Wouldn't it make more sense to blow dust out of moonscape by using thermonuclear devices, although this is bad for satellites, it could create a rotating dust cloud to dim some of the sunlight. It would destroy astronomy, but save the Earth? Albert > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:25:51 -0800 > Subject: [geo] Re: Relocate the moon to Earth Sun L1 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > 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. >
-- 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.
