From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x634.google.com (mail-ej1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38523B29E for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ac297cbe017so1056355366b.0 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:39:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1742229541; x=1742834341; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CQKOkFxx2POA5Tth0lp2jjfpbxUeVKIJDTBsvLoqFaU=; b=KekHYYiCw6DSHTw0lqpuOMjgQpQmENvufqj+FNCJ27LTEl5vv0zmCjYW0pA4AWPRnt d4HpSqbzNWmvaABySEyeZAoiR5NFnKLTXjNKNGeWGZ5fODZQoERckh7fNXwl0hXrwW81 yjg5ZxVfLrNWfH4GQ8DZbBH0+WR2V4hu3WhFsvTnmRTgx2pl/tPTyyqgvA4TJSOTx9JE 0HIUh2BLvyrRHbbcJjnscdc5oBZ6hLjElerQ3/TyoXI9iCdr1mVdW/bbvFwLANeGbowy 6T0fE4y0vHyUqMI4RZ3hykQrphsD0Wmw+82RcU58CmAEJjv0DFRbRXtA4PgCWgzn4K3s b/GA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1742229541; x=1742834341; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=CQKOkFxx2POA5Tth0lp2jjfpbxUeVKIJDTBsvLoqFaU=; b=lfdidQqw0aiOz09b4oHp2neJy+v7Y0lbUcSKZa3bw5MZ+nd91+NC0oa5EN6oPJVy/w JpzEH5UVu0N8U13hDev8jbisGmFfh3eU5h+oSVLthB9N/BZz7gkSNnabP/LkBr5leL1c Z+3cZ7kh0/XqZcesxPnCyaY3yCLoMnLkqKsoXWt4slEo7IHV5hPddkl085R0wosUako1 SNDXQKWJQ4cduT3UTHQs0DyavE1hl6UwWxMdYLEtVJOos5u/unGB+deWNfZ2ZMEM8L6w PsGr1MUlcHW3YBoIG+v0zotVMf8duj836oJ524P1GAGL5BzSfq+n/3TYayk759mnhsC6 a4Pw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzsNpfc19sqOZehE0Ft+CfLunaBpIWOOHymQ0gQRYEe2KH/vykj pa7C670qsWlV/K6CWGlKABAdr70V5KI3B/wu+emlpW17T+GmeZlS8CXDpvTHyHdbP9EWkvuyBCr h52UnkaMRWFsg11bVEwfV9xLCjcFkeYQA634= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct1TOtl7SHKqKn6RTxSkMF2197gT4xt5BMKSagLVzWkI79wVmWh2msxBY983jH 3K0rRmSa1R9541bsPKhn55QVCPt8GHHTrL9BAS06GeDQPCVkMu/O+GtBCwzZRodx6masSmKpHZc VsL6LTyP4Y1pXwHz6jf+baM+SqoxGVJPlc4HdD X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IERczVh/rFZpB8dj5B4OC1YMBvvyiddk9B4O12hPkR89SFRu/WpjHUv+ogaSh+rdKoZwlljxfu51w22oJ1cs1o= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:60ca:b0:ac2:7ce7:cd2b with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ac38f7066ddmr15678466b.2.1742229541271; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:39:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0C278F23-8CD8-49A8-94EB-90F5BA2B055F@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <0C278F23-8CD8-49A8-94EB-90F5BA2B055F@gmx.de> From: "David Bray, PhD" Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:38:24 -0400 X-Gm-Features: AQ5f1Jr8KCK56qeLmoE6fi9K5nMkBWxLGaqABH_9RUYMGnzZZk-szn0hRLFR1M4 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Cc: Sebastian Moeller , "Douglas Goncz A.A.S. M.E.T. 1990" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ecc05406308c6c90" Subject: Re: [NNagain] Hurling rocks into Earth's gravity well X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 16:39:02 -0000 --000000000000ecc05406308c6c90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 100% Sebastian about the Moon Is a Harsh Mistress - and glad to see someone else read that great book. I'd go for burning hydrogen - not hydrogen fusion - if we can extract water from the Moon with solar power as the initial kick-starter. We will need the hydrogen for future rockets launched from the Moon's lower gravity to Mars and beyond too... On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:01=E2=80=AFAM Sebastian Moeller via Nnagain < nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > > > On 17. Mar 2025, at 13:41, Douglas Goncz A.A.S. M.E.T. 1990 via Nnagain= < > nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > > > Hello Dr. David. > > > > The gravity at the surface of the Moon is larger than might be expected > since the volume to radius ratio is as r squared, so that with a differen= ce > of 100 times that is a factor of 100x in gravity at surface we can predic= t > that the rocks they'll be throwing at us we'll be falling up that is thro= wn > out of the gravity wall for 1/10 the trip roughly and falling down that i= s > falling into that gravity well for 9/10 of the trip causing an overall > Factor of enormous acceleration. Offhand I would say the process would > achieve 80% of escape velocity. > > > > The Australian science agency has a nice chart out for asteroid type > objects on their website. It summarizes the relationship between the many > many small rocks which are in our system and the very few large rocks whi= ch > accompany them as they move at various speeds knowing only statistical > information about how many rocks of which size and how fast they're movin= g > and what energy the net result is > > > > They quote figures of atta joules. So once given the upward that is > towards the Earth impetus a mere Boulder could do really significant dama= ge > assuming that the transit time could be controlled carefully in their was > either accurate aiming or some type of midcourse correction to get the > target secured. > > > > Trying to find my way back on topic to Net neutrality. Maybe a moon bas= e > could be set up with a transmitter powered by a small nuclear reactor > > Mmmh, radionuclear power generation seems realistic, a nuclear reactor > less so, given that you somehow need to dispose of waste heat eventually > and vacuum ist a good isolator... then again, for a sufficiently large mo= on > base you might actually want a heating source to make up for the radiativ= e > heat loss. > > That said, you know what they say about the moon being a harsh mistress, > eh? > > > > receiving signals from Earth and retransmitting them to make the > connections for data and voice. Compared to lofting a satellite having th= e > time to construct such an item on the surface of the Moon would be > advantageous the way it seems to me. I'm pretty sure that a satellite wou= ld > have to be put into place in orbit with its power supply and all that and > that's what starling does bloody bloody blah. > > > > By the way I'm running for president. > > / / < GONCZ2028 > / > > > > > > Cheers > > Doug > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2024, 10:04 AM David Bray, PhD > > wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > Meanwhile China probably will land humans on the moon within the next > four > > > years of whomever is the next U.S. President. That may happen before > the > > > U.S. returns to the Moon. Either way, a "base" on the Moon by 2035 > (which > > > is PRC's goal) even if it's robots - or humans with the risk of loss = of > > > life) raises some challenges in terms of SIGINT, GEOINT, and the > general > > > ability to hurl rocks into Earth's gravity well.... > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Nnagain mailing list > > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > --000000000000ecc05406308c6c90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
100%=20 Sebastian=20 about the Moon Is a Harsh Mistress - and glad to see someone else read that= great book.

I'd go for burning hydrogen = - not hydrogen fusion - if we can extract water from the Moon with solar po= wer as the initial kick-starter. We will need the hydrogen for future rocke= ts launched from the Moon's lower gravity to Mars and beyond too...


On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:01= =E2=80=AFAM Sebastian Moeller via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">

> On 17. Mar 2025, at 13:41, Douglas Goncz A.A.S. M.E.T. 1990 via Nnagai= n <nn= again@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> Hello Dr. David.
>
> The gravity at the surface of the Moon is larger than might be expecte= d since the volume to radius ratio is as r squared, so that with a differen= ce of 100 times that is a factor of 100x in gravity at surface we can predi= ct that the rocks they'll be throwing at us we'll be falling up tha= t is thrown out of the gravity wall for 1/10 the trip roughly and falling d= own that is falling into that gravity well for 9/10 of the trip causing an = overall Factor of enormous acceleration. Offhand I would say the process wo= uld achieve 80% of escape velocity.
>
> The Australian science agency has a nice chart out for asteroid type o= bjects on their website. It summarizes the relationship between the many ma= ny small rocks which are in our system and the very few large rocks which a= ccompany them as they move at various speeds knowing only statistical infor= mation about how many rocks of which size and how fast they're moving a= nd what energy the net result is
>
> They quote figures of atta joules. So once given the upward that is to= wards the Earth impetus a mere Boulder could do really significant damage a= ssuming that the transit time could be controlled carefully in their was ei= ther accurate aiming or some type of midcourse correction to get the target= secured.
>
> Trying to find my way back on topic to Net neutrality. Maybe a moon ba= se could be set up with a transmitter powered by a small nuclear reactor
Mmmh, radionuclear power generation seems realistic, a nuclear reactor less= so, given that you somehow need to dispose of waste heat eventually and va= cuum ist a good isolator... then again, for a sufficiently large moon base = you might actually want a heating source to make up for the radiative heat = loss.

That said, you know what they say about the moon being a harsh mistress, eh= ?


> receiving signals from Earth and retransmitting them to make the conne= ctions for data and voice. Compared to lofting a satellite having the time = to construct such an item on the surface of the Moon would be advantageous = the way it seems to me. I'm pretty sure that a satellite would have to = be put into place in orbit with its power supply and all that and that'= s what starling does bloody bloody blah.
>
> By the way I'm running for president.
> / / < GONCZ2028 > /
>
>
> Cheers
> Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024, 10:04 AM David Bray, PhD <david.a.bray@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> ...
> >
> > Meanwhile China probably will land humans on the moon within the = next four
> > years of whomever is the next U.S. President. That may happen bef= ore the
> > U.S. returns to the Moon. Either way, a "base" on the M= oon by 2035 (which
> > is PRC's goal) even if it's robots - or humans with the r= isk of loss of
> > life) raises some challenges in terms of SIGINT, GEOINT, and the = general
> > ability to hurl rocks into Earth's gravity well....
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nna= gain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@= lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
--000000000000ecc05406308c6c90--