/sci/ - Science & Math

>implying space research isn't just as useless as movies

>implying space research isn't MORE useless than movies, since they are both just mental masturbation but the former only pleases you while the latter pleases millions

>>3983469
confirmed shoopjob
and saging to derail another fundspaceorno? thread

>>3983481
>>3983491
>the propagation of our entire species into the stars isn't as important as the next shitty remake of Spiderman.

>>3983508
The next Spiderman remake will be finished in a few years, top. Space exploration will need decades to give results (read: none of us will be alive to benefit from it).

>>3983519
so spidey is more important than space, nice logic retard.

>>3983496
hey, I thought that was real.

>>3983519
But we already have benefited from it.

>People calling space research useless.

Now this is what's wrong with our generation.

>>3983553
The only benefits we gained could have been gained by simply investing in material sciences, instead of funds "tricking down" to it like in good old Reaganomics.

>>3983560
funneling that much money into only a few programs isn't what Sagan would want, he promoted the practice of unilaterally supporting different kinds of programs since it's difficult to understand ahead of time where the next break through will come from.

The space program may make human survival slightly more prolonged. As a proud misanthrope, I'm against it.

>>3983581

Of course, but that doesn't mean that exploration of the cosmos should be abandoned or that it is useless.

Now when people talk about the "amounts of money" we spend on science, we must always remember how tiny the science budget around the globe really is.

>>3983569
>>3983519
>>3983496
>>3983491
>>3983481

>HURRDURR IM A FUCKING RETARD HURR.....


>At 1997 prices, a relatively small metallic asteroid with a diameter of 1.6 km (0.99 mi) contains more than 20 trillion US dollars worth of industrial and precious metals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining

>>3983519
I frequent /b/, and this is the dumbest post I've ever seen on 4chan

>>3983604
And market value would plummet if they ever became available.

>>3983609
Have you ever considered that visiting /b/ says more about your intelligence than about that post?

>>3983646
there're just as many retards on /sci/ (see the first few replies) as there are on /b/.

>>3983604

Is there not an asteroid belt between Mar's orbit and Jupiter's orbit.

Ca'ching $$$

>>3983661
yeah cause that's within our reach

>>3983681
thats why invest money and do research to find faster ways to reach it; isnt it amusing see young people try to be realistic without any knowledge and opimism ..

>space is the only way we will have a chance at letting the human race flourish until the heat death of the universe
>useless

>>3983719
There are far more pressing problems on earth that are much more detrimental to the future of mankind than enabling your mental masturbation

>>3983729
i guess writing complaining with no content in it is one of them

>>3983729
Suffering is no problem. Everybody is going to die for now.

>call getting and utilizing the other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
% of the universe useless
>people bitching that if asteroid mining were pursued full swing would make all metals and elements plummet in price, SOMEHOW THAT'S A BAD THING
>supporting the entirely irrational belief that short-term economic gain is better than the survival and flourishing of your entire species

You are all enemies of humanity. Hostis humanis generis.

I MAD RIGHT NOW:

I'm mad at everyone in this thread who thinks mankind should stay on its little planet with its limited resources (which will be constantly fought over), while we suckle off the mind numbing teat of mainstream media. Working hard for a bearable existence until we finally die, hoping that our ancestors will continue the cycle. Eventually Earth will be able to support less and less life, until there is no life left. There goes the human race, everything we ever achieved will be forgotten and it will all have been pissed down the drain for nothing. We might a well have never existed at all.
Fuck that, I want to explore the stars.

>>3986491
I like you.

but heaven is on earth.
if you die in space you don't go to heaven.

>>3986508

>>3986508
No John, space are the heavens.

And then John was an aquanaut.

we should fly to Kolob, and see if god is really there.

where is the profit in space programs

>>3986551
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining
>At 1997 prices, a relatively small metallic asteroid with a diameter of 1 mile contains more than $20 trillion US dollars worth of industrial and precious metals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Earth_Objects#Near-Earth_asteroids
>As of May 2010, 7,075 near-Earth asteroids are known,[14] ranging in size up to ~32 kilometers (1036 Ganymed).[16] The number of near-Earth asteroids over one kilometer in diameter is estimated to be 500 - 1,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%286178%29_1986_DA
>Asteroid 1986 DA achieved its most notable recognition when scientists revealed that it contained over "10,000 tons of gold and 100,000 tons of platinum", or an approximate value at the time of its discovery of "$90 billion for the gold and a cool trillion dollars for the platinum, plus loose change for the asteroid's 10 billion tons of iron and a billion tons of nickel."[3]

>>3986553
do we really need that much metal?

I like to fool myself in believing the "trolls trolling trolls".
Because the alternative is so horrifying.

>>3986561
>>3986561
yes we do

>>3986553
How much will it cost to get the metal.
Is there a cheaper source currently.
Assuming I had the capital to fund a space mining operation, would it really be the best way to spend my money.

>>3986561
Many of these would be incredibly useful in inventions and processes if they became almost worthless. Aluminium has completely revolutionized how we build many products and structures, but only about a hundred years ago this was not so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History
>Before the Hall-Héroult process was developed in the late 1880s, aluminium was exceedingly difficult to extract from its various ores. This made pure aluminium more valuable than gold.[46] Bars of aluminium were exhibited at the Exposition Universelle of 1855.[47] Napoleon III, Emperor of France, is reputed to have given a banquet where the most honoured guests were given aluminium utensils, while the others made do with gold.[48][49]

So yes, we do need that much metal. Not to mention that rare Earth elements (REEs) are far more abundant in asteroids than the Earth's crust. When Earth coalesced from its primordial molten pile of asteroids, the heavier elements sank toward the core. It's only because of the Late Heavy Bombardment that stuff like gold is 10,000 times more abundant than it should be.

>>3986561

not sure if trolling...

>>3986579
>How much will it cost to get the metal.
An entire project for setting up a mining outpost on a metal-rich asteroid could be anywhere from 3 billion to 20 billion.

>Is there a cheaper source currently.
Yes, there's undersea mineral mining which is taking place as we speak by companies like Nautilus Minerals and so on. Mad Scientist knows more about undersea mining than I do, so it's better to ask him. I support both undersea and asteroid mining.

>Assuming I had the capital to fund a space mining operation, would it really be the best way to spend my money.
In my opinion, it would be an excellent way to spend your money. Developing the technologies required to make it commercially viable as well as the payload launches would be rather costly, but the money from the first relative trickle of elements being fired back at Earth would quickly cover the cost of the operation, and far more. At any point after recuperating costs you could decide to go full-bore and crash the entire metal market with an abundance of metals, making a lot of gold investors pissed off and many industrial manufacturers very grateful. Here's my rough idea of how such an operation would take place:

>>3986590
>>3986579
- One rocket is fitted with about 50 compact, simple mining robots. Then about 6 bigger construction robots. And an unfoldable mass driver. Another rocket is fitted with a small portable LFTR and a plasma gasification unit, molds for simple, bulky robot and product parts (molds for wheel, chassis, mass drivers, and so on.) as well as about 150 or so circuit-boards for robots, as well as any lightweight components that are too intricate to create in orbit such as sensors, and some spare propellant. It sets off for some metal-rich asteroid.
- When it arrives, the LFTR is deployed, the construction robots set up the plasma gasification unit to connect to the LFTR, and mining robots go off to just pick away at rock. This rock is then carried back to the plasma gasification unit, where electricity from the LFTR is used to heat the temperature inside to about 14,000'C, which disassociates everything into its constituent elemental gases. These are then centrifuged and separated to be either in the collection tray to be launched as payload to Earth via mass driver, or to be poured in the molds for extra robot parts. Begin assembling more robots with the components you brought along. Any payloads you wish to send back to Earth get excess iron/nickel melted over it (as a makeshift heat shield) and some primitive thrusters to adjust approach into a designated impact site (Somewhere in a desert) where it can be collected and resold.
- If you want to mine the asteroid faster, just ship up another rocket with a thousand circuit-boards and sensors. It might be feasible to even launch small constructed LFTRs/PGUs and robots to other asteroids via mass drive to basically have a Von Neumann machine for mining the solar system.

OP, why do you say were not spending enough on space?
maybe the problem is were spending too much on moives.

>>3986593
>>3986593
Ahh, the ol' Freitas atomic seperator replicator combined with NASA summer study on self-replicating systems. Plasma dissociation is a pretty inefficient process, though it is pretty simple. Replication rate is pretty decent(3 years), but your mass rate(40 ton/yr) is pretty low due to the inefficiency of the process.

It'd be much better to use simple magnetic and electrostatic beneficiation and magma electrolysis for your elemental seperation process.
http://www.moonminer.com/Magma-process.html

Technically China doesn't need heavy funding for it, they'll just say 'do it faggots' and their market will be all 'okay'.

Space elevators.
Fuck the technical difficulties, fuck how impossible it sounds, humanity should seriously point to building one.

>>3986730
Humanity is only good for squandering it's potential in economics.

>>3986694
I like it! Bookmarked, i'll re-read it later. This interests me. Thanks Lunatic!

>>3986730
Japan is on point with this one.
http://io9.com/5052993/japan-prepares-to-board-the-space-elevator

>>3986751
>Japan is on point with this one.

Haven't heard a peep out of them since they made that announcement though. It makes me a sad panda.

>>3986781
I'm thinking they're busy appeasing the public after the recent events. Hopefully they can continue the project and don't have to scrap it for whatever reason.

>>3986781
Yeah, me too.

>>3986781
Well, clearly ancient space monsters attacked them, as per usual.

I'm sorry.

GUISE, GUISE.

What if we strapped a rocket booster on an asteroid, put it into orbit around the moon and then mined it there?

And then we could do it a few more times and start putting them into orbit around earth until we use them all up and go get bigger ones and fuck up the orbit and obliterate half the planet?

Fuck yeah.

>>3986825
Because we'd have to constantly adjust it's orbit as we decrease it's mass by removing resources from it.

>>3986825
China's waaay ahead of you. And for the record I think it's a terrible idea to modify a large asteroid's orbit to come any close to Earth.

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/08/china-lets-trap-an-asteroid-in-earths-or.php

>>3986848

how feasible would it be for mineral-rich asteroids to be crashed into the moon for easy mining access?

>>3986856
just crash them into the earth.

>>3986848
Well it wouldn't quite be a steady stream of mass loss, it would probably be a few drops into atmosphere worth a shit ton of money, so only a few corrections.

I'm not sure how you would get tons of ore off an asteroid in a way that you could recover it though.

>>3986851
inb4 asteroids are the new weapons of mass destruction.

>>3986856
Terrible idea. You've just taken minerals in no gravity well, which is 95% of the allure of such an undertaking, and put them in a gravity well. No point.

>>3986862
Refine them onsite and then fire the refined materials toward Earth to be crashed at some sparsely-populated collection site.

>>3986864
What Virgin Galactic did when they were designing Spaceship One was make re-entry far less damaging and 'painful' to go through, by shaping the wings weirdly. I think they based it on maple tree seeds, unsure. A similar tactic could be applied to metal payloads to Earth, molding the metals into a helicopter rotor shape, so when it starts hitting the atmosphere, it begins spinning and slows down to prevent from burning up.

>>3986871
http://www.futuretimeline.net/22ndcentury/2150-2199.htm#asteroid-terrorism