Using the centripetal force of a tethered mass (say 10 million tonnes), as the tug that's located 2x L2 (122,700 km) further out, is what’s going to literally pull this off. Don’t always trust my math, because I’ve estimated an initial tug force of only 3.466e6 kg, though obviously this tethered mass and/or its radii can be adjusted to suit, and of course this only gets better as the moon is moved further away.
3.466e6 kg of pulling force doesn’t sound like all that much, but then it’s continuous, whereas an hour it becomes worth 12.477e9 kg, and a month becomes worth an impulse of 8.984e12 kg, and a full year provides an impulse worth 1.078e14 kg. I give this centripetal applied force at least a good century to create a significant exit velocity once the tethered mass has been established, that way if anything goes terribly wrong, at least I will not be around to take any heat. Realistically this moon relocation could take a thousand years, and that’s a very good thing because by then we’ll be at each others throats or otherwise going postal. Obviously there'd be some reaction thrusting taking place for navigation of the tethered mass, as well as using additional reaction thrust on behalf of pulling harder is obviously another option, including what the William Mook version of his thermonuclear rocket impulse thrust could speed this whole process up considerably. This entire process is certainly a whole lot more complex than I’ve suggested, mostly because the moon velocity by itself is representing a lot of kinetic energy that has to get diverted and spent (slowed down) before parking it in the sun-Earth L1 halo zone, but at the very least this could be fully computer simulated in full 3D interactive format that I bet a smart 5th grader could manage. http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” On Feb 16, 9:47 am, BradGuth <[email protected]> wrote: > As long as I’m crazy enough to be proposing the use of our moon in > order to geoengineer a way out of our GW/AGW mess, we might as well > consider directly utilizing the moon itself. > > Our moon has been shrinking and/or deflating as it cools (roughly 100 > nm/year) and further solidifies, so we might as well take full > advantage of whatever's inside of its extremely thick and robust crust > of paramagnetic basalt that’s highly fused and protecting the inverted > density of whatever’s within its thick shell. > > At 7.35e22 kg, our moon is definitely a heavy sucker that’s perhaps > only 0.1% hollow or porous as is. However, besides our desperate need > of creating interactive shade for geoengineering our GW and AGW > problems away, Earth can always use minerals and precious metals or > rear-earths, and what could possibly be more rare-earth than our > paramagnetic moon. > > So, before and/or during the relocation process of gradually moving > our moon out to Earth L1 where it’ll be interactively maintained as > our station keeping shade, we should also tunnel into and mine out > that moon to the tune of at least extracting 10%, leaving us with a > 6.615e22 kg moon that’s nicely hollowed out below that extremely thick > and highly protective crust. Actually most of that tunnel excavated > mass would remain with the moon, as well as converted into basalt > tether fibers and otherwise utilized for the 2xL2 centripetal mass > that’s necessary for pulling that moon further away. > > This vertical tunnel of 12 meters diameter (or if you like as tight as > 4 meters) and the interior excavation process leaves us with an extra > or surplus 2.5e19 m3 of vacant space, in addition to all that’s > otherwise exposed as naturally hollow and/or porous about our moon. > > Giving everyone a volume of 1e9 m3 or one km3 is enough to accommodate > 25 billion of us humans in relative safety (in some ways better than > anyplace on Earth could provide, because the crust of Earth is > relatively thin, broken and very unstable). > > I’m certain that others here in this Geoengineering Group of expertise > can muster up creative alternatives and/or suggest better > utilizations, but just to kick this moon relocation topic up a spare > notch or two is what I’ve intended by suggesting this excavation > process that offers many advantages besides providing for the tethers > and most of the tethered tug mass that’s going to gradually pull our > moon further away from Earth. Just tunneling in at 12 meters diameter > through 60 km of its fused paramagnetic basalt crust is going to be > worth excavating 21e6 tonnes that could be utilized for all sorts of > benefits (including oxygen and water), whereas processing surface > basalt plus assorted crater rubble that’s in no short supply, and > loads of dust should also give us tonnes of valuable He3 that’ll make > everything profitable all by itself. > > http://translate.google.com/# > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” > > On Feb 5, 10:22 am, BradGuth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It's not as hard as you might think, and we'd get up to 3.5% shade, > > although that could easily be adjusted to suit, and there are a few > > other benefits besides terrific job security for at least a century. > > > http://translate.google.com/# > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
