What If We Built Cities on the Moon?
video description
Date: 2023-11-26
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 25
John
16% Earth G is difficult to depict in video, and to wrap your mind around.
We can't know if we can stay healthy in low G if we lived there long-term. The Heart and every other tissue in us likes being moderately stressed, often or all the time.
We have zero data on living on low G, and it's not safe or responsible to talk about living and raising children there until we know. We do know that animals raised in hypergravity in centrifuges are stronger, and more healthy and live longer than controls, and we know that someone who exercises a lot will be expected to live longer than a couch potato.
Fortunately we can live in space colonies in virtually Earth-like conditions, and the domed Lunar city would be there, for those that don't mind taking the radiation doses that would get through any transparency we can think of building a dome of. Armor glass would do, but it'd have to be over a meter thick to stop galactic cosmic rays and the secondary particles they knock off from any insufficiently thick materials you put in front of them. There was a proposal to us layers of water 5 meters thick, and if it's pressurized to Earth Sea level, air pressure helps hold it up (you could literally fly with a pair of wings strapped to your arms.
Note that if someone jumped into a pool or lake, the hole would be big, take a long time to fill in and the surface of the lake would slosh about with tsunami coming up on every beach for hours if there weren't strong wave dampers.
He3 is irrelevant, even if someone figures out a good way to use it in fusion reactors.
Long before we'd get useful amounts of it back to Earth, Solar power satellites from NEO materials would be powering the Earth. (We know of 400 NEAs (among the ones most likely to hit us someday) that are easier to reach than the Moon. 40 or so easier than Lunar orbit. They'd also have much better resources than the Moon.
The Moon is called the slagpile of the Solar system because its best resources are about what an asteroid miner would toss aside as not economical to process further. It also dos not have lots of water. If there were concrete in one of those permanently shadowed Lunar Polar craters, they mine it for its vastly superior water content.
Long before we are building a city in space or on the moon or more than a sparse base at/on Mars, someone will bring back samples of previously rare and precious & -strategic- metals from an NEA, and the funding question goes away along with the national debt or any budget austerity demands. Also the need to fight wars over access to oil and minerals down here ends. Note please that we spend far more on warfare than on space. Today the US annual DoD budget is -80% of the entire historic running grand total NASA expense. Counting Apollo, the Shuttle, and the ISS, but not counting -black- military budgets and ongoing operational military expenses, each of which is more. During the entire timescale of Apollo, the US spent as much on cosmetics, and large States spent more on liquor than we spent going to the Moon.
Far less than a small oil war would pay for the NEA mine and small early first generation space habitat like the Stanford Torus or O'Neill -Island One- Bernal sphere habitat. We'd be learning to protect the earth from the most likely impactors, and we'd get the Moon, bases on Mars, and an end to oil wars and resources scarcity and be proving the means to end heavy primary, polluting industry down here.
The findings of the NASA Ames space settlement studies of the '70s are available to read online, and say that no new inventions are needed to start. All the potential new processing and manufacturing methods we might use up there are known down here; some in use, others as minor effects or difficult in gravity.
reply
16% Earth G is difficult to depict in video, and to wrap your mind around.
We can't know if we can stay healthy in low G if we lived there long-term. The Heart and every other tissue in us likes being moderately stressed, often or all the time.
We have zero data on living on low G, and it's not safe or responsible to talk about living and raising children there until we know. We do know that animals raised in hypergravity in centrifuges are stronger, and more healthy and live longer than controls, and we know that someone who exercises a lot will be expected to live longer than a couch potato.
Fortunately we can live in space colonies in virtually Earth-like conditions, and the domed Lunar city would be there, for those that don't mind taking the radiation doses that would get through any transparency we can think of building a dome of. Armor glass would do, but it'd have to be over a meter thick to stop galactic cosmic rays and the secondary particles they knock off from any insufficiently thick materials you put in front of them. There was a proposal to us layers of water 5 meters thick, and if it's pressurized to Earth Sea level, air pressure helps hold it up (you could literally fly with a pair of wings strapped to your arms.
Note that if someone jumped into a pool or lake, the hole would be big, take a long time to fill in and the surface of the lake would slosh about with tsunami coming up on every beach for hours if there weren't strong wave dampers.
He3 is irrelevant, even if someone figures out a good way to use it in fusion reactors.
Long before we'd get useful amounts of it back to Earth, Solar power satellites from NEO materials would be powering the Earth. (We know of 400 NEAs (among the ones most likely to hit us someday) that are easier to reach than the Moon. 40 or so easier than Lunar orbit. They'd also have much better resources than the Moon.
The Moon is called the slagpile of the Solar system because its best resources are about what an asteroid miner would toss aside as not economical to process further. It also dos not have lots of water. If there were concrete in one of those permanently shadowed Lunar Polar craters, they mine it for its vastly superior water content.
Long before we are building a city in space or on the moon or more than a sparse base at/on Mars, someone will bring back samples of previously rare and precious & -strategic- metals from an NEA, and the funding question goes away along with the national debt or any budget austerity demands. Also the need to fight wars over access to oil and minerals down here ends. Note please that we spend far more on warfare than on space. Today the US annual DoD budget is -80% of the entire historic running grand total NASA expense. Counting Apollo, the Shuttle, and the ISS, but not counting -black- military budgets and ongoing operational military expenses, each of which is more. During the entire timescale of Apollo, the US spent as much on cosmetics, and large States spent more on liquor than we spent going to the Moon.
Far less than a small oil war would pay for the NEA mine and small early first generation space habitat like the Stanford Torus or O'Neill -Island One- Bernal sphere habitat. We'd be learning to protect the earth from the most likely impactors, and we'd get the Moon, bases on Mars, and an end to oil wars and resources scarcity and be proving the means to end heavy primary, polluting industry down here.
The findings of the NASA Ames space settlement studies of the '70s are available to read online, and say that no new inventions are needed to start. All the potential new processing and manufacturing methods we might use up there are known down here; some in use, others as minor effects or difficult in gravity.
reply
Alexandria
I would leave Earth tomorrow if i could settle on the moon. Initially the population would be too small and interdependent for there to be wars over lines on a map, fossil fuels which are destroying the atmosphere, radical climate change, plastic waste choked oceans, and corrupt politicians calling all the shots. The moon would eventually get those issues, but i wouldn't stay on the moon indefinitely either. But compared to earth and its downward spiral. I'd ship off this rock first chance i get
reply
I would leave Earth tomorrow if i could settle on the moon. Initially the population would be too small and interdependent for there to be wars over lines on a map, fossil fuels which are destroying the atmosphere, radical climate change, plastic waste choked oceans, and corrupt politicians calling all the shots. The moon would eventually get those issues, but i wouldn't stay on the moon indefinitely either. But compared to earth and its downward spiral. I'd ship off this rock first chance i get
reply
wdd3141
Two problems:
1) helium 3 used in nuclear fusion power? There are no fusion power plants. The sunlike conditions considered necessary for nuclear fusion cannot yet be harnessed.
2) 1/6 Earth gravity could atrophy human bones and muscles. The gravity issue was never addressed in this video. I can see people (mainly scientists and miners) going to live and work on the Moon a few months out of the year, but not as permanent settlers.
reply
Two problems:
1) helium 3 used in nuclear fusion power? There are no fusion power plants. The sunlike conditions considered necessary for nuclear fusion cannot yet be harnessed.
2) 1/6 Earth gravity could atrophy human bones and muscles. The gravity issue was never addressed in this video. I can see people (mainly scientists and miners) going to live and work on the Moon a few months out of the year, but not as permanent settlers.
reply
Sciencer
Would make more sense to build in the lunar lava tubes that can be found all over that world. These lava tubes can be 500 meters wide and tall, and several kilometers in length. They'd provide unparalleled radiation protection, relatively easy to close up and pressurize. Now, the lava tubes would have to be shored up to prevent collapsing, but for a lunar base or town, it would be almost impossible to go wrong with lava tubes!
reply
Would make more sense to build in the lunar lava tubes that can be found all over that world. These lava tubes can be 500 meters wide and tall, and several kilometers in length. They'd provide unparalleled radiation protection, relatively easy to close up and pressurize. Now, the lava tubes would have to be shored up to prevent collapsing, but for a lunar base or town, it would be almost impossible to go wrong with lava tubes!
reply
thomas
Cities on the Moon would need counterparts on the other side. This would allow for those who preferred a sunny side; it also would allow for constant solar production regardless of the lunar position. Our cities would use local lunar soil for the basic building blocks as well as oxygen for us and our needs. All cities would need underground redoubts for threats from meteors (with no atmosphere to protect, solar storms, etc.
reply
Cities on the Moon would need counterparts on the other side. This would allow for those who preferred a sunny side; it also would allow for constant solar production regardless of the lunar position. Our cities would use local lunar soil for the basic building blocks as well as oxygen for us and our needs. All cities would need underground redoubts for threats from meteors (with no atmosphere to protect, solar storms, etc.
reply
GyanPrakash
When we Build Cities on The Moon, we're going to enter a new Era of Human Civilisation where we're free from Religion, Superstition and the Conservative Mindset we have on Earth.
Science and Technology will flourish and guide Human Civilisation to the Next Big Step of becoming a Galactic Civilisation.
Above all well see Earth Rise, and It's so cool --
reply
When we Build Cities on The Moon, we're going to enter a new Era of Human Civilisation where we're free from Religion, Superstition and the Conservative Mindset we have on Earth.
Science and Technology will flourish and guide Human Civilisation to the Next Big Step of becoming a Galactic Civilisation.
Above all well see Earth Rise, and It's so cool --
reply
Time
This video of surface moon glass city is unrealistic and prohibitively dangerous because of exterior endangers such as meteors, high intense sun rays, moonquake, and man-made disasters as flight accidents. The economical and safest way to build a moon city is a subterranean city with heated underground geothermal energy. ---
reply
This video of surface moon glass city is unrealistic and prohibitively dangerous because of exterior endangers such as meteors, high intense sun rays, moonquake, and man-made disasters as flight accidents. The economical and safest way to build a moon city is a subterranean city with heated underground geothermal energy. ---
reply
Prophet
If they built cities on the moon humans still can't survive due to no supply of foods, and lack of oxygen. cause the moon is far from sun to provide them heat. and now they planning to produce a solar system in space that can provide heat to the moon. but that won't work at all
reply
If they built cities on the moon humans still can't survive due to no supply of foods, and lack of oxygen. cause the moon is far from sun to provide them heat. and now they planning to produce a solar system in space that can provide heat to the moon. but that won't work at all
reply
Sinisa
Here on Earth we are protected from cosmic radiation by the atmosphere and by the magnetic field.
What would protect life up there?
Looks like surface habitats wouldn't give enough protection, at least until we develop better materials cheap enough.
reply
Here on Earth we are protected from cosmic radiation by the atmosphere and by the magnetic field.
What would protect life up there?
Looks like surface habitats wouldn't give enough protection, at least until we develop better materials cheap enough.
reply
German
I wonder why all the focuses are on Mars, like to land there, build a colony. -
But why not focuses on Moon first? -
Or even build some -space arc? -? Space station like ISS, but bigger and self-sustaining?
reply
I wonder why all the focuses are on Mars, like to land there, build a colony. -
But why not focuses on Moon first? -
Or even build some -space arc? -? Space station like ISS, but bigger and self-sustaining?
reply
education
If or when we move to Moon, the same greedy sh-t that goes on here on earth would just continue. People would suffer when others makes it as a business, wars and unbalanced societies would emerge.
reply
If or when we move to Moon, the same greedy sh-t that goes on here on earth would just continue. People would suffer when others makes it as a business, wars and unbalanced societies would emerge.
reply
Chairman
US and China alone combined have a military budget of more than $1 trillion, spending at least half of it on space programs, we could build a small city on the Moon and even on Mars.
reply
US and China alone combined have a military budget of more than $1 trillion, spending at least half of it on space programs, we could build a small city on the Moon and even on Mars.
reply
541Stakk
You know what job would be popular? Whaling on the moon, we'd carry a harpoon, but their ain't no whales, so we'd tell tall tales an sing our whaling tune. ----
reply
You know what job would be popular? Whaling on the moon, we'd carry a harpoon, but their ain't no whales, so we'd tell tall tales an sing our whaling tune. ----
reply
Kea
Lets build a moon city!
If we work together, we could build this!
In my opinion, the benefits outweigh the obstacles that governments stop at.
reply
Lets build a moon city!
If we work together, we could build this!
In my opinion, the benefits outweigh the obstacles that governments stop at.
reply
EBFilmsMan
By the time we have cities on the Moon, we will have mastered lab-grown beef, chicken, and pork. I'm not giving up my bacon, dammit!
reply
By the time we have cities on the Moon, we will have mastered lab-grown beef, chicken, and pork. I'm not giving up my bacon, dammit!
reply
Justmy
If cities were built on the moon, and it's natural resources are mined, wouldn't it affect the earth/moon magnetism and tides on earth?
reply
If cities were built on the moon, and it's natural resources are mined, wouldn't it affect the earth/moon magnetism and tides on earth?
reply
Maxwell
Considering it costs $2B just to launch 3 astronauts to the moon, no it will not cost $10B to build an entire city on the moon.
reply
Considering it costs $2B just to launch 3 astronauts to the moon, no it will not cost $10B to build an entire city on the moon.
reply
Joyce
The doubtful dashboard wailly sneeze because ceramic identically found next a hard-to-find nut. hapless, alert representative
reply
The doubtful dashboard wailly sneeze because ceramic identically found next a hard-to-find nut. hapless, alert representative
reply
Thin
What if in the future there was a moon nation and then it pulled a 13 colonies and started a war and became its own nation.
reply
What if in the future there was a moon nation and then it pulled a 13 colonies and started a war and became its own nation.
reply
education
when you are hit by a space projectile traveling 70km/second, your any construction is toasted. Good luck dreaming.
reply
when you are hit by a space projectile traveling 70km/second, your any construction is toasted. Good luck dreaming.
reply
Anurag
Building cities in the Moon can be a possible scenario, but in this case, it will take a lot of research into this.
reply
Building cities in the Moon can be a possible scenario, but in this case, it will take a lot of research into this.
reply
Nintendan
That's interesting but I've always had one question. How would oxygen be produced in a place that had no oxygen?
reply
That's interesting but I've always had one question. How would oxygen be produced in a place that had no oxygen?
reply
Avrin
In my fictional world, Moon City is real, already finished and successful. It's made by fictional and made up people
reply
In my fictional world, Moon City is real, already finished and successful. It's made by fictional and made up people
reply
New
Hey nasa planned to do it on like 2024
And Elon Musk planes to make a city on mars by 2050 with starship deleverys
reply
Hey nasa planned to do it on like 2024
And Elon Musk planes to make a city on mars by 2050 with starship deleverys
reply
Mateusz
Better than fish would be insects. Lower requirements, eats all organic waste and consume less water.
reply
Better than fish would be insects. Lower requirements, eats all organic waste and consume less water.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
