The Chinese Moon Landing

[rozeh]

No, your remarks don't upset the guys. They (your comments) are largely irrelevant.  People will discuss what they choose to in this "open" (General Chat) forum.

Uh-ha. Thank you for discourage me(put sb down me).

[JohnnyGringo]

No, your remarks don't upset the guys. They (your comments) are largely irrelevant.  People will discuss what they choose to in this "open" (General Chat) forum.

Uh-ha. Thank you for discourage me(put sb down me).

What's "sb"?  Antimony?
Chemical Element
Antimony is a chemical element with symbol Sb and atomic number 51. A lustrous gray metalloid, it is found in nature mainly as the sulfide mineral stibnite.
Symbol: Sb

I shouldn't have been so rude in my response. I apologize.  But there certainly are POLITICAL and MILITARY implications / aspects to this or any adventures.  And trying to stifle that kind of discussion "because it will cause to contention" or a few would be offended ... is well, offensive in its self.

Contention is what debate is all about. It should be encouraged, not discouraged.

We don't all live in a country that stifles public debates.

[rozeh]

What's "sb"?  Antimony?
Chemical Element
Antimony is a chemical element with symbol Sb and atomic number 51. A lustrous gray metalloid, it is found in nature mainly as the sulfide mineral stibnite.
Symbol: Sb

I shouldn't have been so rude in my response. I apologize.  But there certainly are POLITICAL and MILITARY implications / aspects to this or any adventures.  And trying to stifle that kind of discussion "because it will cause to contention" or a few would be offended ... is well, offensive in its self.

Contention is what debate is all about. It should be encouraged, not discouraged.

We don't all live in a country that stifles public debates.

[JuKu]

  It makes me wonder, "Why?". Why bother going back to the moon? Unless they though there was something to gain.  Russia and China both received some of the materials that we brought back.  Was this just a display of capability?   

  If so, is this all they were capable of? Why not go for some of the more unexplored regions, like the asteroid belt?

Maybe they are getting ready to send a probe/rover to Mars... The moon is a much easier target to shoot for, and they can prove out their hardware.  Maybe Mars is next.  The moon is larger than many think it is, there are still many unexplored areas that have not been seen up close and personal.  One of the things that many are speculating about is on the surface of the moon: Helium-3 which [ostensibly] can be a pollution-free source of energy.  I don't think anyone has yet found any Helium-3, but you never know-- maybe China will be first [and you might expect a mining claim on the area where it was found!]

Not a secret, the Chinese have stated that one of the long-term goals is a permanent mining station. And one of the reasons in indeed helium-3. It is known that the top two meters of lunar soil is rich in that, as helium-3 comes from solar wind. On earth, the sun-produced H3 is trapped in top part of the atmosphere, and being so light, it is blown away. On the surface, you can get some from particle accelerators. It is enormously usable stuff: I once saw a documentary clip of a desktop proof-of-concept fusion reactor burning H3, controlled by an ordinary PC. No practical use - unless you have a helium-3 mine...

The other goal is a permanent base and a space station: If you have water (moon has plenty) and power (moon has plenty of sunlight and H3), you have fuel. Operating missions to rest of the solar system is far more easier from moon's small gravity than from earth.

The Chinese are good in big, long-term projects.

[EEVblog]

We don't all live in a country that stifles public debates.

We also don't all contribute to a forum that provides anything goes debates.
There are countless forums to discuss politics, military, and alien conspiracy theories on, but this isn't one of them. This is primarily an electronics (and technology) discussion forum.

[EEVblog]

Dear EEVblog(Dave) and GeoffS,
I had already said to guys that it's better you don't speak about politics or war or... because it will cause to contention.(I hope my remark don't will upset the guys. I like the all american and aussie and europeans  )

Personally, I'm all for a free-for-all debate on anything, and verbal fisticuffs, and I find both politics and war rather interesting myself. But professionally, unfortunately I have to try and run an electronics forum with a modicum of responsibility.
So if it look like threads like this a going to take off into the mud, threads do have to get reigned in occasionally.
The odds comments and banter are ok, but it's the nasty slippery slope into the gutter that needs watching out for.

[GK]

  It makes me wonder, "Why?". Why bother going back to the moon? Unless they though there was something to gain.  Russia and China both received some of the materials that we brought back.  Was this just a display of capability?   

  If so, is this all they were capable of? Why not go for some of the more unexplored regions, like the asteroid belt?

Maybe they are getting ready to send a probe/rover to Mars... The moon is a much easier target to shoot for, and they can prove out their hardware.  Maybe Mars is next.  The moon is larger than many think it is, there are still many unexplored areas that have not been seen up close and personal.  One of the things that many are speculating about is on the surface of the moon: Helium-3 which [ostensibly] can be a pollution-free source of energy.  I don't think anyone has yet found any Helium-3, but you never know-- maybe China will be first [and you might expect a mining claim on the area where it was found!]

Not a secret, the Chinese have stated that one of the long-term goals is a permanent mining station. And one of the reasons in indeed helium-3. It is known that the top two meters of lunar soil is rich in that, as helium-3 comes from solar wind. On earth, the sun-produced H3 is trapped in top part of the atmosphere, and being so light, it is blown away. On the surface, you can get some from particle accelerators. It is enormously usable stuff: I once saw a documentary clip of a desktop proof-of-concept fusion reactor burning H3, controlled by an ordinary PC. No practical use - unless you have a helium-3 mine...

Helium 3 is a byproduct of the decay of tritium in nuclear warheads. I use helium 3 tubes for neutron detection (geophysics). Helium 3 is the best gas for he job, but world wide stocks are seriously depleted and the price has gone through the roof since 911 as neutron detectors are used for "Homeland protection". A recent quote for a tube that I bought in 2003 for $1300 costs $8500 now. 
Though homeland security has been the biggest impacting factor, Helium 3 has also been going up in price over the past decade of so due to the efforts of both the USA and Russia to reduce their number of nuclear warheads, which are the primary source for commercial helium 3.

[mrflibble]

  It makes me wonder, "Why?". Why bother going back to the moon? Unless they though there was something to gain.  Russia and China both received some of the materials that we brought back.  Was this just a display of capability?   

  If so, is this all they were capable of? Why not go for some of the more unexplored regions, like the asteroid belt?

Maybe they are getting ready to send a probe/rover to Mars... The moon is a much easier target to shoot for, and they can prove out their hardware.  Maybe Mars is next.

The moon as proving ground for capabilities makes a lot of sense IMO. And there is indeed plenty of exploration that can be done there. Checking for viable amounts of He-3 would definitely be on the list. Another thing that could be very interesting is to put a long baseline array on the farside of the moon for some serious radio astronomy. You could even expand the baseline over time. And big advantage is no need for fuel for orbital adjustments, because well, moon.

Or the ever popular space elevator. Last time I checked we didn't have fibers strong enough for a terrestrial tether. But for the moon you can make do with a lot less tensile strength, for which fibers are already commercially available. "All" we need is someone crazy enough to pick up the outrageous tab without any immediate payoff. Just like on earth it will probably make more sense for a while longer to just use chemical propulsion. Anyways, my main point here being that should spinning long fibers become a lot cheaper over time, it might become affordable to actually deploy a tether above the moon. That would 1) be totally awesome and 2) be a good way to practice operations of such a thing. But we'll see probably see electrodynamic tethers around the Earth sooner since there's plenty of payoff there and it's not nearly as expensive. Luckily there is a pretty big market for strong fibers so that will get progressively cheaper over time as manufacturing keeps improving.

At any rate, I wish the Chinese the best of luck with their moon missions. And more of it please!  As much as the various countries differ, we're still along for the same ride on the same rotating mudball hurtling through space at ludicrous speed. XD

[mos6502]

  It makes me wonder, "Why?". Why bother going back to the moon? Unless they thought there was something to gain.  Russia and China both received some of the materials that we brought back.  Was this just a display of capability?   

Couple things:

- a radio telescope on the back of the moon would be awesome, because a huge problem with radio astronomy today is all the man made noise. On the dark side of the moon, you could be sure that any signal you pick up isn't man made.

- an optical telescope on the moon. Hubble had only a 2.4m mirror and blew all other earth based telescopes out of the water. A large mirrored telescope could be built on the moon that would provide immensely detailed pictures.

The problem is, it would be hugely expensive to transport all the necessary materials to the moon. A solution could be to send robots that mine the required materials directly on the moon and then build most of the stuff from the raw materials.

In any case, sooner or later, we will run out of resources and/or living space. There are 7 billion people on this planet right now. By 2080, it could be 14 billion. Any nation that gains a foothold on the moon right now will be at a huge advantage later on.

[rozeh]

Personally, I'm all for a free-for-all debate on anything, and verbal fisticuffs, and I find both politics and war rather interesting myself. But professionally, unfortunately I have to try and run an electronics forum with a modicum of responsibility.
So if it look like threads like this a going to take off into the mud, threads do have to get reigned in occasionally.
The odds comments and banter are ok, but it's the nasty slippery slope into the gutter that needs watching out for.

You are owner(for forum). in all cases, you are right, Dave . personally, I like the all aussie (I have many friend from australia in avrfreaks.net (john, Ross,...) or etc).
my remarks just was for prevention of probable conflicts (Because I saw that some post has modified).
anyway, Thanks Dave for create this forum. in many cases, I had already seen your videos in youtube and enjoye of those. we iranian like you.

[Kjelt]

In any case, sooner or later, we will run out of resources and/or living space. There are 7 billion people on this planet right now. By 2080, it could be 14 billion. Any nation that gains a foothold on the moon right now will be at a huge advantage later on.

Problem are not the people themselves but the comsumption of these people and most important fresh water and food. I don't see how the moon can significantly contribute there at least with current technology. Besides living on the moon requires an atmosphere to protect from cosmic radiation or people won't have a long life.
But hey let's contribute to stay on earth and let's all stop procreating.

[TerraHertz]

In any case, sooner or later, we will run out of resources and/or living space. There are 7 billion people on this planet right now. By 2080, it could be 14 billion. Any nation that gains a foothold on the moon right now will be at a huge advantage later on.

How so?

To be clear, I'm not questioning the value of space exploration, and agree there are over 7 billion people on Earth now, and it's still going up. I even agree to some extent with the Global Cull types, that Earth would be (and was) a nicer place with under one billion humans.

But I don't see space technology making any difference to the population problem. There simply aren't the resources (energy or materials) to boost enough people out of the gravity well each year, to make any significant difference to even the population growth rate, let alone the static population. Not to mention the food, air, water and machinery they'd need to stay alive.

Space exploration _might_ get started with small numbers of people boosted up there - tens or even hundreds. Then IF (big if) the problems of creating self-sustaining biospheres capable of growing food  could be solved, they could begin increasing numbers the natural way. That's also putting aside issues like the high background radiation level outside Earth's atmosphere, long term epigenetic error accumulation, and so on.

But the idea of space travel ever making a difference to Earth's population problem - nope. Not without a reactionless anti-gravity drive, or something like that.

The only 'big advantage' any nation would gain through having an active Moon base (or asteroid belt base) would be the kind in Heinlein's 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress'.  It's a good place from which to throw big rocks at Earth.

[Rick Law]

As with the first satellite, achieving it was not about the event per se, but a statement about the state of technology of the achievers themselves.  America was not worried because there was a metal basket ball overhead, America was worried because it told the world that Russia got it done and America was "not yet."

In doing what it did, China proved to the world it can.  I am sure some if not many of the technologies were "copied", but that's the way one learns.

I believe it as Einstein, or someone with similar stature who said: "When standing on the shoulders of giants, one can see far."  So, to learn from example is smart.  First
learn how to do something by example, then learn to do something by themselves.  Not a bad way.

Let's say the entire thing was copied.  And let's just say the blue print and specs are all done for them, tested for them, and available in kit form...  Even under those terms, getting the kit assembled and getting the whole plan executed was still a hard job to do and doing so is a major accomplishment.  Given the current state of international affairs, I am fairly sure no one shipped them a "kit with some assembly required."

I like this a lot.  We (the "developed nations") need a kick in the bud.  We have been arrogant and got lazy.  We need the competition between each other and with others.  We need the pressure to keep us moving forward.

[mrflibble]

But I don't see space technology making any difference to the population problem. There simply aren't the resources (energy or materials) to boost enough people out of the gravity well each year, to make any significant difference to even the population growth rate, let alone the static population. Not to mention the food, air, water and machinery they'd need to stay alive.

I don't see space tech as being The Solution [tm] either. But luckily we don't have to think in terms of any one solution. We can however think in terms of many parts of the puzzle, small and big. If we can even get some of us pesky humans out there, then we have a chance to fuck up the neighborhood spread life out there as well.

Space exploration _might_ get started with small numbers of people boosted up there - tens or even hundreds. Then IF (big if) the problems of creating self-sustaining biospheres capable of growing food  could be solved, they could begin increasing numbers the natural way. That's also putting aside issues like the high background radiation level outside Earth's atmosphere, long term epigenetic error accumulation, and so on.

Indeed. Self-sustained biospheres are a BIG fat if. Without that it is already game over from the start. Hell, even a biosphere with planet Earth IN the loop (having crucial bits shipped from Earth to your habitat) is already a tall order. Problems number 1, 2 and 3 probably have something to do with water, water and more water.

But the idea of space travel ever making a difference to Earth's population problem - nope. Not without a reactionless anti-gravity drive, or something like that.

While I am all for reactionless drives, the lack of that doesn't have to stop us. Either fission or fusion powered reaction drives (preferably the kind that doesn't radiate your balls off) could get us a long way already. But we currently don't even have the tech to make that on Earth, so that requires some work. But in terms of payoff, we should definitely get going on that since energy production without burning more fossil fuels would be quite handy. Just cheaper energy (cheap in terms of messing up our planet, not cheap in terms of arbitrary strange units) + better desalination processes could help already with our big population.

The only 'big advantage' any nation would gain through having an active Moon base (or asteroid belt base) would be the kind in Heinlein's 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress'.  It's a good place from which to throw big rocks at Earth.

And lets not forget the big advantage of having a supercomputer with a good sense of humor!

[Kjelt]

To all moonlanding conspiracy theorists, this movie was just released, what really happened

[mianchen]

To all moonlanding conspiracy theorists, this movie was just released, what really happened

roflmao

sent from Mars

[M0BSW]

According to some UFO sites their looking for ET's, it's strange that some countries do everything to hide this stuff , while other countries don't , here in the UK  there is or was a minister in government for UFO's, hiding it just make people suspicious , hope they do find something, they also just unveiled 3 yes 3 Stealth fighters in one go, which look pretty impressive. and did anyone see the TV program in the UK , that show the robot they made to keep their astronauts company on long missions, the robots adapt  them selves to the interests of the human, enabling sensible two way conversations with the machine.

[Galenbo]

Did they take a permission from the US government to land on the moon?

No, but NSA hacked their equipment. So all data goes to the USA even before it goes to china.
Everybody happy :-)

[GeoffS]

Direct from the Chinese media:

http://www.ecns.cn/2014/02-12/100479.shtml

[xrunner]

Direct from the Chinese media:

http://www.ecns.cn/2014/02-12/100479.shtml

Space is tough China - come back to me when you land a human being there (and they live to tell about it) LOL.

[JuKu]

Better news today:

"Yutu has come back to life," said Pei Zhaoyu, the spokesman."

http://www.ecns.cn/2014/02-13/100662.shtml

[G7PSK]

The curse of fake capacitors strikes again?

[Mr Smiley]

I heard on the news ( uk ) last night that the device might be coming back to life 

They also said that it had an expected mission lifespan of 3 months.

Isn’t that expecting tooo much from something made in china