Space Warfare, Technology and Exploration

[RealNapster]

No, they should. A big migration can fundamentally alter our social structures, which I think would be interesting

And a single mistake will kill them all. Scary stuff, but interesting.

 

[ps3linux]

I think the end-of-life of the International Space Station will invigorate USA, Russia, Europe and private groups like SpaceX to have Mars programs.



Well, the nerds are also waiting for non-government programs like Mars One ( now sadly cancelled ) and for SpaceX.

You should listen to interview podcasts of some the short-listed 100 in Mars One, especially this one which has an interview with a Prof. Chris Daniels which is about the practical possibilities and problems that the Martians will face and what they have to do. I highly recommend this last interview.

On the Mars One website itself you will find short descriptions of the short-listed 100, including some from India.



Agreed.

As an example, Elon Musk has said that the near-future Mars colonies should be governed by Direct Democracy. I will add that to this a more advanced system would be Direct Democracy Socialism like was there in Libya until 2011.



Gold is a good conductor of electricity.



The list does not have Libya which in 2011 was in the 23rd position having 143.8 tonnes.



Perhaps.



Technically, it has a minimal atmosphere, which is why past Mars rover missions needed heat shields.



But it has CO2. Most of its atmosphere is CO2 :

Hydroponics. I believe the ISS has had some success growing plants in zero gravity, so growing in Mars gravity with Mars CO2 and hydroponics would be of not much problem.



The two water-ice caps on the two poles.



IIRC, there was a report about finding of some seasonal flowing water flowing a crater.



About bacteria / fungus, unless we go there we will be generally unable to find out their presence.

I get what you mean; figure of speech I was talking in relative terms and you in absolute black and white figures.
Its a massive undertaking, with humanity divided over petty issues, I don't think terraforming is happening anytime soon.

may be some great war, when the kingdoms have fallen, and there is one govt in the world humanity would spread its wings towards star and find the resolve to develop technology and dedicate resources.

 

[Naofumi]

And a single mistake will kill them all.

Mistake while migrating or when settled? I don't think humans will migrate in a single "ship". The migration will happen in phases and must be triggered by some event.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Firstly, I ask you to refer to this thread from 2015. It is a good description of how Libya worked.

I remain unconvinced of democracy in Libya, it simply does not add up to the murders of dissidents in Libya. The wealth, literacy rates, HDI, per capita were an effect of nationalised oil and good spending but not of Democracy. And democracy is not necessarily good in my opinion - A meritocratic secular dictatorship is better than a corrupt theocratic democracy.

 

[jamahir]

I don't think terraforming is happening anytime soon.

I agree. For some decades at least any Mars colony should live in a non-terraformed environment.

Musk says that a quick thickening of the atmosphere can be achieved by landing fusion bombs on the Martian polar water-ice-caps. The critics of that say that this idea will actually make dust rise into the upper atmosphere, forming clouds, which will create more cold on the land.

Another of Musk's ideas ( I think his ) is to deploy giant mirrors in Low Martian Orbit to direct sunlight onto the polar ice-caps to melt the ice and achieve the thickening more slowly than the first idea.

I am sure there are other ideas too for terraforming.

I remain unconvinced of democracy in Libya, it simply does not add up to the murders of dissidents in Libya.

Because of the nature of the pre-2011 Libyan system ( direct voice ) the dissidents had more say than in most other countries. Some of them who were jailed, like Abdulhakim Belhaj, were released on Western insistence but in 2011 these dissidents formed a part of the militants who invaded Libya with the help of NATO + GCC.

I ask you to read the theory of how the Jamahiriya system was arranged.

 

[RealNapster]

Mistake while migrating or when settled?

Both

 

[Itachi]

 

[jamahir]

Seemed a bit interesting. Glanced through.

The draft principles are intended to help develop best practices for future lunar development. (credit: NASA)

Draft Moon Village Association Principles: creating best practices for sustainable lunar activities

by Giuseppe Reibaldi and Mark J. Sundahl
Monday, April 27, 2020

On March 6, the Moon Village Association unveiled a set of 15 draft Moon Village Association (MVA) Principles intended to help facilitate the peaceful settlement of the Moon by establishing best practices for the long-term sustainability of lunar and cislunar activity. The MVA Principles are now published on the MVA website and are open for public comment. The announcement by the president of the MVA, Dr. Giuseppe Reibaldi, took place during a day-long symposium on Returning to the Moon: Legal Challenges as Humanity Begins to Settle the Solar System hosted by the Global Space Law Center at Cleveland State University’s Cleveland-Marshall College of Law (see “Hard law or soft law? The debate about the future of space law”, The Space Review, April 13, 2020).

The MVA Principles include both the core legal principles that will guide human activity on the Moon as well as provisions that encourage the creation of best practices to address the practical challenges of establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon.

As discussed further below, all stakeholders, including members of the general public, are invited to submit their comments on the principles through the MVA website. The purpose of this article is to answer some basic questions about the nature of the MVA Principles and to provide a concise summary of the principles to acquaint readers with their scope.

What is the Moon Village Association? The concept of the “Moon Village” is a vision of peaceful global cooperation in lunar exploration and utilization. The concept contemplates a collection of international efforts that involve both governmental and non-governmental (i.e. private) entities conducting activities in a spirit of cooperation and mutual assistance. Everyone is free to contribute to humanity’s future on the Moon in accordance with their individual capabilities. The Moon Village Association (www.moonvillageassociation.org) was incorporated in Vienna in 2017 with the goal of implementing the Moon Village concept by serving as a hub of communication for stakeholders in the new international push to establish a permanent human presence on the Moon. At the core of the MVA is an extensive network of professionals and institutions from more than 40 countries. They are all connected by a dedication to making progress on the legal, technical, and ethical issues that face the early settlers of the Moon. At the same time, members of the general public make up a significant portion of the organization’s membership. The MVA is also member of IAF and has been granted observer status at the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).

What are the MVA Principles? The MVA Principles include both the core legal principles that will guide human activity on the Moon as well as provisions that encourage the creation of best practices to address the practical challenges of establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon. The principles were drafted by the members of the MVA’s Coordination & Cooperation Committee and draw on existing legal instruments and initiatives, including the existing space treaties, the UN Long-Term Sustainability Guidelines, and the Hague International Working Group’s “Building Blocks” for an international framework for space resource activity.

Why are the Moon Village Principles important? Many stakeholders, including both government agencies and private industry, have Moon-related projects. To date, these projects have been carried out in line with the existing space treaties. However, these treaties fall short of the rules that will need to be in place when conducting lunar activities. Two examples include need to harmonize interfaces to enable the interoperability of lunar habitats and other equipment and the need to develop a registry of land use on the Moon. The MVA Principles, when supported by major stakeholders, will allow for an increase of cooperation and, perhaps more importantly, the avoidance of possible conflicts.

To whom do the principles apply? The MVA Principles are intended to apply to anyone conducting activities on the Moon or in cislunar space, whether such entity is governmental or nongovernmental in nature. Of course, this distinguishes the MVA Principles from the space treaties that impose obligations solely on the states that are party to the treaty (while any obligations on private entities spring solely from domestic implementing legislation.)

By achieving a voluntary consensus among government agencies and private industry, best practices will emerge and could eventually influence the drafting of hard law, or even achieve the hallowed status of binding customary international law.

Are the principles binding law? No. The MVA Principles are purely voluntary in nature. Although the principles could, in time, influence the creation of a new international treaty, Realpolitik makes a treaty at this point in time a practical impossibility. Even successful treaties can take a decade to draft and another decade to receive sufficient signatures to enter into force. In light of these realities, the Moon Village Association decided to adopt a “bottom-up” approach that seeks the voluntary adoption of MVA Principles by stakeholders, whether such stakeholders are government space agencies, private companies, or other entities. Despite not having the binding power of hard law, the principles are nevertheless intended to set practical goals and provide helpful guidance in the conduct of lunar activities.

The overarching goal of the principles is to develop a set of best practices that will ensure the long-term sustainability of lunar activities. By achieving a voluntary consensus among government agencies and private industry, best practices will emerge and could eventually influence the drafting of hard law, or even achieve the hallowed status of binding customary international law. Another option would be for the principles to inspire a patchwork of binding domestic laws that would, in their combined effect, approximate the binding effect of a treaty. Of course, some aspects of the principles are already codified in international law, such as the duty to exercise due regard with respect to the interests of other parties.

What issues do the principles address? We encourage our readers to read the principles in their entirety. That said, here is a list of the topics addressed in the principles:

• Principle 1: Compliance with international law
• Principle 2: Benefit-sharing and interest-balancing
• Principle 3: Governance
• Principle 4: Long-term sustainability of lunar activities
• Principle 5: Private lunar activities
• Principle 6: Scientific study of the Moon and cislunar space
• Principle 7: Information sharing
• Principle 8: Avoiding harmful activity
• Principles 9 & 10: Land use registry
• Principle 11: Public database for sharing scientific information and best practices
• Principle 12: Future legal initiatives
• Principle 13: Ethics
• Principle 14: Dispute resolution
• Principle 15: Monitoring and further development of the Principles

What is the “land use registry” called for in Principles 9 and 10? The extraction of natural resources from celestial bodies is indispensable to the establishment a permanent human presence on the Moon. If the Moon ever hosts a significant population, the prospect of delivering oxygen, water, fuel, and construction materials to the Moon from Earth would be prohibitively expensive. Better to harvest water ice from the surface of the Moon. But, is the mining of natural resources on the Moon legal? (The answer is yes.) Can a private company stake a claim? Can a “Moon market” in natural resources be created?

The MVA Principles adopt the registry of the Hague International Working Group, but then expand the registry to the broader category of “land use” in general.

These were the questions taken up by the Hague International Space Resources Governance Working Group which recently published the Building Blocks for the Development of an International Framework on Space Resource Activities. These building blocks are intended to serve as a guide to creating an international framework for the extraction and use of natural resources.

At their core, the building blocks call for a registry-based system for prioritizing the rights of both governmental and private actors to occupy a particular parcel of land on the Moon (or any other celestial body, for that matter,) On a first-come, first-serve basis, registrants would have a priority right to work the registered mine. Under Hague Building Blocks, a registration would describe the nature of the mission, including the location of the registrant’s activity. “Safety zones” would also be established to provide a buffer zone between the registered activity and any new activities undertaken by another operator. The building blocks also contain provisions to protect cultural or historical interest (such as the Apollo landing sites) as well as site of particular scientific interest.

The Hague Building Blocks were distributed to the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee meeting of COPUOS in February 2020. A General Exchange of Views with respect with resource extraction was on the agenda of the Legal Subcommittee meeting planned for March 2020, but cancelled due to the pandemic.

But why create a land use registry only for mining? As the first permanent human settlement on the Moon takes shape, the use of land will be varied. Some parcels will be used for mining and the processing of resources, while other parcels will be residential, scientific, and other uses of land that will eventually be as varied as they are here on Earth.

The MVA Principles address this issue by adopting the registry of the Hague International Working Group, but then expanding the registry to the broader category of “land use” in general, beyond mere resource extraction activities. To be clear, space resource activities would still be registrable under the MVA registry and would enjoy priority rights to harvest natural resources, subject to certain restrictions. But other types of land use would also receive the right to occupy and utilize a parcel of land.

Will the principles evolve over time? Absolutely. One of the touchstones of the MVA Principles is the concept of “adaptive governance,” that is, the incremental evolution of governance in step with technological and economic development. This suggests a light regulatory touch, but also an ability to respond nimbly to shifts in technology as necessary. The current Draft MVA Principles will be further revised in light of all comments received during the public comment period and will continue to evolve beyond that point.

What is the status of the MVA Principles? The authors were scheduled to make a joint technical presentation regarding the MVA Principles at the COPUOS Legal Subcommittee meeting. The principles are being currently being distributed to major stakeholders worldwide to invite them to comment and adopt the Principles to guide their activity. You can find the Draft MVA Principles along with instructions on how to submit your comments here.

Dr. Giuseppe Reibaldi is the Founder and President of the Moon Village Association. Prof. Mark J. Sundahl is the Director of the Global Space Law Center at Cleveland State University.

@RealNapster @Naofumi @Joe Shearer @ps3linux @Hamartia Antidote

---

I have a noob question. To receive and send to Starlink internet satellites a person has to have a "pizza box" modem ( as said in the vid ). Now, at my house we have a Tata Sky satellite TV box which doesn't receive signal when it is too cloudy or is raining. Will it be the same for the Starlink internet receiver / transmitter boxes ?

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Seemed a bit interesting. Glanced through.

The draft principles are intended to help develop best practices for future lunar development. (credit: NASA)

Draft Moon Village Association Principles: creating best practices for sustainable lunar activities

by Giuseppe Reibaldi and Mark J. Sundahl
Monday, April 27, 2020

On March 6, the Moon Village Association unveiled a set of 15 draft Moon Village Association (MVA) Principles intended to help facilitate the peaceful settlement of the Moon by establishing best practices for the long-term sustainability of lunar and cislunar activity. The MVA Principles are now published on the MVA website and are open for public comment. The announcement by the president of the MVA, Dr. Giuseppe Reibaldi, took place during a day-long symposium on Returning to the Moon: Legal Challenges as Humanity Begins to Settle the Solar System hosted by the Global Space Law Center at Cleveland State University’s Cleveland-Marshall College of Law (see “Hard law or soft law? The debate about the future of space law”, The Space Review, April 13, 2020).

The MVA Principles include both the core legal principles that will guide human activity on the Moon as well as provisions that encourage the creation of best practices to address the practical challenges of establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon.

As discussed further below, all stakeholders, including members of the general public, are invited to submit their comments on the principles through the MVA website. The purpose of this article is to answer some basic questions about the nature of the MVA Principles and to provide a concise summary of the principles to acquaint readers with their scope.

What is the Moon Village Association? The concept of the “Moon Village” is a vision of peaceful global cooperation in lunar exploration and utilization. The concept contemplates a collection of international efforts that involve both governmental and non-governmental (i.e. private) entities conducting activities in a spirit of cooperation and mutual assistance. Everyone is free to contribute to humanity’s future on the Moon in accordance with their individual capabilities. The Moon Village Association (www.moonvillageassociation.org) was incorporated in Vienna in 2017 with the goal of implementing the Moon Village concept by serving as a hub of communication for stakeholders in the new international push to establish a permanent human presence on the Moon. At the core of the MVA is an extensive network of professionals and institutions from more than 40 countries. They are all connected by a dedication to making progress on the legal, technical, and ethical issues that face the early settlers of the Moon. At the same time, members of the general public make up a significant portion of the organization’s membership. The MVA is also member of IAF and has been granted observer status at the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).

What are the MVA Principles? The MVA Principles include both the core legal principles that will guide human activity on the Moon as well as provisions that encourage the creation of best practices to address the practical challenges of establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon. The principles were drafted by the members of the MVA’s Coordination & Cooperation Committee and draw on existing legal instruments and initiatives, including the existing space treaties, the UN Long-Term Sustainability Guidelines, and the Hague International Working Group’s “Building Blocks” for an international framework for space resource activity.

Why are the Moon Village Principles important? Many stakeholders, including both government agencies and private industry, have Moon-related projects. To date, these projects have been carried out in line with the existing space treaties. However, these treaties fall short of the rules that will need to be in place when conducting lunar activities. Two examples include need to harmonize interfaces to enable the interoperability of lunar habitats and other equipment and the need to develop a registry of land use on the Moon. The MVA Principles, when supported by major stakeholders, will allow for an increase of cooperation and, perhaps more importantly, the avoidance of possible conflicts.

To whom do the principles apply? The MVA Principles are intended to apply to anyone conducting activities on the Moon or in cislunar space, whether such entity is governmental or nongovernmental in nature. Of course, this distinguishes the MVA Principles from the space treaties that impose obligations solely on the states that are party to the treaty (while any obligations on private entities spring solely from domestic implementing legislation.)

By achieving a voluntary consensus among government agencies and private industry, best practices will emerge and could eventually influence the drafting of hard law, or even achieve the hallowed status of binding customary international law.

Are the principles binding law? No. The MVA Principles are purely voluntary in nature. Although the principles could, in time, influence the creation of a new international treaty, Realpolitik makes a treaty at this point in time a practical impossibility. Even successful treaties can take a decade to draft and another decade to receive sufficient signatures to enter into force. In light of these realities, the Moon Village Association decided to adopt a “bottom-up” approach that seeks the voluntary adoption of MVA Principles by stakeholders, whether such stakeholders are government space agencies, private companies, or other entities. Despite not having the binding power of hard law, the principles are nevertheless intended to set practical goals and provide helpful guidance in the conduct of lunar activities.

The overarching goal of the principles is to develop a set of best practices that will ensure the long-term sustainability of lunar activities. By achieving a voluntary consensus among government agencies and private industry, best practices will emerge and could eventually influence the drafting of hard law, or even achieve the hallowed status of binding customary international law. Another option would be for the principles to inspire a patchwork of binding domestic laws that would, in their combined effect, approximate the binding effect of a treaty. Of course, some aspects of the principles are already codified in international law, such as the duty to exercise due regard with respect to the interests of other parties.

What issues do the principles address? We encourage our readers to read the principles in their entirety. That said, here is a list of the topics addressed in the principles:

• Principle 1: Compliance with international law
• Principle 2: Benefit-sharing and interest-balancing
• Principle 3: Governance
• Principle 4: Long-term sustainability of lunar activities
• Principle 5: Private lunar activities
• Principle 6: Scientific study of the Moon and cislunar space
• Principle 7: Information sharing
• Principle 8: Avoiding harmful activity
• Principles 9 & 10: Land use registry
• Principle 11: Public database for sharing scientific information and best practices
• Principle 12: Future legal initiatives
• Principle 13: Ethics
• Principle 14: Dispute resolution
• Principle 15: Monitoring and further development of the Principles

What is the “land use registry” called for in Principles 9 and 10? The extraction of natural resources from celestial bodies is indispensable to the establishment a permanent human presence on the Moon. If the Moon ever hosts a significant population, the prospect of delivering oxygen, water, fuel, and construction materials to the Moon from Earth would be prohibitively expensive. Better to harvest water ice from the surface of the Moon. But, is the mining of natural resources on the Moon legal? (The answer is yes.) Can a private company stake a claim? Can a “Moon market” in natural resources be created?

The MVA Principles adopt the registry of the Hague International Working Group, but then expand the registry to the broader category of “land use” in general.

These were the questions taken up by the Hague International Space Resources Governance Working Group which recently published the Building Blocks for the Development of an International Framework on Space Resource Activities. These building blocks are intended to serve as a guide to creating an international framework for the extraction and use of natural resources.

At their core, the building blocks call for a registry-based system for prioritizing the rights of both governmental and private actors to occupy a particular parcel of land on the Moon (or any other celestial body, for that matter,) On a first-come, first-serve basis, registrants would have a priority right to work the registered mine. Under Hague Building Blocks, a registration would describe the nature of the mission, including the location of the registrant’s activity. “Safety zones” would also be established to provide a buffer zone between the registered activity and any new activities undertaken by another operator. The building blocks also contain provisions to protect cultural or historical interest (such as the Apollo landing sites) as well as site of particular scientific interest.

The Hague Building Blocks were distributed to the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee meeting of COPUOS in February 2020. A General Exchange of Views with respect with resource extraction was on the agenda of the Legal Subcommittee meeting planned for March 2020, but cancelled due to the pandemic.

But why create a land use registry only for mining? As the first permanent human settlement on the Moon takes shape, the use of land will be varied. Some parcels will be used for mining and the processing of resources, while other parcels will be residential, scientific, and other uses of land that will eventually be as varied as they are here on Earth.

The MVA Principles address this issue by adopting the registry of the Hague International Working Group, but then expanding the registry to the broader category of “land use” in general, beyond mere resource extraction activities. To be clear, space resource activities would still be registrable under the MVA registry and would enjoy priority rights to harvest natural resources, subject to certain restrictions. But other types of land use would also receive the right to occupy and utilize a parcel of land.

Will the principles evolve over time? Absolutely. One of the touchstones of the MVA Principles is the concept of “adaptive governance,” that is, the incremental evolution of governance in step with technological and economic development. This suggests a light regulatory touch, but also an ability to respond nimbly to shifts in technology as necessary. The current Draft MVA Principles will be further revised in light of all comments received during the public comment period and will continue to evolve beyond that point.

What is the status of the MVA Principles? The authors were scheduled to make a joint technical presentation regarding the MVA Principles at the COPUOS Legal Subcommittee meeting. The principles are being currently being distributed to major stakeholders worldwide to invite them to comment and adopt the Principles to guide their activity. You can find the Draft MVA Principles along with instructions on how to submit your comments here.

Dr. Giuseppe Reibaldi is the Founder and President of the Moon Village Association. Prof. Mark J. Sundahl is the Director of the Global Space Law Center at Cleveland State University.

@RealNapster @Naofumi @Joe Shearer @ps3linux @Hamartia Antidote

---



I have a noob question. To receive and send to Starlink internet satellites a person has to have a "pizza box" model ( as said in the vid ). Now, at my house we have a Tata Sky satellite TV box which doesn't receive signal when it is too cloudy or is raining. Will it be the same for the Starlink internet receiver / transmitter boxes ?

---

It's not realistic to have anything of value above ground.
The moon has no atmosphere so there are meteors flying at thousands of miles an hour hitting the surface 24 hours a day. While the chances of a hit to a rover may be small a hit to a large complex is not unreasonable to expect.

It is more likely some kind of bunker in a deep crater to reduce the angle of vulnerability would be proposed. Probably directly facing the earth to use it as a shield. Otherwise you may have to dig under a mountain.

 

[jamahir]

Probably directly facing the earth to use it as a shield.

That's an interesting thought.

Otherwise you may have to dig under a mountain.

I suppose that will have to be done by machines because where will the digging people stay if the surface or just below the surface is too dangerous.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

That's an interesting thought.



I suppose that will have to be done by machines because where will the digging people stay if the surface or just below the surface is too dangerous.

Even facing the earth it only gives you a tiny bit of shielding since you are so FAR AWAY.

Ugh! That's not much at all!

Looks like we will be digging.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Even facing the earth it only gives you a tiny bit of shielding since you are so FAR AWAY.

Ugh! That's not much at all!

Looks like we will be digging.

This image? Is this from the same Fake US moon landing mission

 

[Galactic Penguin SST]

There could be 36 communicating intelligent civilizations in our galaxy, study says

http://web.archive.org/web/20200615...gent-civilizations-galaxy-scn-trnd/index.html
http://archive.vn/mS2i5
http://web.archive.org/web/20200615...ence.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ab8225
http://archive.is/FPilJ

​

The ethnic Europeans' estimation is 36 Communicating Extra-Terrestrial Intelligent (CETI) civilizations that might be living in our Galaxy.

Another gross farce, even surpassing in ridicule that of the most infamous 1960s Apollhoax!

My own raw guesstimate is no less than 10'000 to 100'000 advanced exo-civilizations in our own Solar System.

For the number in our Galaxy, it is above several billions.

Full length commentary:

The number of More Advanced exo-civilizations as compared to the Earth, is to be expected astronomical in number.

Not '36 in our galaxy', as claimed by some ethnic European scientists, a number not even related to any more advanced exo-civilizations, but simply of 'communicating intelligent civilizations'.

In short they got it all wrong, from A to Z.

More advanced exo-civilizations would of course use vectors, even more advanced than supraluminal one. Knowing that China already uses supraluminal communication in its Quantum satellite Micius, based on applied quantum entanglement technology.

But the authors of the article The Astrobiological Copernican Weak and Strong Limits for Intelligent Life didn't even consider leaving the Einsteinian relativistic limit of the last century!

Another gross mockery of exo-biology is the false notion of 'habitable zones'.

Indeed, life develops better not in gaseous unprotected planets as on Earth, but in undersea world shielded by kilometers thick crust of ice.

The consequence is that instead of seeing all life forms being wiped out regularly as on Earth, these icy planets could produce advanced civilizations in one single uninterrupted thrust, that is probably in under half a billion to one billion year.

Not 4.5 to 5 billions years as claimed by the Europeans in their Astrobiological Copernican Strong limit.

The main cause for the 5 mass extinctions of life on Earth were volcanism, impactors and gamma ray-burst.

Icy worlds, that have little to no volcanism due to the very small amount of rock in the core of the planets, and that are perfectly shielded against all space radiations and asteroids, know therefore no apocalypses.

They don't receive their energy from the Sun, but benefit from the quasi-perpetual geothermic energy produced by tidal force, while orbiting larger mother planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, but also remote giant Trans-Neptunian Objects. That is throughout the Oort Cloud.

Therefore, for one Earth in the Sun heated zone, we have hundreds of thousands of habitable icy worlds.

Each suitable for harbouring thousands of advanced exo-civilizations.

The question is why this cover up. Because it is an obvious institutional disinformation.

As a remainder, until the end of the cold war (1990s), the brainwashing was such that the dogma spread in all public publications and books, was intended to hide the existence of water in our Solar System. Comets were not made of water and even the Saturn's Rings were presented as composed of dust and rocks.

The answer is fear. The fear of the tyrants, that this revelation would empower the enslaved world masses to overthrow their oppressor.

Notice, the U.S. scifi has regularly leaked to the general public what the scientific elite already knew for more than half a century. Such as in the 1997 science fiction novel by British writer Arthur C. Clarke. 3001: The Final Odyssey were it is hinted that the U.S. will never dare explore these moons (for some fictitious excuses), or again in the most recent 2019 movie AD ASTRA, where it is claimed (of course falsely to disinform the popular masses) that there is no civilization (intelligent life) in these far moons...


Indeed, the Dystopian Empire has no future in this universe. Its foreseeable extinction is inevitable, of course not today, but in a very near future, maybe even a few decades from now. We might even be able to witness it during our lifetime.

Look at the Jupiter and Saturn's oceanic moons.... One can bet they are there, with possibly up to 4 billions age civilizations (deducted 0.5 billions years for reaching the first advanced animal life forms), compared to the less than 3.4 million years all put together by including the start of the stone age, for the Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

Should one be contacted, it is always the most advanced that decides.

It is the Korean monk Hyecho (慧超) who made it to the Mediterranean world after 723 AD, not the opposite. It is the Chinese Admiral Zheng He that made the voyage to Africa in 1405 to 1433, not the opposite.

Only the Master of Chi Arts can break this exo-diplomatic bottleneck. In all other cases, be assured that this will be a quick and one way confrontation.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/unit...troversy-in-japan.512477/page-2#post-12462719

 

[jamahir]

Watch this vid embedded in this space.com article. It is about an American company called ICON which has been selected by NASA to build 3D Printed buildings on the Moon. The company is already experienced in building 3D Printed housing structures on Earth which you can learn from this short vid.

But I feel that on the Moon as well on Mars they should build habitats in craters and have an upper layer where liquid water can be stored for the usual purposes as well as to act as radiation shield.

---

@ps3linux @RealNapster @Hamartia Antidote

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Watch this vid embedded in this space.com article. It is about an American company called ICON which has been selected to build 3D Printed buildings on the Moon. The company is already experienced in building 3D Printed housing structures on Earth which you can learn from this short vid.

But I feel that on the Moon as well on Mars they should build habitats in craters and have an upper layer where liquid water can be stored for the usual purposes as well as to act as radiation shield.

---

@ps3linux @RealNapster @Hamartia Antidote

Good luck to them. Although they sound like they'll make expensive stuff.

 

[jamahir]

How have space stations evolved?

August 14, 2020

Outposts off planet are a sure sign of humanity’s deepening engagement with space. To date, the most significant one has been the International Space Station (ISS). Its presence is historic, and many people – whether or not they are avid space buffs – are aware of its existence. But few individuals beyond specialists know about previous space stations. To learn more about the history of space stations and how they are likely to continue evolving, we spoke to Eric Dahlstrom. Besides being an active member of New Zealand’s space community as a co-founder of the social enterprise SpaceBase, he previously worked at NASA Langley on ISS design.

What role do space stations place in space exploration?

In essence a space station is just a building in space. Just as there are many reasons for having buildings on Earth, there are many reasons for having buildings in space. Space stations have been used as laboratories, habitats, observatories, transportation nodes, manufacturing and assembly centers, and even hotels. The main function of most space stations has been to serve as a laboratory to study the effects of microgravity. Each day on the International Space Station there are a couple hundred microgravity experiments operating.

Next year will be the 50th anniversary of Salyut 1, the first space station. (Unfortunately, the first crew to that station died as they returned to Earth.) Before the International Space Station (ISS), the Soviet Union launched six stations and the United States launched one. China has launched two so far. So, in total, there have been ten space stations. Today, on the ground, there are somewhere between four and ten space stations being assembled and prepared for launch (the number is uncertain due to the secrecy of some private companies).

The early space visionaries studied how people might live in space on space stations. When Werner von Braun proposed missions to the Moon, he thought we would build a space station along the way. The urgency of the race to the Moon meant the space stations were delayed until after Apollo. But the Space Shuttle was planned (and named) with the intention of shuttling crews to a space station.

The current NASA plan to return to the Moon involves building the Lunar Gateway – a space station in a high orbit around the Moon. NASA hopes to use this lunar space station as a staging location to coordinate international missions to the Moon, somewhat like the Everest base camp. There are also several commercial companies planning to build privately-owned space stations in low orbit around Earth, to be used as labs and hotels. The recent flight of astronauts on the commercial SpaceX Dragon-2 vehicle shows that these companies can now purchase crew flights to their space stations. We are seeing new opportunities for space station concepts.

What lessons can we learn from previous space stations to improve future space stations?

The Russians pioneered the concept of modular space stations, where you could launch different modules and plug them together – like adding rooms to your house. The Russians made the modules almost independent. They kept this philosophy on their side of the ISS. They are still building new modules to add to the five they have currently on orbit. The next Chinese space station, planned for 2021, borrows heavily on the Russian design. The US portion of the ISS (including modules from Japan, Europe, and the Canadian robot arm) was designed to function as more of an integrated whole. It still was assembled in parts, but the station was not fully powered until the large solar arrays were completed.

All space stations’ modules and elements have been limited by the size of the launch vehicle – the Space Shuttle, the Proton, the Long March 5, or (in the case of Skylab) the Saturn V. The ISS was designed to be assembled by connecting component parts. But even the ISS required more than 200 EVAs (spacewalks) to assemble (1,400 hours). In the future, space stations will be assembled and constructed on orbit to an even greater extent, perhaps robotically. Companies like “Made in Space” are studying how to 3D-print space stations and space habitats, perhaps using asteroid resources. There has also been one experimental module testing the ability of a module to inflate to provide a larger space than when it was launched, while still protecting astronauts by layers of Kevlar.

All space stations so far have been designed for research on the effects of microgravity. I expect the next generation of space stations to be designed for long-term habitation. Some will likely have artificial gravity through rotation. We may see the construction of large wheel-shaped space stations, or simpler designs of modules tethered together to flip end over end. Many of the health concerns of long duration spaceflight could be avoided with some artificial gravity.

The ability of parts from different nations to plug equipment together was demonstrated with the ISS (this was an area I worked on, connecting the Russian and US parts together). It was a significant victory when NASA adopted the Russian docking system – even to connect the US Shuttle to the US space station node. NASA plans to continue to use this system on the future Moon missions. Maintaining these international standards is a constant effort, but also represents a vision of a future of cooperating in space. I’m not positive, but I think the recent videos from China show they have also adopted these international standards for docking systems and robotic grapple features. This is a clue that China hopes for a future of everyone working together in space.

What are some of the most formidable engineering challenges that stand in the way of creating better space stations?

Space stations need more autonomy in how they operate. Each space station typically has hundreds of people on staff monitoring all the systems and keeping in touch with the astronauts and cosmonauts. In the early days, the US Mission Control used to schedule all astronaut activities in 15-minute increments, 24 hours a day, which drove the astronauts crazy. They finally accepted the advice of the Russians and backed off, giving the astronauts more flexibility and more free time. But all astronauts still operate according to detailed instructions from the ground. In the future, space stations far from Earth should operate more like ships on the ocean, without the detailed directions from the “standing army” at Mission Control.

The challenges of logistics and resupply of space stations remain a limiting factor in their use. The Russians developed the “Progress” robotic spacecraft. Its first automated flight was in 1978 to the Salyut 6 space station. Newer versions of Progress are still used to supply the ISS, along with robotic spacecraft from Europe, Japan, and the United States. NASA’s plans for a lunar space station include resupply from US commercial companies, allowing them to develop commercial capabilities throughout cislunar space. Advocates for commercial space development often note this has an exciting historical analogy here on Earth. In 1849, the US government purchased supplies for only two years for the Texas military outpost Fort Worth; this led directly to the creation of the modern cities of Dallas and Fort Worth.

The ISS has gradually made progress toward closed life support systems, with the addition of water recycling in 2009. It is 85% effective as it processes roughly six tons of water per year. Ideally, space station systems would more effectively recycle all consumables and eventually produce food onboard. But experiments at growing food in space have only progressed slowly.

The ISS and all previous space stations have orbited close to the Earth and under the protection of the Earth’s magnetic field. The NASA Lunar Gateway station planned for high lunar orbit will be outside the protection of the Earth’s magnetic field and exposed to stronger radiation from the Sun and galaxy. Radiation protection will remain a challenge for space stations in deep space. Some designs plan for a “storm shelter” where the crew could remain for some hours during solar radiation events. In the long-range future, larger space stations with more shielding mass will be desired.

The next major step in the development of space will be the use of local resources in space, including mass from the Moon and asteroids. Current hardware development is proceeding in preparation for small-scale experiments, but conceptual designs are being developed for large-scale space habitats constructed from lunar and asteroidal resources. It is an exciting time to design future space stations.

---

@ps3linux @Hamartia Antidote @Indx-techs