NASA: Well, Maybe Not A Moon Base After All... [New Scientist]

[mjah]

NASA may abandon plans for moon base

NASA will probably not build an outpost on the moon as originally planned, the agency's acting administrator, Chris Scolese, told lawmakers on Wednesday. His comments also hinted that the agency is open to putting more emphasis on human missions to destinations like Mars or a near-Earth asteroid.

NASA has been working towards returning astronauts to the moon by 2020 and building a permanent base there. But some space analysts and advocacy groups like the Planetary Society have urged the agency to cancel plans for a permanent moon base, carry out shorter moon missions instead, and focus on getting astronauts to Mars.

I'm always the dumptastic partypooper on these threads, so I'll just post this and leave the discussion to others.

[Larry]

First response: :pooh:

Second response: (sigh)

IMO, the second best possible next step we could make into space would be a permanent Lunar base. (If it's done right. Meaning things like working towards becoming self-sufficient.)

(The best possible next step would be a permanent orbital base, supplied by the permanent Lunar base. But again, only if it's actually big enough to be useful, rather than simply being a technology demonstrator.)

I fail to see a single thing we could possibly gain from an out-and-back mission to Mars that we won't also gain, much more cheaply and safely, from a permanent base. And with the base, after you spend the money, you've still got the base. It's the difference between renting and owning.

[Rocky21]

Third response: Of course there will be no moon base because no one has ever traveled to the moon.

[zoony]

What would it feel like to stand there on the surface of the moon... with no atmosphere. Your feet planted on the ground and the rest of your body seemingly in outer space. Nothing to block your view into the night sky or stare into the blackness of space. The earth is right there in front of you- you can see the entire thing

I get the heebie jeebies just thinking about it

[btfoom]

What would it feel like to stand there on the surface of the moon... with no atmosphere. Your feet planted on the ground and the rest of your body seemingly in outer space. Nothing to block your view into the night sky or stare into the blackness of space. The earth is right there in front of you- you can see the entire thing

I get the heebie jeebies just thinking about it

Especially when you rotated to the 'dark side'. There would be no external light to block your view of distant stars and planets. You think you feel small standing in the middle of a big field here on earth, I imagine you'd feel much smaller (and alone) on the moon.

Actually, a pretty cool concept. Thanks, Zoony.

[TheGoodBits]

Especially when you rotated to the 'dark side'. There would be no external light to block your view of distant stars and planets. You think you feel small standing in the middle of a big field here on earth, I imagine you'd feel much smaller (and alone) on the moon.

Actually, a pretty cool concept. Thanks, Zoony.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the moon did not rotate... Or that if it does the rotation is precisely timed with its revolution. The end effect is that we always see the same side of the moon, so that if there was a base, it would either be on the light side or the dark, but it would not have day and night like we have on Earth.

[benskins26]

third response: Of course there will be no moon base because no one has ever traveled to the moon.

+1

[btfoom]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the moon did not rotate... Or that if it does the rotation is precisely timed with its revolution. The end effect is that we always see the same side of the moon, so that if there was a base, it would either be on the light side or the dark, but it would not have day and night like we have on Earth.

You are right about us seeing the same 'side' of the moon, but it does in fact rotate:

• The rotation of the moon—the time it takes to spin once around on its own axis—takes the same amount of time as the moon takes to complete one orbit of the Earth, about 27.3 days. This means the moon's rotation is synchronized in a way that causes the moon to show the same face to the Earth at all times. One hemisphere always faces us, while the other always faces away. The lunar far side (aka the dark side) has been photographed only from spacecraft. (from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0714_040714_moonfacts.html)

Also, as the moon/earth rotate around the sun (while it moves as well), different parts are illuminated at different times.

[Mad Mike]

Oh dear god. Here come the moon hoax conspiracy theorists. :doh:

On the bright side, it does remind me of one of my favorite YouTube videos. :hysterical:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

[jpillian]

You are right about us seeing the same 'side' of the moon, but it does in fact rotate:

• The rotation of the moon—the time it takes to spin once around on its own axis—takes the same amount of time as the moon takes to complete one orbit of the Earth, about 27.3 days.

I recall this from my earlier days of being an astronomy geek, but holy cow that's cool. Seems like a very odd behavior for the moon to exhibit.

Bad moon!!

[Koolblue13]

What an incredible waste of money that would have been. Glad they aren't going to do it.

[DjTj]

I recall this from my earlier days of being an astronomy geek, but holy cow that's cool. Seems like a very odd behavior for the moon to exhibit.

Bad moon!!

It's actually a pretty logical consequence of being caught in the earth's gravity. Gravity is stronger on the closer side of the moon and weaker on the far side. It also stretches the moon to make it a little bit oblong. This actually makes it hard to spin, so over time the moon slowed down and ended up in lockstep with the earth.

Moons around other planets do the same thing. All of Mars's, Jupiter's, Saturn's, Uranus', and Neptune's moons are locked to those planets as well.

This effect is stronger the closer you are to the orbiting body, so none of the planets exhibit this behavior with respect to the sun, but Mercury is actually slowing down, so it rotates only 1.5 times every time it goes around the sun.

[Spec138]

Oh dear god. Here come the moon hoax conspiracy theorists. :doh:

On the bright side, it does remind me of one of my favorite YouTube videos. :hysterical:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

I love that video haha. I think the guys name is Bart something.

I love moon hoax nuts, it's easier to ignore them in future arguments.

[mjah]

Edit: Never mind, DjTJ beat me to it.

Instead, here's an article about the Shuttle potentially flying until 2011.

U.S. authorizes $2.5B for 2011 shuttle operations

[Larry]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the moon did not rotate... Or that if it does the rotation is precisely timed with its revolution. The end effect is that we always see the same side of the moon, so that if there was a base, it would either be on the light side or the dark, but it would not have day and night like we have on Earth.

The Lunar surface experiences day and night just fine. (Although one "day", the time from one dawn to the next, is a month long. The landing site at Tranquility, for example, gets two weeks of daylight followed by two weeks of night.)

There is no dark side of the Moon.*

There is an Earth side, and a non-Earth side.

* (Although, at the poles, things are a bit different. If the Moon were a perfect sphere, then at the pole, the Sun would appear, over the course of a month, to completely circle the horizon, neither rising nor setting, but always 50% exposed. However, the Moon, isn't a perfect sphere, it has mountains and valleys. Take that spot at the pole, and surround it with mountains, and now you've got a spot "where the sun don't shine". This could be really, really, important, because there, it's possible that there might be water, frozen.)

[Spec138]

Edit: Never mind, DjTJ beat me to it.

Instead, here's an article about the Shuttle potentially flying until 2011.

U.S. authorizes $2.5B for 2011 shuttle operations

But what if everyone in the world runs in place?

Where's your god now?

Your edit screwed up my comment.

[mjah]

But what if everyone in the world runs in place?

Where's your god now?

Your edit screwed up my comment.

I thought it got even funnier! :hysterical:

[Mad Mike]

What an incredible waste of money that would have been. Glad they aren't going to do it.

I agree that it's not yet time. The technology isn't ready. It would cost too much for too little gain.

My vision for the future would include an orbital dry dock that we can use to build, repair, and re-supply interplanetary ships to really explore the solar system. I'm talking big ships that could be assembled from modules built on earth. Such a dry dock would be the base infrastructure of a real interplanetary space program.

[Zguy28]

So, no Moonbase Alpha?

[Spec138]

I agree that it's not yet time. The technology isn't ready. It would cost too much for too little gain.

My vision for the future would include an orbital dry dock that we can use to build, repair, and re-supply interplanetary ships to really explore the solar system. I'm talking big ships that could be assembled from modules built on earth. Such a dry dock would be the base infrastructure of a real interplanetary space program.

As far as money is concerned, anything we have put into NASA in the past has helped our economy significantly more than we invested. I need to find which book I read that in.

[Larry]

I recall this from my earlier days of being an astronomy geek, but holy cow that's cool. Seems like a very odd behavior for the moon to exhibit.

Bad moon!!

Actually, there are physical forces that tend, over time, to cause planetary bodies to do that. Tides.

As the Earth rotates (relative to the Moon), the Earth experiences tides. The place on the Earth that's closest to the Moon actually has it's gravity reduced by a tiny bit. (Because the Moon's gravity offsets a tiny portion of the Earth's gravity.)

(There's a corresponding reduction in gravity at the point that's furthest from the Moon, too. But the reason for that is a bit more complicated. I guess the best, short, way to explain it is that if you look at that point on the Earth that's furthest from the Moon, that point is moving faster than it ought to be, simply to be in orbit around the Moon. It's "higher that it needs to be" speed causes it to attempt to "rise" (meaning, move further from the Moon.))

If the Earth didn't rotate relative to the Moon, then it would tend to become slightly egg-shaped, with the long axis pointed through the Moon.

What that means is that, as the Earth rotates relative to the Moon, the Earth is constantly beeing "kneaded", as first one place, then another, attempts to rise under the reduced gravity.

If you think of it just from the perspective ot the Earth's oceans, the water in the oceans is constantly flowing from one place to another, as sea level attempts to assume that egg shape. But, the egg shape keeps pointing towards different places on the Earth's surface.

For example, twice a day, the "sea level" of the Mediterranian rises and falls by several feet, as gravity is constantly being reduced then increased there. That requires a

lot

of water to flow through Gibralter, first one way, then the other.

Well, all of that water moving from one place to another, then changing it's mind and going the other way, (and the corresponding forces on the solid portions of the Earth, too. They're subject to the same forces, they just don't move as much. And the same thing happens to the atmosphere, too.), costs energy.

Takes a lot of energy to pump all that water into and then out of the Med, twice a day.

Well, that energy has to come from somewhere. The First Law of Thermodynamics is that There Aint No Free Lunch.

It comes from the rotational energy of the Earth. All the effects we see (and the ones we don't notice) due to tides, are slowing the Earth's rotation down.

Fortunately for all of us, the Earth is one honkin big flywheel. It's not going to stop any time soon.

[Larry]

What an incredible waste of money that would have been. Glad they aren't going to do it.

And now you see why it's happening.

It's an incredibly stupid decision, which will affect our country for a great deal of time.

But there are a lot of people who'll believe it.

[Larry]

So, no Moonbase Alpha?

Guess we'll just have to put our nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain for a while longer.

[TheGoodBits]

The Lunar surface experiences day and night just fine. (Although one "day", the time from one dawn to the next, is a month long. The landing site at Tranquility, for example, gets two weeks of daylight followed by two weeks of night.)

There is no dark side of the Moon.*

There is an Earth side, and a non-Earth side.

* (Although, at the poles, things are a bit different. If the Moon were a perfect sphere, then at the pole, the Sun would appear, over the course of a month, to completely circle the horizon, neither rising nor setting, but always 50% exposed. However, the Moon, isn't a perfect sphere, it has mountains and valleys. Take that spot at the pole, and surround it with mountains, and now you've got a spot "where the sun don't shine". This could be really, really, important, because there, it's possible that there might be water, frozen.)

yeah that makes more sense, because we obviously don't see the light side of the moon the whole time, otherwise we would always have a full moon. I was struggling this morning to think about to elementary school astronomy to remember how it all worked. I'm obviously no scientist lol.

[Spec138]

Just to add to Larry's post, Earth is slowing down at a rate of .002 seconds per day per century

o noes!

Also, I don't know if it's what you mean but I understand the Earth is slowing down due to friction from the oceans.