What Life In a Lunar Colony Will Be Like
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 тра 2024
- What Life In a Lunar Colony Will Be Like.. and can people live on the Moon? We want to establish a Moon base, but have you thought of it as a place to live comfortably? Could we build a city in the Moon and make it a place we call home one day?
Last Video: New Images From James Webb Space Telescope Are Here!
• New Images From James ...
SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates
Mars Colonization News and Updates
• Mars Colonization News...
The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!
► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com
Business Email: derek@ellify.com
#Spacex #Space #Moon
0:00 Introduction
0:53 One million tons to the Moon
3:12 The complications
6:49 Life in Moon city - Наука та технологія
I would love to see the day where I look up at night, and see lights from some form of Colony on the moon.
That has already happened, in the year 1609, Galileo Galilei, turned his telescope to the moon and described lights moving across the surface.
Or imagine when the colonies get big enough, you might be able to see them clearly with a telescope, especially because the Moon doesn't have an atmosphere
@@DrWoodyII that wasn't a colony but cosmic crackheads looking for cosmic crack rocks...
@@matthewviramontes3131 we still have an atmosphere on Earth so visibility remaons the same...
I'd rather look up and see Earth while I was standing in that colony on Mars.
I think the moon should be the first colony simply because it would be easier to test different methods of space engineering and would be close enough to help in an emergency
The fact that you actually think you know so much more than Elon is 😅🤣😂 absurd. You do it. Really. Do it yourself.
@@paintedpony2935 Elon fanboy moment, thinking Elon musk is remotely smart
Space Nazis tho
And the Second Amendment applies to the moon
@@paintedpony2935 Elon has his own motivations, has nothing to do about what you know and more about what you want. He's even hinted at it in the past that the moon is too easy, and doing so will kill motivation for going to mars.
I think another potential advantage is to use the moon as the step off point for a Mars mission. Build a large cargo ship which doesn't need to escape Earth's gravity, stockpile materials on the moon and launch from there when the time is right. One or two trips with a super carrier vs thousands of trips with piddly little ships seems more cost effective and time efficient. However, I'm not an expert of any sort - I just like the idea of expanding our reach in our solar system.
But losing ONE cargo ship would be the same as losing a THOUSAND piddlies!
@@stevekundzala676 Well, just don't lose one...😄
we just aint that good yet😂 Space x already lost how many piddlies just getting it up there 😂
Born too late to discover the earth, born to early to discover the stars
you are correct about using the moon to build for mars much better than launching that much stuff off world and safer Plus I like your build it big idea makes better sense to get there in something with leg room in it.
I’m pretty sure that’s actually one of the premises behind why NASA is doing this
The Moon is a stepping-stone to the Stars.
I think the moon would be the ideal first stepping stone for deeper exploration of our solar system. To research and develop technologies hopefully using resources from the moon instead of launching them from earth.
The moons conditions being more inhospitable than Mars may also be a benefit since we know what to prepare for and how, and also how prolonged low gravity affects people.
Yeah I am absolutely in love with using the Lunar material to our advantage
The moon simply needs to become a colony and a hub for new industry and mass-mining operations. And it will be. If we are not sending one or many starships to the moon on a daily basis by the end of the decade, we are doing something wrong. Look up the “Bagger 288”, the largest wheeled vehicle on earth, a massive mining excavator. Machines like that are limited in size due to the insane amount of weight they have to hold with trusses and cables. Machines like that will be easily built and run on the moon because of the gravity. We can expect to see massive amounts of moon dust being filtered and processed for their metals without fear of destroying an ecosystem.
We're already exploring the solar system. Unmanned exploration makes vastly better sense.
It already has been. Exploration and colonization are different things. Exploration is best done by robotic probes that are inexpensive, fly fast, take pictures and data, and move on. Next is sending more expensive robots to land and do science. Settlement or colonization happens when humans go there permanently. This can be for exploration, science, mining, manufacturing, tourism, and finally permanent housing.
The lunar colony will absolutely come first. It would be reckless to venture farther out without doing all the research that we can on the moon first.
The Moon presents opportunities to "road test" everything to be used on Mars, and do it at much closer range than Mars.
A lunar colony might have the positive outcome of teaching would-be Mars colonists how there is nothing to look forward to.
Yes of course. I fear Elon Musk's ambition may contribute to premature doomed Martian colonies.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@GL-iv4rw They're more likely to just steal the whole damned thing and disappear with it! Now won't *that* screw up the tides?
I think a colony or permeant base on the moon would be essential in any effort to reach Mars with substantial quantities of materials and resources. The moon could be a staging post and, possibly even a manufacturing site for materials destined for Mars. I imagine it would be a lot easier to launch a fleet of ships carrying cargo from the moon to Mars than the Earth.
Good video. I enjoyed and learned from this. So thumbs up and subscribed. My current take on some of this is that I think it makes sense to establish bases, communities, etc., lots of useful infrastructure and skilled people on the Moon first, and then set out to inhabit Mars (or wherever) from the Moon -- assuming that it can be done that way. I checked out your channel and you have lots of vids that I will be viewing. Time permitting, that is. There are so many great informative UA-cam channels and well produced and presented UA-cam vids that are on my list to view. Too many, so I'll be trimming the list in the foreseeable future. But your channel will be among the keepers. At least for the foreseeable future. Thanks for your efforts and posting your vids.
Honestly this is one of the most underrated channels. Exactly the content i'm interested in. Well presented. Well delivered.
Only the dishonest and cowards use "honestly" as impulsive brain fart and "ice breaker" to conveying their points.
@@linyenchin6773 ok bro
@@linyenchin6773 Only idiots with projection issues pretend to know the psychological incentives of people who use the word "honestly". The despicable scum who dictate to the land of your forefathers, know a thing or two about dishonesty.
@@linyenchin6773 Ok, I'll be blunt then. Your comment is hostile. It is derogatory and ridicules without addressing the content of Aric's statement. It is a model of bluster whose sole effect can only be to negate both the speaker and what he said and thus nullify all. It is nuclear writing.
If this was not your intent, you need to apologize and refrain from doing this ever again. Regardless of intent, it doesn't take an analysis for anyone to see your hostility and write you off as an enemy. If you want to be treated as an enemy, you know how to get there. You have a choice. You will make your own bed and lie in it. Sweet dreams.
You put it concretely
It's a great staging ground for new technologies and innovations. Would be worth testing those on the moon where we can get to fairly quickly in the case of an emergency.
That would actually make a great Hollywood movie imagine this we've had a small colony on the moon for a long time we've had a lot of exploration they found big lava tube tunnels and converted it into a big living space all of a sudden there's some horrible disaster on earth like Yellowstone going off and everybody gets shipped up to the Moon from that whole region like millions of people and they all got to get used to living in a tube on the moon. Might be interesting if the tube were so big that there were lots of room and that were one of the surprises in the movie that you build the movie up like they're all going to be cramped like you see all the previews show people in small crap spaces and stuff but most of the movie you see that the space inside that lava tube is huge filled with plants brought to supply the needs of the Colin.y
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@americannomadnewsthecardbo4339 And it would be even more interesting if all the politicians of earth were left behind on earth because the moon doesn't allow politicians - they are obsolete on the Moon!
People would be so much happier!!!
ABSOLUTELY!!!
The moon is not necessarily a "better" colonizing location, but it's a quicker one that will provide us with the ability to launch ships to Mars and beyond. What's ridiculous is that we haven't been there since Apollo missions and that we haven't settled there already.
Congratulations! You just made the whole space race topic understandable and interesting to someone who just isn't in the know I really enjoyed this video and learnt a lot.
The key is the Shackleton Crater, almost directly at the south pole of the moon. That would keep the moon base or colony in perpetual shadow, thus avoiding the temperature swings. Solar panels up on the rim of the crater would be nearly in perpetual sunlight. Also, there are some indications that there is water ice in the crater, to help supply water for the colony without having to haul heavy supplies up from Earth.
Space tourism would be possible for the moon--not so for Mars. With a 3 day trip to the moon and back, one could do a moon vacation with about 2.5 weeks. If fusion energy is ever perfected, the large amounts of deuterium would give the moon a "cash crop" and would probably lead to something of a gold rush for the moon. The close proximity of the moon would mean it could be colonized much faster and cheaper than Mars could. And people could be rotated to and from the Moon easily compared to Mars.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@GL-iv4rw
Thats just it. The Moon would be colonized first because it offers immediate economic,industrial, and military return of investment
in addition to scientific returns from both studying the Moon itself and radio astronomy. Space tourism, lunar mining, and military bases
to defend the sovereign interests of the space fairing nations would naturally occur. The Moon would always be directly linked with
a global civilization on Earth, in Earth orbit, and the L4 regions of space.
a Martian civilization is going to drift away from Earth control.
Both Mars and the moon possess lava tubes. On the moon they can be quite large, big enough for a city with skyscrapers. Lava tubes offer a shielded thermally stable environment. Much easier to colonize the moon with a hardware store and hospital 3 days away vs 6-9 months, not to mention launch windows and delta v. Even on Mars, you need shielding against radiation.
A skyscraper on Earth has a view. You can stick your head out and actually breathe the air. You can walk outside, maybe go to the beach. Have a walk through a forest. Do a whole bunch of pleasurable things. A skyscraper stuck in a hole on the moon is an improvement? How? And why spend a hundred times as much to live in a gilded cage? I won't even mention Mars.
Yes, ready-made shielding and huge volumes to play with. Habitats could be on carousels for extra G, the regolith dust would be minimal and not ionised and production in a stable thermal environment would be simpler. Ideal locations for the first colonies.
@@saumyacow4435 completely missing the point. The point is not to build a skyscraper in the moon.
@@AGPMandavel i was responding to Dan's comment, which was talking about skyscrapers on the moon.
@@saumyacow4435 I understand that. If I understand him correctly, he was not advocating that “we should build a skyscraper in a lava tube in the moon.” More so, that those lava tubes have enough room for a skyscraper, which invokes a much more complex idea, that one lava tube has enough space for a small city. I get that not everyone wants to leave earth, so I can’t comment on concerns over the inability to go outside or anything. But some people don’t care about that if it means living in an extreme environment and doing something very difficult for the sake of pioneering a new way of living. If a catastrophe doesn’t strike us down anytime soon, we will go to space, we will live on the moon and elsewhere as a matter of fact given enough time. Some people may not see the appeal of that… but some already do.
The biggest advantage was what you mentioned last. And that is the very readily extractable source of He3 from the regolith. This element, created from cosmic rays and solar wind, is completely stable and good fuel for fission power.
The moon is the obvious winner. quicker to get there & do short stays, quickly return to earth to avoid damaging effects of low gravity. Plus Helium3.
I prefer Helium1! lol@@johnmorelli3775
Love these videos! Thank you for the detailed overview of colonizing our Moon
Little beans and whatnot?
I’ve always thought we should have a colony on the moon first. It makes sense for a first/experiment colony with it being close enough that if something were to happen, we could actually be close enough to react.
That is, of course, until we start transporting vast quantities of nuclear waste to the moon for idisposal and the concentrations of it chain react in a titanic explosion that rips the moon out of Earth orbit, hurling it and all of its colonists into the void of interstellar space ala 'Space 1999:Breakaway'.
Not to mention it’s much easier to implement space stations and space ports in low gravity. So, just off the surface, we could have emulated gravity (centripetal acceleration) to prevent bone loss during long term stays.
I was hoping you would mention the potential benefits of living in Lava Tubes. The latest Chinese press release about their Lunar plans stated their intention to utilize Lave Tubes for shelter. Potentially, you might be able to construct an entire city in one.
this is true. The Moon's gravity is such that its lavatubes are yuuge.
They already have bases up there in craters.
@@Nautilus1972 Got any pics?
You might want to check out the 'Prinzton Project' developed by the Moon Society several years ago. It deals with the design of a rille colony which could be the forebear of a lava-tube settlement. . .
@@brycejohnson6209 I googled the Prinzton project and got nothing there. I did get the Moon Society but no sign of it there yet either. There's lots to explore there and I'm sure I'll come across it. Thanks bud!
You made the case rather profoundly. I see going to the moon as a precurser to going Mars. Learning to walk before you run. RC
That was a brilliant watch, really enjoyed that
The two year window is actually for fuel saving. You can launch every few weeks if you can afford it. Missing the window could mean the voyage is now twice as expensive, but not impossible.
That would be nice ,to keep fireing them up for years every day
The problem with other windows is that they require more fuel to make the transfer. More fuel equals less cargo. This equation is geometric, so pretty quickly you get to zero cargo. Even then you are talking about months of travel time both ways.
time is also the other huge factor, launching away from the window drasticly increases the time it takes to get to mars, prolonging the recovery time when the colonists make it to mars.
Fuel has and always will be the problem. most of a rocket has traditionally been expendable because 90% or more of any rocket is essentially just fuel tanks which become dead weight when expended thus ejected. Re-usable rockets is a great advance but it doesn't solve the fundamental problem.
Of course most of that fuel is expended getting free of the gravity well of Earth - once in space it takes minimal energy to go anywhere, you only need more if you need speed.
However, this fuel issue will remain a fundamental problem up until such time as a viable, effective, efficient and reliable nuclear rocket engine is created.
There's an alternate route where the starship goes to Venus first, then slingshots to Mars. That doubles the number of convoys that can be sent to Mars every 26 months.
I think it is a logical first stepping stone to developing a colony on Mars. Imagine how much would be learned with help close at hand if needed before undertaking a full on attempt at Mars, it makes sense.
What about the issues with Gravity, fatal bone loss etc
@@AndrewGerrard8 you just work out people already do that on the ISS
@@Quacking-duck they don’t stay up long enough for fatal bone loss, however Mars would pose that issue. Human Genetic engineering would be required prior to settling on Mars. Not to mention deadly bacteria and radiation issues.
Interesting! thx for sharing! Definetly subbed!
If there's ever a colony in my life time. I would definitely move to the moon. I really hope the 2024 mission goes well. Plenty of things can change in 26 years. In 2050 I'll be 56. Still young enough to make my way there if it develops enough in that time. In the first 13 years, it would probably be a lot of testing and building and in the last 13 years, the world would definitely see potential in moon endeavors and start building more domestic infrastructure. It's probably wishful thinking. The moon would probably become only a storage or huge warehouse for shipping and managing resources for a long time before anyone had the idea to build a community there.
A man can dream.
I volunteer for life term workforce
You born in 1994, same here. 2050 is only 27 years away.
Great video! I think lunar colonies will be underground to avoid impacts, temperature variations and radiation. LED windows showing the outside can take the place of actual windows. Mining will produce pits and trenches anyway. These can be roofed over to make habs and tunnels. Reactors 1000' away need no more shielding than a pit. They can't make the moon's surface more radioactive. :) And if it turns out that low gravity adds a couple decades of life for old people (less stroke, cardiac, etc.), plus no germs or dirt (environmental controls), crime (monitors everywhere), harmful weather or natural catastrophes, or stuff in your air and water, we could see a mass move.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@GL-iv4rw The first group of people going in numbers will have to be high paid specialists working for the companies trying to get things going. If/when some jobs open up that require lots of normal people, it will still take generations before enough people are up there to count politically. Even then colonies have notoriously little to say until/unless they get big enough and aren't hamstrung by the parent countries. So long ways to go, the present politics will seem as relevant as the 100 Year War, and I sure hope the people there manage to decide for themselves. Cheers!
And those people are going to need services. Robots can do a lot of that but people still want to interact with people.That count even more for elderly
people.
@@GL-iv4rw
The moon will intitially be carved up like North America was before the French and Indian War. Various powers will have their zones
that fall under the national laws of the parent nation. I know the Other Space treaty of 1967 prevents nations declaring ownership
of territory off world, but that was only passed to prevent the US or USSR from claiming the Moon if they got there first.
When multiple nations start having colonies at great national investment,and chartered corporations also set up shop there,
those nations and their corporations are going to want their property and investments protected by national laws and eventually,
military forces. It would take over a century for Lunar colonies to band together and demand a seat in the UN.
@@TheLAGopher Yes, good points. Pioneer societies always take care of their elderly because in those societies elderly are very useful and tribal bonds are strong. It's a survival thing. And automation, whether humanoid robots or not, means the colony needs 50-99% less workers.
Great video, thanks. I've thought about the huge swings in surface temperature on the moon, and it seems to me that dealing with a very low, but more or less stable surface temperature would be easier. Therefore, has anyone considered placing living quarters in the permanent shadow of a crater near the northern or southern pole (also a location of water ice). So surface temperature would be very low, but steady (maybe even close to absolute zero), so it would be as though your igloo is sitting on a giant ice block. If the igloo could be insulated sufficiently then you would at least have more or less steady conditions. ie. your design envelope could be minimized in size.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
Only one meter of regolith is needed to moderate temperatures to an even level. The real problem is eliminating waste heat form inside the habitat during the daytime. . .
I wonder if there is a "twilight zone" somewhere at the poles that would have more stable temperatures throughout the month. What is a year like on the Moon? Does the lunar ecliptic move across the sky on the Moon like the ecliptic does on Earth?
It's just awesome that a realistic conversation about moon colonization is happening in my lifetime.
Very cool ! I hope I live long enough to see a colony on the moon & maybe Mars too !
I'm convinced that we are destined to use the Moon as a stepping stone tomorrow's and Mars a stepping stone to the rest of the solar system. I think the best path to Mars is through industrializing the Moon so that 100 tons can be produced on the moon reducing overall launch cost per person.
Even if this were all technically possible. Even if we were all as wealthy as today's multi-billionaires and there weren't millions of starving people on Earth. What is the upside of actually living on Mars? For a start, you're underground. It doesn't matter how fancy your hole is, its still a hole. You can't go outside. The low gravity is going to do cumulative damage to your body and that's not fixable. So, is there a point to this? An upside? Something you get there that you don't get on Earth? Especially if you are indeed fantastically wealthy to start with.
@@saumyacow4435 The point (?) The upside (?) How about . . . freedom (?)
@@QED_ I think you've reinforced my point.
@@saumyacow4435 There's a few reasons; freedom isn't one of them, not sure what the fuck that guy is talking about. One is the argument we've put all our eggs in one basket, figuratively and literally, with all humans, all life in the universe being on one single planet. Colonizing Mars and potentially other worlds, building massive cities into the sides of canyons and biodomes over the craters, will allow not just human life but all life to have multiple opportunities to persist in the event something horrible happens on Earth; which is looking increasingly likely these days. That would be the ultimate reasoning I think, but there's also a nearly infinite supply of resources out in the solar system that can benefit Earth, from water and metals to rare minerals that can support advances to our technological growth and understanding of the universe even further. We don't know what 1/3rdG will do to our bodies, we haven't ever been in it before for more than a few seconds on a plane. They could prove to be serious to colonizers, or maybe it'll be enough to counteract the major health problems of microgravity. 1/3rd is certainly better than 0. Martian humans will be weaker, taller, and more brittle, though, and their biology will make visiting Earth a really uncomfortable experience. I don't believe these are issues we can't overcome, however. And, we obviously can't build giant cities on Mars yet. But we have an island in time where we can take the major steps to begin this process, so, in my opinion, we should. Mass extinction events happen, and we're well overdue; I'd like to see the light of consciousness persist throughout the solar system, personally.
@@Zacharysharkhazard The "species survival" argument doesn't stand up to analysis. You have to ask yourself a couple of questions. Firstly, what actual events would cause human extinction (that is, actual extinction, not just billions of lives lost) in a meaningful time frame (the next 10,000 years)? And the second question is, given that threat of extinction, what is the best course of action? We do have alternatives and Mars is only one of those.
Lets clear the table. The sun isn't going to expand any time soon. Its not a threat in a meaningful time frame. The "dinosaur killer" asteroid, whilst catastrophic, isn't actually going to cause extinction of the human race (we're far too numerous and some of us would find the means). In any case, that's a remote event. Of course "country killer" asteroids are marginally relevant in a 10,000 year time frame, but we're talking extinction. Pandemics? Nope. Super volcanoes? Again, catastrophic, but not an extinction event. So, we don't even get past this test.
Next question is of course about the best response. Lets suppose we knew of an imminent threat - a big asteroid that's going to arrive 10 years from now. Do we save ten thousand people on Mars? Or, do we (with the same resources) save ten million people on Earth - along with far more of our technological and cultural heritage, and other species? Its pretty obvious what the better choice is.
So I'm sorry, but the "backup" argument doesn't hold water. No one has presented a single case that justifies Mars as the better solution.
The "let's exploit space for resources" argument doesn't stand up to analysis either. For a start, we literally haven't scratched the surface of Earth's resources. Go research just how much gold and rare earths are dissolved in the oceans for instance. There's also the question of what exactly we'd do with all those resources from space and answering "we could build space colonies" is entering into a circular argument. In any case the "lets exploit space" argument is at best an argument for robotic mining - not a substantial human presence.
The question about living on Mars is not "can it be done", because the answer is technically yes (though it would be astronomically expensive). The question is, who benefits? And if the answer is, no one, then - it isn't going to happen. If a few carefully selected, extremely fit, highly trained volunteers become explorers, knowing full well that their mission to Mars will do them permanent harm, that's fine by me. There is an upside and they've consented. But actually living there? It benefits no one.
Lets enjoy our dreams, but stay grounded in reality.
The real question is how little gravity can the human immune system live, or rather keep it's human alive with?
Same Thoughts on the Gravity aspects...
It would be difficult and so annoying. This guy is on way too many magic mushrooms. He has lost touch between fantasy and reality.
@@cljoe35it's called "hypothesising", look it up, you might learn something
Thank you, you have answered many questions I have phd about the moon.
Radiation, radiation,radiation, that is probably the biggest challenge, besides that you forgot to mention that there is the possibility, not so much on Earth right now but the Moon of using a space elevator to ease the dependency on rockets to take off and saving precious fuel.
Once we extract water most of the other problems get minimized quite a bit, used for building, hydroponics, oxygen extraction, also very effective as a radiation shield.
Gerold K O'Neil wrote the book"sations in space". In it he proposes huge space stations built by lunar colonies launching raw materials via liner accelerators. The book was published in the early 70s.
Probably the best place to build colonies on both the moon and on Mars would be underground. That would solve more problems than it would create.
Build cities inside lava tubes for protection against meteors and radiation would be an ideal first step. 💯
Better way to solve the same problems is to build something on this planet. Vastly less expensive and better outcome.
If H. G. Wells were alive today, seeing the plans for underground colonization, he might look long term into the future and write a novel such as "Morlocks from Outer Space."
@@wdd3141 mmmm... tasty... humans!
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
Very informative. Great job.
I would love to see a colony on the Moon, the potential would be great. Mister X
Excellent video! One thing you didn’t mention, that we would need to overcome, is moon dust. Moon dust created major issues for the astronauts and equipment. Being electrostatic, it sticks to everything and the tiny particles are like shards of glass, with no wind/weather to wear them down over millions of years like earth. Dealing with moon dust will be a tough one to overcome. I’m sure the smart folks at NASA are working on it. :D
Lunar derived cement and/or cast basalt engineering is the main answer to this issue. Despite what you see in artists concepts, individuals will actually spend very little time outside a habitat. Those who do will be working in areas where the ground has been stabilized (compacted) to a point where the only 'dust' is what they deliberately dig up. Apollo crews had no choice but to deal with the dust as is. Crews at a base will have it far better. . .
Roger that. Thanks :D
Regolith
The thing is that we still really don't know how much fractional gravity is "good enough" for growing different kinds of plants. It could very well turn out that 1/6th of a g is dramatically better than 0g.
I would have to assume that plants could grow to much greater heights under lower pressure from gravity….
@@cestmoi7368 Not necessarily. They actually need gravity to direct them in the right direction to grow. This is akin to thinking humans could grow bigger without air pressure forcing them down...we know how messy it gets for a person without that pressure on them.
English is my second language, you explain everything so well I understand it all like if I was listening to it in my native language
Thank u for video
A colony on the Moon is a great idea! (Initially... ) The idea of Moon/Mars colonies came about in the Apollo days. (1960's-70's) First to set up a colony on the Moon, to prepare and to supply a trip/Colony to Mars. So keep putting those great ideas and plans on Social Media. Like I do. ( "Don The Sports Psychic" and "Mosh Pitt Kitties" also had re on UA-cam.)
Great video! I wonder if they will develop some kind of mini magnetic field generator for these bases/vehicles.
Nice channel, never seen it before but now I'm here to stay...😉
Supplemental centrifuges will be a must for any appreciable long stays on the Moon. Most effectively used during rest and sleep hours. Dedicated centrifuges for Earth returnees from long stays, would be used to physiologically reacclimate them over short periods. Mass-drivers will become a priority very quickly too. The Moon is a perfect proving ground that we'd be mad not to make the most of.
I’m not sure centrifuges will need to be used. Moon stays can be as short as a week, meanwhile ISS members regularly spend months in zero g with limited effects on health. The gravity on the moon should help with putting stress on the muscles and bones as you’re always going to be walking rather than floating.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@lanceanthony198 I agree that relatively short stays (1-6 months) wouldn't be too much of a problem. Longer stays for those in different employment, where their fitness is tantamount, they would definitely be required. Even with reduced transport costs, ferrying the number of personnel in the early days would be expensive. There are many other benefits to using such centrifuges also.
So nice to see the moon as the logical stepping stone to developing a space culture and technology! Also the covered home approach is absolutely the right way to go. I think the easiest way is to bore into the side of a crater (remember, Elon owns a Boring Company) and reinforce with cementitous regolith. Do you remember the moon colony 'Clavius Base' featured in 2001: A Space Odyssey? Anyway, I've been saying this for years now, so it was nice to see!
Plus once we do colonize the moon and mars it can potentially decrease the population on Earth as people start living on the moon and mars, even though some people would still live on Earth
You got me sold. It might be just a baby step but it certainly seems like a step to the solar system .
Mind boggling stuff and I think it is just a matter of time 👍
The complexity presented by the needs of supporting human life in space will hopefully shift focus to robotics. Let robots build, support and study out there. Robots can be multiplied by building themselves. Once base is established, send humans for the needed tasks.
I'm curious have you ever done construction? You ever worked with machines on a daily basis maintaining and repairing them? What about working with equipment in harsh environments lots of wear and tear and massive changes in temperature constantly? A lot of people have had these experiences I have and those experiences have taught me s*** breaks. Constantly unexpectedly and in new and inventive ways s*** breaks. And to me sending robots to Mars just like masturbation it just doesn't satisfy like the real thing.
@@americannomadnewsthecardbo4339 work with machines every day, and agree. Robots are useful and very convenient in certain situations, but that shit breaks and when it does, everything stops.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
What 'needed' tasks? Robotics can do anything required on the moon IF we are willing to make the investment in their technology. Humans are not really needed on the moon to dig trenches or assemble structures etc. Humans are better at more abstract tasks such as interpreting results of experiments or devising new types of instruments. Trouble-shooting is mostly what humans will do, but that does not require anyone to be a permanent resident.
@@GL-iv4rw Keep an eye out for the L2 colonies as well; L2 is where Side 3 is at, after all...
The one factor for moon life is the gravity. However, for older people, say 60+, who are starting to feel the aches and pains on weary bones, walking around on 1/7 gravity would make you feel young again, falling over not such a problem with falls being more gentle and the ability to lift everyday objects with ease - a paradise!
My idea is to have the lunar colony settled by the elderly, with younger people making shorter trips that do not harm their physical side. It would mean a permanent stay for all those volunteers who have reached that stage in life, a retirement in a better environment and at least another 20 years of feeling you are still worth something to society by applying your life long skills to the upkeep of the base. The command centre would be rotational with different countries taking turns placing a Commander in charge for a year and then handing over to a new one. The core moon base operational teams and pilots etc. can be replaced every year too but in three phases so that at any one time only one third of the team is new and starting their year while two thirds have settled and for some months or nearing the end of their rota. The permanent base dwellers would be the over 60s who work in hydroponics, are doctors, food and catering and provide child care for the children.
Younger visitors might come as a family, the couple being qualified in different skills whilst their children attend playschool or primary school run by the elder residents.
Personally, I do not think that a normal society could exist in such an environment, it would need to be run on hierarchical military lines where strict controls are required over nuclear power, hydroponics, breathable air production, fish farms etc. Having a lackadaisical 'I am my own guy' approach would be dangerous where people don't pull their weight in completing vital tasks and jobs or contribute to the destruction or damage of food stocks or air breathing production.
Recruiting would be tricky.
You want retirement-age people who DON'T want to retire, have useful skills, are still mentally sharp enough to be viable producers, don't mind long separation from family and current friends, are free of medical issues other than weakness (cancer, diabetes, etc), and are psychologically flexible enough to switch over to a radically new lifestyle.
Some surely exist, but I don't know ANY who meet all those conditions, so it's going to be hard to find and maintain a viable work force over a long term.
All those seniors had better be sharp as a tack. You don't want a "society" completely filled with geriatrics any more than you want a "society" composed completely of babies; too many problems.
There could be plenty of candidates in the 60-70 age range who could handle the mental and physical requirements while bringing valuable lifetime experiences with them, but after living on the moon for 10 years they would probably have to stay for life. I can’t imagine an older person functioning in earth’s gravity after all that time away, it’s hard enough when you’ve been in the gravity all along (or so I’m told). The moon would end up containing a slew of retirement homes and funeral parlors, but that would create more jobs for the younger folks to rotate into.
Nice!!! Let me add. Once we have a settlement, with mining operations, robots and 3-D printing, we can begin constructing a Pin-wheel rotating space station, so that Humans can be stationed with earth like gravity. Humans would transport back and forth between the space station and the Lunar Base. By the time construction begins on the Space Station, asteroid mining will provide enough Gold to coat the surface in order to deflect/absorb solar radiation.
Long term effects of low gravity could be alleviated by using rotating sleeping quarters. You won't need much to supplement the existing gravity. 8 to 10 hours of near earth gravity could help.
@FlyboyCGC it's not sci-fi. Any kid with a ball tied to a string will tell you the same.
I'm 22, Is there any chance ill see people settling on Mars or the Moon in my lifetime?
if you are alive in 2050 you will most likely see it :)
@@marstheplanet477 Thank you bro!
@@51Archives 😀
Settlements? Like a scientific outpost with 10 or 20 people?
2070 at least for Mars, 2025-next decade at least for the Moon.
A million colonists? Not a chance, you need an economic advantage for this to happen, and there's no way bringing stuffs from Mars will be commercial viable for the foreseeable future(even if SpaceX manage to become a revolutionary space company, by bringing the launch costs to 2 million and bullshit per launch, and 20 $/kg fantasies, to orbit).
Tourists? Maybe it'll be commercially feasible when you invent some kind of warp drive(never).
The moon definitely. There's a moon mission to build a base there happening in 2024. There is also a moon launch happening on August 29th. If we manage to land on the moon in 2024 and things go well. By 2030. There would be enough time to set up a few infrastructure there and it would be easy to set up since gravity is weak. Heavy things would become lighter. I'm sure robotics would be there to do a lot of the work and assembly. We would probably see a smaller version of the ISS there by the 1st or 2nd year. By the time 2030 came around. Resources would likely be sent back to earth. It wouldn't be a full settlement. But by 2050. 20 years from then. It could be an entire colony or at least a small settlement. 20 years is a lot of time, you would only be 50 years old which is still pretty young and would still have a few decades of life left to enjoy whatever 20 years of moon settlement looks like and that's assuming we don't make any breakthroughs in increasing life expectancy, which we have been.
Idk about Mars though. I mean if humans live longer, than for sure, but I wouldn't expect anything comprehensive coming out of Mars missions to settle or colonize until 2070. There would definitely be trips to Mars in 2050 if the moon is thriving but but anything could happen
I'm past the age of making a trip there (60), but next generation cosmonauts could do it, awsome possibilities!!
Excellent
I'd imagine the moon would be set as a a research base, or just a base of operations of some sort. Cool to have satellites surround the moon or even having a space station orbiting around it as well. Communication to the moon would be awesome. But yeah, once that's settled, then perhaps settlement will be a big thing, or at least testing a mini settlement like a small town of sorts.
Yeah, it'll probably start as a research base. But, once it's considered safe/feasible enough, the researcher's families could join them, businesses and schools could pop up to support those families, etc. Kind of the Old West mining town model.
Space tourism will pay for all this crap
On a recent NASA video, they discussed the issue of lunar dust and micro dust getting onto space suits. The conclusion - the current space suit can't function for more than 24-48 hrs. let alone days, weeks, months, or years that it would take to construct a shelter. An electrostatic solution may extend that viability considerably but the fact remains that every entry/exit to the lunar surface would require a complete dust cleaning of not only suits but shelters as well to maintain their viability.
Don't over think it. It's flexing and rotating parts. Gonna need grease, +240° -to - 180. Knee an elbow pads. Or joints made separately. Sleeves and pant legs not so much. Or walk into a water pool. If gravity is a 6th. Can you carry or wear a 1000lbs ?
Sounds to me just like engineering. We are smart monkeys we'll figure it out.
This is why going around on the moon in a spacesuit, would be an incredibly rare thing. Way more practical to use enclosed rovers etc. The average person doesn't hop into the middle of the atlantic ocena no different than on the moon. Also the radiation is brutal. Best staying inside most of the time underground. The beauty of the moon is that low gravity means you can build massive domed structures at very low cost. On earth it is expensive on the moon it's easy. You'd be stuck underground but you'd still have the illusion of a "sky".
I think Home Depot stocks them! lol@@dixonhill1108
I'm almost 71 years old. I hope I live long enough to see Man set foot on Mars. Hurry up already!
One hundred years from Mars. I'm 69.
7:00 One of the things to consider is setting up cargo transit stations at Deimos and Phobos. One should belong to the Fleet.
The moon is still constantly bombarded with the same rocks that don't get through Earth's atmosphere... you didn't mention the whole "living in a shooting gallery" problem. Nice work! Keep it up!!
Definitely a great step forward, and perfect for testing and planning out colonizing other planets. Probably end up as an expensive vacation resort though.....
The NASA designed "24-Hour Lunar Schutle" (LEO to LLO) can transport 18 Lunar Workers with a two person crew. And refuel with Oxygen (LOX) for the return trip to LEO ! Also the big SpaceX cargo rocket with full Oxygen Tanks can return to LEO with the LUNar OXygen (LUNOX-TM) to sell or use in LEO. T. Lipinski
Don't know if we could live on the moon but I really enjoyed your video
You could always just design an engine based on the fluctuation of heat and cold on the surface of the Moon or giant Chambers pushing Steam because of the atmosphere change
I think the moon could only be good for something like a robot base, solar radiation micro asteroids not to mention a whole lot of other difficulties that were not mentioned in this piece
Fascinating...
Far easier to do. It gives us experience and the nessacary development and research which gives us a stepping stone into travelling to outer space and and many of the other planets and moons we can colonise.
Answer is No - you forgot the basic -- will humans be able to have children on the moon at 17% gravity... and would those children ever be able to go to earth (or even mars) -- i can imagine science and mining stations there, and the moon to be a place to work... but more???
The ACTUAL ANSWER is we don’t really know. We don’t really know what children growing up in 1/6thG will do, or if it’ll be enough gravity to reduce the health effects of zero g. Most likely, people born on the moon/Luna will be okay with a few medical defects, but they won’t be able to visit Earth or experience 1G without intense suffering or some magical drug that increases bone density and overall body strength so their organs and bones don’t collapse. People born on Mars will experience similar problems, but to a *slightly* less degree, having twice the gravity of the moon, but they likely won’t be able to visit Earth either.
@@Zacharysharkhazard Its possible that in the same way humans can tolerate 2G-5G with little side effects for short periods of time, maybe future lunar and martian born humans can visit earth and stay for short periods of time. I havent a clue how long that time might be though. Could be as little as a few hours or as long as a few weeks.
@@andrew6846 I do hope so! Healthy "Earthers" can tolerate sustained 3G for a little while, so maybe Martians will be able to visit for short periods of time (like a day or two, with drugs that enhance their strength), but Lunar humans would be feeling the equivalent of about 6G on Earth, so it'd be extremely uncomfortable, super painful even just to exist on the surface, I'm unsure if they'll ever be able to visit the Earth. That said, after a few generations, the moon and Mars will be their home, so many probably won't even really want to visit.
While Mars may be the end goal, I think that learning what we need to do to live on another planet via the moon is a better choice. Also if facilities could be built on the moon for supporting mars missions, then you could build much larger rockets
And Mars is not the end goal - it is the first major step. The entirety of the Milky Way galaxy is the end goal.
Very nice video
Use starship 1.0 to mainly start building construction plants for the moon as well as starting the work on mars!! The Space Ex at the same time builds there construction factories that builds Starship 2.0 along with Booster that saves on fuel used because less gravity!! Heck Booster can be used to launch SH to even greater speeds before returning to the moon
Great video! I love anything space-related. I personally think we need to colonize both. First the moon, obviously, so we could transport materials from moon-mars without using as much fuel. Of course, that means you'd have to build rocket fuel refineries on the moon, but if we got the time, I'd say it's worth it in the long run. After the moon, we go to Mars. I truly believe that we can colonize Mars, then go on to occupy the asteroid belt, and maybe even one of Jupiter's moons. This may take 100+ years to do, but I believe it is our final frontier. Eventually, we will have giant space stations that are 100% self-sustainable and can hold entire generations of people. After many generations, space travelers of the future will even be able to make it to other star systems, with or without FTL travel..
well your open minded an imaginative, 2 of a handful of qualitys needed for Humanities survival.
What if you were to find out our solar system, planets, were inhabited, with your human ancestors an human hybrids,
An you were their future, you realize how important we are, all life forms on Earth are premiumly important, Roosevelt tells of a event back in the 30s, a Alien craft alighted in a Midwest town out stepped, what was described as a Octopus, that slithered on its tentacles, is how it moved. accompanied by a Bigfoot,
Immediately you would think we humans aren't the top intelligence, out there, they more than likely, consider us as hybrids.
One thing is for sure, they're friendly,
Your governments, religion, for whatever reason, tells you nothing.
In fact the whole universe is teaming with life.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
@@GL-iv4rw
There was a time when there was no moon.
Someone brought it here, for a reason, obviously someone owns it.
Canada, U.S. built a Solar observatory on the far side 1973/74 to study a planet almost 3times Earth's size, that had wandered into our solar system in 1960.
Most of Earth's Observatories were temporarily closed, when recently, this planet crossed the Sun,
If any country has designs, of a military base on the moon, you can dump that idea,
It won't happen.
On the topic I go with many of the early SF writers - tunnel into the moon to establish cities. Advantages - protection from drastic temp swings, enhanced (not perfect, but better) protection from meteoroid impact, less materials needed (digging caves, not erecting buildings), digging of caves provides materials we would normally be mining to get anyway (we would just be getting use out of mine shafts instead of abandoning them), and the list goes on. It isn’t as sexy, but living in underground caves seems like a more sensible approach to me.
Until we can develop artificial gravity of some type, living on the moon or in space will be a difficult thing, the only other option is for people to live a few generations that will allow the human body to adapt to the environment, but those people will most likely not be able to come back to earth.
Or, we can establish how long it takes for the cumulative effects to be health- threatening and then plan to operate in shifts, much like submariners do. . .
Intresting!
We will need both. There will be a base on the Moon and one on Mars and another on Titan.
Also Vitman C stops Skurvy!
Any moon base that could be implemented with currently foreseeable technology would be more like McMurdo Station than Plymouth Colony.
The hardest places to make a living on Earth are much much easier than the easiest places anywhere else in the solar system. The same technology that could be used to build a self-contained beached-submarine colony on the moon could be used to build one on Antarctica, in the Sahara Desert, or floating cities on the oceans. So why haven't we already? Economics. Not just the cost of establishing such a base/city/colony, but also keeping it economically self-supporting. It will need to import A LOT of stuff that cannot be made locally. This means that it needs to export stuff or provide services of equal value. So for this to be viable there needs to be radical improvements in fabrication technology to reduce the import demands and/or we will need to find a unique resource or function that it can trade with the rest of civilization.
What about politics and geopolitics, will the Moon align itself with the Eastern-aligned Asian Union and the L4 colonies or be sanctioned/declare war with the Western-aligned North American Union and L5 colonies, or be neutral/non-aligned like the African Union?
I remember watching the Apollo 17 mission on television when I was a child. It’s amazing we put men on the moon in 1969 and the early 70s. However, I will believe another human mission to the moon when I see it, for several reasons. We have let our infrastructure crumble and can’t even agree how to fix it. So, a “moon colony?” Would love to see it, but am not holding my breath.
Our own infrastructure crumble ?
What utter nonsense !
so many great pros and cons!
I definitely think the moon should be the first priority. Baby steps, let's not get ahead of ourselves. This is something we don't want to rush
Mars is ten times more interesting. Definitely more challenging, but a real Habitat with potential for terraforming? Mars is the only real option.
Why not both the moon and Mars? Self-sustaining cities on both the moon and Mars would better ensure the survival of the human race in case of natural or manmade cataclysm. Put our eggs in multiple baskets versus all our eggs in one basket as we are today.
@@greatzardoz8547 I guess I just think that NASA gets distracted too easily. Elon Musk? He has the resources and know-how to get there sooner and complete the task. But NASA will diddle daddle around for decades.
The moon is going to be a great opportunity to learn as much as we can before the MARS launch.
When I was a young boy I remember watching Apollo 11 land on the moon, it was live on TV.
I went outside and pointed at the moon and said Mom some men landed on the moon.
Now I'm old, we should be established on the moon by now but we gave up!!
It'll be a severe challenge, but with our modern day technology we can live on the moon in our near future.
The Stars is our destiny!! 🚀
just watched hello tomorrow! which led me hear :)
Will probably happen someday. Been a dream of many people for decades. And the technology is finally catching up to the point that it's a real possibility.
Would love to see Robert Heinlein's sci-fi novel "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" made into a movie. Maybe someday with actual footage shot on the moon....
Gonna need a fully stocked Hardware store right away.
Cold dry, airless... what's not to love?
Just the thought of Earth having a "fleet" of space ships is so cool.
I don't know what you smoke but it must be gooood!
It would make more sense to build floating cities on Venus than to colonize Mars. Venus has gravity closer to the Earth, it's closer than Mars and easier to get there. Plus Venus still has a magnetic field to protect from solar radiation.
I have been exploring this topic for two decades, because I'm a science fiction filmmaker with my first movie script about colonizing Mars released in 2007, "War of the Worlds 2". And I deem that We MUST Colonize the Moon before Mars because the Moon is the only nearby place with conditions similar enough to Mars to TEST everything on first, that we are planning to build or do on Mars. If we send a thousand ships and a hundred billion tons of materials straight to Mars, people will die, trillions of dollars could be lost. And with such a catastrophic disaster in the hopper, we would just shut it all down and call Mars a graveyard. And we might not pick the project back up for centuries. Look how easily we shut down on the moon for 50 years, and there wasn't even a disaster there. Yes, we must go to the moon, build a support base deep inside one of its natural tunnels, and begin a real colony. It will be much easier to control, protect, and contain deep in a tunnel. And we can even seal the tunnel, air-tight, so we can practice terraforming the environment down there. Then when we get to Mars... well, you know the drill. YES, I AM MOST DEFINITELY A "MOON FIRST" KIND OF GUY.
Moon is a great test of mankind needs in space and overcoming of obstacles. A step to colonizing Mars. Mars is the goal. More difficult but much more rewarding.
There should be *largest than* *ever before* Moon Ground Telescopes designed for taking pictures of anything in space with at least 100x better quality than JWST, and in ALL wavelengths!!!
The first 10 or so starships will be autonamus and manned by robots, so no oxygen needed to get to mars. Big saving when you want to send product to Mars and the robots can start building a base on Mars. The starships can also be cut up and used to build the mars base. As the robots do not need to go back to earth. This is the same with the moon.
Thanks for the video! Really nice. The gravity is even less than 50 % on mars compared to earth, it is even as less as around 40 %.
It would make sense for us to try and build on the moon first for a colony and if it can be self-sufficient we can copy the results for Mars and any other future endeavours
If we genuinely want to get to Mars eventually it's essential to realize that the first step towards that goal is establishing a foothold on the moon first and ironing out the kinks before jumping into the deep end. Much like the ISS was a necessary first step towards learning what is needed for long duration moon missions.
We would be ill prepared - or at the very least less prepared, for a Mars colony without starting with the moon since there are enormous differences in difficulty between the two. So again, anyone who genuinely wants to make it to Mars needs to accept focusing primarily on the moon for the time being, unless you don't actually care about making a colony happen there and just want to go ASAP to plant a flag
I agree! Moon, then Mars.....or Venus 🤘
this video just makes me realize how much earth really is perfect for humanity
Been there and done that. Covid lockdown in Melbourne I couldn’t go out the house. Same thing on the moon.
I say go for it !
This probably won't happen in my life time. But I'd be happy to see happening.