and natural water cycles made acidic by our CO2, NOx and of course loads of sulfur, plus various natural and artificial ventings of raw/toxic methane contributions that are not exactly helping. Thanks mostly to the solar wind, we are also losing our precious helium and hydrogen by 100<1000 tonnes/sec (w/o solar wind that loss might average >10 tonnes/ sec, and without our contributions it might even conceivably drop >1 t/ sec). In other words, we seem to be making this global warming trend a whole lot worse than mother nature could ever hope to achieve. The good news is that essentially well run ourselves out of many natural reservoirs and buried kinds of raw elements, so that whatever remains can readjust to the raped, plundered and pillaged reality of getting on with the more natural trends of global geodynamics and its diminished biodiversity of traumatized evolution thatll have considerably fewer humans to deal with. Other than all that, plus a measured factor of global dimming that absorbs more solar energy, what could possibly go wrong with the good life w/o slow-ice on planet Eden/Earth? Heres a simplistic simulator package that has a little something for everyone. (have yourself a ball) Obviously aerodynamic drag (much greater before we had that moon), as well as lacking important factors of the lithobraking, loss/transfer of icy mass and other tidal forces of the sun are not involved within this simulation, but none the less its a good enough example of how a capture might actually be easily accomplished. http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml Theres also the Roche Limit to consider: In 1848, Astronomer Edouard Roche noted that, if a satellite was held together mainly by its own gravitational attraction, there would be a minimum distance from the primary inside which the tidal forces of the primary would exceed the satellites binding forces and would tear it apart [Hoskin, 1996]. The Roche Limit for two bodies is approximated by a function of their densities: Earth 18,470 km Jupiter 175,000 Saturn 147,000 Uranus 62,000 Each near miss by that process of capturing an icy Selene of perhaps 8e22 kg, would have pulled large portions of that thick ice away from its surface, and thereby making its capture easier as mass and thereby energy is extracted from Selene. ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 27 Jan 2010 09:23 On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Wheres the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least > > bit hollow? > > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1 > > (Selene L1) environment? > > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible, > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science? > > > ~ BG > > Whats not holding up that robust lunar crust? > > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 > psi: > 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ > m2) > > Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 > Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = > 62 t/m2 > > Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently > fused molecular kind of solid thats only leaking sodium, whereas > 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar > basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its > tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious > amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention > whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by > rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. > > Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having > allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, > whereas even I might doubt that wed get anywhere near that kind of > result, but its certainly fun to ponder. > > Seems its going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have > those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified > geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under > that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that > supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%) > towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon > saturated farside crust. > > The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated > basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the > metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely its > only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed > iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the > greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. > > Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is > ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at > 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course > better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or > voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldnt be unexpected. > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet As long as we cant afford to establish those Mars habitats (outside of mostly robotics) because 99% of everything needed for humans has to come from Earth to begin with, therefore why not utilize at least the relatively failsafe interior of our moon(Selene) thats easy to get to/ from, that otherwise offers such an abundance of nifty and valuable surface elements, as well as likely accessible voids and/or low density (only slightly compacted) material inside of its tough lithosphere to deal with, including brines that should have been trapped within/under that robust fused basalt crust (no good reason to perceive that hollow geode pockets dont exist). Otherwise, besides all those valuable minerals and 3He, we should ponder as to how much of our moon(Selene) offers carbonado, or could be easily utilized for manufacturing carbonado. Would you like to see those surface exposed minerals, as merely natural hue saturation enhanced in living color? (isnt UV secondary/ recoil fluorescence unavoidably nifty) http://www.coronaborealis.org/images/full_moon_color.html http://blog.deepskycolors.com/archive/2008/10/12/moon-in-full-color.html Heres a somewhat less-saturated color/hue version (lots more of the same posted on the internet), and as anyone can plainly see theres nothing false colored about it, because those surface minerals are in fact the only photon source of each and every color pixel thatll only get more intense the closer that camera gets. http://web.telia.com/~u18524382/moon_color.jpg Apparently our spendy LRO mission is mineral color blind. http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/ http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse As long as we hold onto our moon(Selene) we can't possibly have another ice age, not to mention those added TeraWatts worth of our mostly sooty energy plus artificially vaporized and natural water cycles made acidic by our CO2, NOx and of course loads of sulfur, plus various natural and artificial ventings of raw/toxic methane contributions that are not exactly helping our biodiversity or cooling us off. Thanks mostly to the solar wind, we are also losing our precious element of helium plys hydrogen by 100<1000 tonnes/sec (w/o solar wind that loss might average >10 tonnes/sec, and without our contributions it might even conceivably drop >1 t/sec). In other words, we seem to be making this global warming trend a whole lot worse and more toxic than mother nature could ever hope to achieve. The good news is that essentially well run ourselves out of many natural reservoirs and those buried kinds of raw elements, so that whatever remains can readjust to the raped, plundered and pillaged reality of getting on with the more natural trends of global geodynamics and its diminished biodiversity of traumatized evolution thatll have considerably fewer humans to deal with. Other than all that, plus a measured factor of global dimming that absorbs more solar energy, what could possibly go wrong with the good life w/o slow-ice on planet Eden/Earth? Heres a simplistic simulator package that has a little something for everyone. (have yourself a ball) Obviously aerodynamic drag (much greater before we had that moon), as well as lacking important factors of the lithobraking, loss/transfer of icy mass and other tidal forces of the sun are not involved within this simulation, but none the less its a good enough example of how a capture might actually be easily accomplished. Heres a simplistic simulator package that has a little something for everyone. Obviously aerodynamic drag that should have been much greater before we had that moon, as well as lacking important other factors of the lithobraking impact(s), loss/transfer of icy mass and other tidal forces of the sun and possibly Venus are not involved within this basic simulation, but none the less its a good enough example of how a capture might actually be easily accomplished when the approach angle and velocity are just right. http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml Launch angle: -128 Launch force: 6.15 Besides the lithobraking encounter, theres also the Roche Limit to consider: In 1848, Astronomer Edouard Roche noted that, if a satellite was held together mainly by its own gravitational attraction, there would be a minimum distance from the primary inside which the tidal forces of the primary would exceed the satellites binding forces and would tear it apart [Hoskin, 1996]. The Roche Limit for two bodies is approximated by a function of their densities: Earth 18,470 km Jupiter 175,000 Saturn 147,000 Uranus 62,000 Each near miss within the Roche Limit by that process of capturing an icy Selene of perhaps 8e22 kg, would most likely have broken and pulled large portions of that thick ice away from its surface, and thereby making its capture easier as mass and thereby energy is extracted from the Selene encounter. Of course this encounter and subsequent capture would have transferred teratonnes of that ice to Earth. Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet
From: BradGuth on 27 Jan 2010 09:30 On Jan 25, 12:02 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 22, 4:43 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 22, 3:55 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > How many tonnes/day of carbonado can we produce within the Earth-moon > > > L1(Selene L1) that offers perhaps 3e-21 bar (3e-19 kPa)? > > > CVD diamond making only needs a vacuum plus electrons, and there's no > > place better suited than Selene L1, along with carbon that's easily > > extracted from the moon(Selene). > > Perhaps I should be discussing this option of making tonnes of large > scale carbonado diamond with Debeers. On second thought, I'll just become Jewish and buy Debeers for less than ten cents on the dollar after their global market value drops by 90%. ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 28 Jan 2010 21:42
On Jan 4, 10:50 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 6 2009, 10:56 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Wheres the objective evidence that our Selene/moon is not the least > > bit hollow? > > > Where's our public funded science pertaining to the Earth-moon L1 > > (Selene L1) environment? > > > Since most everything original about our Apollo mission obtained > > science is either missing or remains as need-to-know or inaccessible, > > where's the other 99.9% of our public funded LRO science? > > > ~ BG > > Whats not holding up that robust lunar crust? > > Moon interior open space as geode like hollows/voids w/air at 14.7 > psi: > 14.7 psi = 10.335e3 kgf/m2 (x 6 becomes a force worth holding up 62 t/ > m2) > > Exterior Vacuum at 3e-15 bar = 1.2e-12 inch h2o = 3.06e-15 kgf/cm2 > Otherwise a negative pull or suction of 14.7 psi (10.335e3 kgf/m2) = > 62 t/m2 > > Assuming this mineral saturated lunar basalt is that of a sufficiently > fused molecular kind of solid thats only leaking sodium, whereas > 1/6th gravity should become worth 124 tonnes/m2 of holding that lunar > basalt shell up/away from the porous or semi-hollow mantel and its > tidal offset core, as such is going to lift or hold up a serious > amount of that basalt crust per km2 (124e6 tonnes/km2), not to mention > whatever interior pressure below that thick and heavy crust should by > rights be something considerably greater than 14.7 psi. > > Due to the crust porosity and various mineral leakage as having > allowed some degree of subsequent pressure/vacuum equalization, > whereas even I might doubt that wed get anywhere near that kind of > result, but its certainly fun to ponder. > > Seems its going to be a little tough for our moon(Selene) not to have > those cavernous hollows/voids of some kind, at least a few solidified > geode like pockets, porous layers or accessible vugs within and under > that extremely thick and robust basalt crust, especially where that > supposedly iron core has shifted at least several percent (<25%) > towards Earth in order to help offset that much thicker and mascon > saturated farside crust. > > The farside mass offset of this unusually heavy mineral saturated > basalt crust is worth <4e21 kg, and the maximum <450 km radii of the > metallic core is supposedly worth 4<5e21 kg (more than likely its > only worth <4e21 kg). Therefore this dense metallic core of supposed > iron needs to be considerably offset towards Earth, so that the > greater proportion of lunar mass is always facing Earth. > > Not that any thick and mineral saturated form of fused basalt crust is > ever going to easily collapse under it's own mass, especially not at > 1/6th gravity (even less gravity below that crust), and of course > better yet if the average interior atmosphere of whatever pockets or > voids of gasses were <100 bar (1470 psi) shouldnt be unexpected. > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet As long as we cant afford to establish those Mars habitats (outside of mostly robotics) because 99% of everything needed for humans has to come from Earth to begin with, therefore why not utilize at least the relatively failsafe interior of our moon(Selene) thats easy to get technology and ourselves to/from, that otherwise offers such an abundance of nifty and valuable cache of surface elements, as well as likely accessible voids and/or low density (only slightly compacted) material inside of its tough lithosphere, including brines that should have been trapped within/under that robust fused basalt crust (no good reason to perceive that hollow geode pockets dont exist). Otherwise, besides all those valuable minerals and 3He, we should ponder as to how much of our moon(Selene) offers carbonado, or could be easily utilized for the bulk manufacturing of carbonado. Would you like to see those surface exposed minerals, as merely natural hue saturation enhanced in living color? (isnt UV secondary/ recoil fluorescence unavoidably nifty) http://www.coronaborealis.org/images/full_moon_color.html http://blog.deepskycolors.com/archive/2008/10/12/moon-in-full-color.html Heres a somewhat less-saturated color/hue version (lots more of the same posted on the internet), and as anyone can plainly see theres nothing false colored about it, because those surface minerals are in fact the only photon source of each and every color pixel thatll only get more intense and/or darker the closer that camera gets. http://web.telia.com/~u18524382/moon_color.jpg Apparently our spendy LRO mission is still mineral color blind. http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/ http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse As long as we hold onto our moon(Selene) with an average 2e20 N worth of force (each and every second by second), we simply can't possibly have another ice age, not to mention those added TeraWatts worth of our mostly sooty energy plus artificially vaporized and natural water cycles made acidic by our CO2, NOx and of course loads of sulfur emissions, plus various natural and artificial ventings of raw/toxic methane contributions that are not exactly helping our biodiversity or cooling us off. Thanks mostly to the solar wind, we are also losing our precious decay element of helium plus hydrogen by 100<1000 tonnes/ sec (w/o solar wind that global loss might average >10 tonnes/sec, and without our contributions it might even conceivably drop >1 t/sec at minimal solar wind). In other words, we seem to be making this global warming trend a whole lot worse and more toxic than mother nature could ever hope to achieve. The good news, is that essentially well run ourselves out of many natural reservoirs and those buried kinds of raw elements, so that whatever biodiversity remains can readjust to the raped, plundered and pillaged reality of getting on with the more natural trends of global geodynamics and its diminished biodiversity of traumatized evolution, thatll have considerably fewer humans to deal with. Other than all that, plus a measured factor of global dimming that absorbs more solar energy, what could possibly go wrong with the good life w/o slow-ice on our planet Eden/Earth? Heres a simplistic simulator package that has a little something for everyone. (have yourself a ball) Obviously aerodynamic drag (much greater before we had that moon), as well as lacking important factors of the lithobraking, loss/transfer of its icy mass and other tidal forces of the sun are not involved within this simulation, but none the less its a good enough example of how a capture might actually be easily accomplished. Think of our moon(Selene) as a spent icy comet, whereas 6.5e21 < 1e22 kg of ice from Selene is not any small volume to pick from, even if only 10% of it stuck with us is representing a substantial addition of water to our terrestrial environment. Important factors of aerodynamic drag(aerobraking) should have been much greater and further reaching before we had that moon, as well as were lacking a few other important considerations of those primary and secondary lithobraking impact(s), encounter induced trajectory shift, loss/transfer of icy mass and those other pesky tidal forces of the sun and possibly Venus are not involved within this basic simulation, but none the less its a good enough example of how a capture might actually be easily accomplished when the approach angle and velocity are just right. http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml Launch angle: -128 Launch force: 6.15 Launch angle: -129 Launch force: 6.0 Launch angle: -66.666 Launch force: 9.69 Besides those complex lithobraking encounter issues, theres also the Roche Limit to consider: In 1848, Astronomer Edouard Roche noted that, if a satellite was held together mainly by its own gravitational attraction, there would be a minimum distance from the primary inside which the tidal forces of the primary would exceed the satellites binding forces and would tear it apart [Hoskin, 1996]. The Roche Limit for two bodies is approximated by a function of their densities: Earth 18,470 km Jupiter 175,000 Saturn 147,000 Uranus 62,000 Each near miss that's within this Roche Limit and of course by way of that initial lithobraking process of capturing an icy Selene of perhaps 8e22 kg(<8.35e22 kg), would most likely have fractured and pulled large portions of that thick ice away from its surface, and thereby making its capture process easier as its mass and thereby energy is extracted from the encounter. Of course this tremendous encounter and subsequent capture would have transferred teratonnes of that ice to Earth, and perhaps otherwise that fully fused basalt lithosphere of Selene should have remained in tact. Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / Guth Usenet |