Colorado School of Mines opens up a graduate program in Space Resources, in three options: a certificate, an MS, and a PhD. Normally I would be highly skeptical, but this university has a solid reputation for long-term value in its degrees.
https://diqn32j8nouaz.cloudfront.net...g_degrees1.jpg
https://diqn32j8nouaz.cloudfront.net...g_degrees2.jpg
More: https://space.mines.edu
The "resources" are going to be located on planets, planetoids, moons, and asteroids. (The void separating them is very empty - on the order of one hydrogen atom per cc.) That means going there, along with the necessary heavy equipment, mining and concentrating the resource in a nasty, deadly environment then shipping it either back to earth or to an established space colony (good luck on building those).
The cost of those operations versus the value of just about any material makes such operations prohibitively expensive. Plus, we have exactly zero experience living, let along mining, on any celestial body other than this one. It's going to take decades to obtain that experience with great expense in lives and treasure and that assumes that the government can muster the willingness to follow through on a long, expensive learning curve.
I'm sorry but the whole thing sounds like a gambit by the university to get naive folks and alumni to contribute more money.
Back in the 50s they told us we would all have flying cars by now. The current hysteria of building a colony on Mars in the near future is an even sillier concept. Mining the solar system is even farther out there.
Yup, I was surprised to see Colorado School of Mines to be the first to offer this degree; their reputation is diametrically opposed to that of universities offering the standard vague degree in "Communications" for $200K.
It's interesting to see their mention of "In-Situ Resource Utilization", the same phrase that NASA has been increasingly bandying about. I wonder if the "mining" will actually be more along those lines. But yes, if we start to see degree programs like "Space Poetry" and "Space English", we know our civilization is in trouble.
If you're skeptical about a space mining degree, here's another one-of-a-kind gem:
https://diqn32j8nouaz.cloudfront.net...law_degree.jpg
Terrestrial lawyers can't write concise, fair, understandable laws about situations in which they are immersed. Now we want to give degrees for writing science fiction novel theses by authors who never saw the inside of a science classroom. I think they should all be given priority seating on the first manned mission to the sun.
You want space laws? Here you go...
Gravity is king.
Don't stand in front of the quasar beam.
Spaghettification (yes, it's a word - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification) at the local black hole spa will not cure spinal problems.
Assuming a Hohmann transfer orbit (minimum energy), it will take about 260 days to reach Mars (and an equal amount to get back). If you're going to spend at least a month on Mars (considering the mission expense, less would be silly) that means the astronauts need to spend 550 days or 1.5 years of their lives on a mission that will yield precious little that couldn't be garnered with a robotic probe.
You'd want to send at least half a dozen people given the multiple disciplines needed for a productive mission. Now, imagine locking six people in a glorified tin can for a year and a half. Environmental threats would pale against the chances of aggravated assault or murder. Not all the problems we need to solve for interplanetary travel are physical. It looks easy on Space Trek but the reality with 21st century technology is a lot different.
As much as I respect NASA for their accomplishments and contributions to the many advancements of items we use today and largely take for granted Throughout history there has yet to be a government controlled let alone run entity which could be considered efficient. There were plans to send a 10,000 lb mobile habitat to the moon back in the very early 70s' Completely within the capabilities with the technology of the time. That idea was scrubbed in favor of a much more feasible lunar rover
There are 3 of them sitting on the moon there are also 10 count them 10 lunar landing descent stages there and 6 assent stages which were purposely crashed back to the surface. One of the wiser moves by NASA not to leave them in an ever decaying orbit which very possibly could have gone on for decades.
The way I see it if one day humans are ever going to go to Mars for anything other than a publicity stunt,we are going to have to return to the moon first. Which by the way is about all that was accomplished on the moon by the 12 men who have actually landed there.
In my opinion there re a few machines that would need to be sent to the moon before men return. Those machines need to be semi autonomous in nature just like the Mini Cooper sized Curiosity rover currently on Mars.
One or more of these machines preferably at least 2 in case 1 breaks down, should be a form of an excavator like machine These would then excavate an existing crater to a sufficient size and depth for a habitat structure to be erected.
If enough is currently known about the regolith there it may be possible to make a material similar to shot Crete that being the case 30 years ago a guy in east Texas and another in Australia developed a system to make self erecting concrete domes by using an inflatable bladder they placed a lattice of steel over the bladder pumped several inches of concrete on it then inflated the bladders to create dome houses.
Today we have the technologies to be able to program the excavators to change out their tools to convert to manipulating arms to spread the bladder then lay the reinforcement. Even if there were not a way to make concrete remotely or if suitable materials were not readily available, expanding foam could be sent and an attachment on the machines could pump and spray this over the reinforcement, and the regolith could cover this then all that would be required would be to inflate the structure and allow it to cure. a triple airlock could be installed at the time the reinforcement was being deployed after inflation the Air lock tunnel could be unlatched and the accordion tunnel stretched out.
By the time the first humans arrived there would already be a secure radiation proof atmospherically sealed habitat just bring furniture
Mean while the excavator machines could have been thickening up the layer of covering over the dome/s
While doing this in my opinion would be technically possible on Mars the distance and logistics to do it as a first time experience would border on stupid.
Yes, if we want to experiment with building bases on extra-terrestrial bodies, the moon is a great place to test our technologies. Travel time is short and the energy requirements aren't excessive. It doesn't have an atmosphere that can poison you as is the case with Mars but it's sufficiently nasty in terms of temperature, aridity and radiation exposure to provide a good test of any base-building technology.
Even better, a moon base on the dark side would actually serve a useful purpose. Totally shielded from the earth's light pollution and absent a roiling atmosphere, it's a superb location for a battery of telescope observatories.
As for robot landers building concrete structures for future astronauts, there's just one massive problem. Where are you going to get the water? Mars has no surface water and, if there is water below the surface, we haven't found it yet. Even if we find it, reaching it and extracting it will be a gargantuan problem. Taking water with you is out of the question; the weight penalty is just too great.
Agreed Marv about the water issue. While liquid oxygen and hydrogen can be recombined to make water the process in not as easy as simply pouring the 2 elements together, the same as sepperating the 2 elements then compressing them into a liquid state.
Carrying water would be a great expense in weight to boost ratio but that would not be the ultimate problem when water is exposed to negative atmospheric pressure IE a vacuum it almost instantly boils away.
My suggestion of using a 2 part expanding foam also depends on having at least a neutral pressure which would require some form of barrier. Possibly in the form of a thin poly film covered with the regoliff. A 3rd part would have to be included such as a gas may have to be included to serve as a catalyst as it was injected in order for the chemical reaction to start. But we have the means to conduct such experiments in vacuum chambers. The process could be tested and perfected aboard the ISS.
Yes the dark side of the moon could yield untold benefits aside from having to over come the extreme cold the lower solar radiation could be a huge plus.
As I figured it turns out someone has been studying the idea of using the lunar dust for construction. for some time now.
https://www.space.com/41633-moon-dus...-habitats.html
Given the difficulties of mining minerals in space, one must wonder if it's more practical to mine bitcoin in space.
Highly speculative, and admittedly sci-fi, but still cool: Bitcoin mining in space
I'm still trying to figure out if bitcoin is a real substance or a something dreamed up to create a basis for creating an alternate monetary value system
It helps me to think of it like gold. Industrially, gold isn't that valuable; steel is worth much more. The qualities that make gold valuable (scarcity, fungibility, immutability, resistance to forgery) are the same ones that make cryptocurrencies valuable. This doesn't mean that bitcoin will or won't succeed, just helps to place it in your mind.
What, exactly, are they mining and how is this mining being done?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon
I seem to remember some pictures (perhaps from a previous post of yours) where they were "mining" bitcoin in what appeared to be factory-like buildings equipped with machinery of some sort. It seemed more like manufacturing than mining.
Does bitcoin have any intrinsic value or is it, like paper money, valued by agreement between its users?
Crypto mining means solving cryptography puzzles. Essentially guessing at hashes until you get one correct. The more computer processing power you have, the more likely that you will guess correctly, and earn the block reward - currently 12.5 BTC, valued around $90K USD. These days it's more common for people to add their computing power to crypto mining pools. When the pool gets a block reward, it's split among people relative to the processing power that they contributed. It's generally not profitable unless electricity is very cheap.
The network of computers that handle bitcoin is now the most powerful computing network in history.
Intrinsic value? No. I don't know if ANY money is currently in use with intrinsic value. Even if you count gold as having intrinsic value (minimally), I don't believe any country still has gold-backed currency. The argument in favor of bitcoin's value is largely centered around its utility AS money, in that it's more trustworthy than any money we've previously seen. And that bitcoin is a proof of work.
Thus the theoretical but still interesting bitcoin space mining question. The thought is that you send a spaceship close to the sun, and use the solar energy to power computers that solve bitcoin hashes. Thus, the largest problem of space mining: sending the payload back to Earth, is mostly solved, because you just send back a string of characters which represents a bitcoin address that holds a block reward.
Sounds too much like the stock market to me it only retains value as long as there is trading going on. How many flat broke Millionaires and billionaires would there be if someone simply pulled the plug on the system.Everything is traded on non existent futures or speculation of hard goods to be produced. by people who wear neckties who wouldn't know a pork butt it it sat on him.
I won't ever have the millions but when I buy something I can touch it with my hands if I sell it it or trade it either sells or trades at a value either more or less than what I have in it but it is tangible none the less. If I buy an ounce of gold I want it weighed out equal to a standard mass then placed in my hand not some data stream batch of numbers that says I own the gold if it is not in my hand I can't prove that it even exists.
in 1981 I told a guy that someday the stock market would reach 6000 He thought I was crazy. I said it is just a number Yesterday it hit 26,000 just another number through all of the devaluations of money over they years 26K probably is not much more than 6 K was when I made that statement 17 years ago.
Yup, most money is digital now, whether it's cryptocurrencies or not. You touched on another money problem that bitcoin attempts to solve: inflation. The number of bitcoin produced is finite (21 million), and all mining is expected to be completed around 2140.
Another way to think about it is this: money is just a ledger. From the line in your bank's computers, to the $20 bill in your sock drawer, each one is just a note saying: "You are entitled to this much worth of goods/services." Bitcoin is attempting to act as the new ledger. Because all bitcoin transactions are public (although those involved in the transaction may be anonymized), and those transactions are recorded across millions of computers, the immutability of the ledger is thought to be superior to current systems.
""Because all bitcoin transactions are public (although those involved in the transaction may be anonymized), and those transactions are recorded across millions of computers, the immutability of the ledger is thought to be superior to current systems.""
This is still the downside When technology vanishes into burned electrons I will still have 17 acres of land with stuff scattered all over it.
I have been working on a friend's truck and his trailers He sometimes hands me cash while other times I get my compensation in other forms.
For instance He called me up and asked what I thought about an old Shear that he found would it be worth a $100.00 to me off his bill
Sure I said
Attachment 25330
Attachment 25331
It will be delivered soon OK I have 2 options here I could haul it to scrap if I find that it is completely non repairable and collect the value of weight in other steel or cash Or if at least partially repairable I could do this and use it If fully repairable and upgrade-able I could do that then use it to trade up or for something else.
Also Just last night he told me he bought an old Austin Western crane for $500.00 Its mine if I want it. DUH! I happen to have an engine I can put in it and according to the guy he bought it from it was running and being used around his place before the engine broke he pulled it but later bought another crane
Attachment 25332
Either way I go I can't loose with these.
PS I get that water tank as well
Also There is a load of roof insulation on the way
