/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9756063
>The moon is filled with valuable minerals
Not true.

>>9756063
Because the only valuable way to moon mine is if a superpower and its politicians find a "will". However, jews (our politicians) have the lowest spacial intelligence of any race. They will never agree because "it willlll neveeeer wooork oout goyim, now go earn me some shekels".

>>9756065
He3, gold, platinum. Fuck off

>>9756063
>>9756075
The surface of the Moon is pretty homogenous.
The processes which concentrate minerals into ore bodies involve water and life.
If there's gold and platinum, they'd have to be extracted from kilotons of dirt. Earthly granite and seawater are probably equally "rich".

Even if shipping the stuff to Earth was cheap, the men and equipment to do the job has to be sent from the Earth to the Moon -- and THAT is expensive!

Because we can't easily bring that stuff back to earth and we have no use for it in space.

>>9756063
Because we are not building anything in space yet. When we do, we will need those resources. Earth doesn't need those resources.

>>9756133
>Because we can't easily bring that stuff back to earth
This is incredibly easy

>>9756063

>>9756063
The global IQ is too low.

I’m sorry but the fact that the hunan element of mining is not even graced here by any of you does but exemplify how none of you have ever worked a job in their life.
Fix yourselves before day dreaming about billionaires bringing gold from wherever the fuck.

>>9756063
>it's low grav so when we're set up transporting hauls back is cost effective.
Because getting shit off the place you're mining is only half the problem, getting it back through the atmosphere of Earth is the bigger problem.
It's not as bad as the rocket equation, but for every kilo you are bringing back you still have more energy you need to bleed off before you can make a landing. This means either splitting your loads into hundreds of smaller loads or spending a lot more money on each single return.
It certainly wouldn't be cheaper than mining and transporting on our planet which is a considerable problem with the idea.
I would be much more convenient to use the mined materials in space instead.

>>9756491
No one cares about the slaves.

>>9756063
Only if you have a Stargate. And even then people would be against mining the fucking moon, which is there for everyone and not some kike in the White House.

>>9756063
>we
who "we"? you think private companies share money with you?

>>9756491
>I’m sorry but the fact that the hunan element of mining is not even graced here by any of you does but exemplify how none of you have ever worked a job in their life.
What? Tons of people would want to be spezz miners.

>>9756063
The cost of setting up something like that would be....astronomical, let alone the cost of trips to and from space. It's not worth it.
When it's economically viable it will happen. By then people will be building cities in space anyway.

>>9756687
>It's not worth it
The material on the moon would be worth many times our annual or decade long global budget combined. Gotta spend astronomical to make astronomical. Also we need to get gold mining away from earth it's legit going to fuck everything up

>>9756117
Helium-3 is far more valuable than gold and the moon is chock full of it.

>>9756481
then why don't you do it?

>>9756063
>the moon is real

>>9756718
I'm not on the moon

>>9756063
The expenditure of resources is well above the return

>>9756730
Anon, can you even prove that you are real?

>>9756063
Space doesn't exist you retard.

>>9756803
I think therefore I am.

>>9756063

Because governments keep shifting plans every few years so space agency's that spearhead development that would allow private industry space access keep lagging behind.

Getting craft licensed to carry humans is also a massive pain in the balls not to mention the design requirements.

The free market is unironically fixing the problem now.

>>9756709
The Moon is not "chock full" of Helium 3.
There's just a surface film, deposited there by the Solar wind. Earth got the same treatment, but here it's been diluted by the atmosphere.

I am sick of all this "if only we had He3 we'd have fusion power by Thursday" crap.
We do not have fusion reactors and a bottle of He3 is not going to make them come any faster.
When we DO have fusors, He3 will be a good fuel. It'll produce fewer neutrons -- but it's NOT "aneutronic", not something you can safely have in your Delorean.

When we DO have working fusion, I hope we'll also have fusion rockets -- which will reduce costs and bring spaceflight out of the "over Niagara in a barrel" stunt class.
THEN, and only then, will mining He3 from the Moon become worthwhile.

Until that day, no billionaire is going to invest in your cockamamie schemes. Even Musk has to convince investors that his BFR will return dividends -- and soon.

>>9756063
rockets are expensive
we have no infrastructure
the extraction might not even be worth it

>>9756063
mmmm... nothing is better than hot jewess ready to kill filty palestinian scum

>>9756866
I said prove, not theorize.

>>9756063
>Why aren't we mining space yet.
Because even bringing a rocket to the moon will have costs associated with it that will make ANY mining operations an economical dead end.
Even supposing that the moon is extremely rich in minerals, the fact that you have to fly a rocket up there, actually mine something and the get it back means that it is as economically nonviable as it gets.

Even worse, we have ABSOLUTELY ZERO idea how to do it, even if a company were suicidal enough to attempt it, they still had to funnel in billions into research to even get the whole project started.

> it's low grav so when we're set up transporting hauls back is cost effective
You don't understand space travel.

>Why won't a billionaire take the first step?
Their IQ is is usually above 80 and even if it isn't they hire guys who would tell them politely that this is fucking retarded.

>>9756070
If there was money to be made by harvesting minerals on the moon, you can be sure that the Jews would do their best to get there.

>>9756063
Because it's more profitable to mine Earth. Eventually that will change when we start running low on terrestrial resources and everything will get more expensive, but for now just be glad we have lots of good stuff conveniently buried in our own rock.

>>9756063
Space has nothing we can't mine on earth far more cheaply.

it's hard to mine vacuum

>>9756117
you forgot that moon dust wrecks fucking everything

>>9756063
The fact that it's cheaper to mine here, coupled with the fact that the vast majority of the populous doesn't think more than a generation ahead.

That, and the Spanish Gold effect. When we start bringing resources back en mass, they lose their monetary value, and it crashes the related market.

https://www.planetaryresources.com/

https://deepspaceindustries.com/

>>9756063
moon rock is pretty homogeneous. you won't find any veins of ore, it's a case of painstakingly processing obscene amounts of dust. extraction methods need high yields which is even harder to pull off in a hostile environment.

>>9756075
>The Helium-3 meme
He3 is only useful if we have a function fusion method that uses it. We don't. Invent fusion first you brainlet, then we'll talk.

There's not enough gold and shinny shit up there to make it worth the effort, and what little there is is too difficult/expensive to extract and export. You fuck off.

>>9756594
Thanks to the miracle of something called "owning socks,"they indeed do.

>>9756866
I think I think, therefore I think I am... I think.

>>9756063
Because density of valuable materials on the moon is too low to justify building an operation to retrieve it.

>>9756063
Can you handle the red pill? If not, don't read this post.

In the early 1950's a few exotic forms of energy (zeropoint, fusion, nuclear) were successfully replicated. It was the original luminiferous aether model that made it all work. This is the reason why the establishment worked really hard to discredit any alternative models that would eventually lead scientists to the truth. Everything from atomic hydrogen plasma discharge energy to elemental transmutation was scrubbed from public libraries. National security was the excuse when in reality, it was to protect the status quo which included oil interests. If you truly want space travel, you are gonna have to fight for it.

>>9756063
we dont have the tech to reach the moon

>>9756594
this. i'm so tired of broke boys bitching about muh corporations and muh wall street. nigga stfu and get Robinhood.

>>9756117
>The surface of the Moon is pretty homogenous.
Citation needed. Especially since the old NASA maps show otherwise.

>>9759217
It's all volcanic. All of it. There's some difference, but not much.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Moon

>>9756063
Because the start up costs are too expensive to allow it
Once launch costs are reduced, and red tape cut, the idea will start being less insane

>>9756075
Fucking fuck, you're dense. Research, then post. Fucking schoolboys.

Environmental disaster. I don't want a romantic wonderful object TO BE MINED BY RICH PEOPLE EEEEW.

that means we have to look up to the sky everynight and watch rich cunts getting richer.

fuck humanity. fuck you.

>>9759477
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Moon
please read that link closer. It shows you are a phone poster but really, there is a major difference between the mare and the highlands.

>>9756063
OP, I really want to be with you on this one. But just HOW are we going to get those valuable minerals back to earth without huge costs? The only viable solution would be to sell those minerals to other spacebourne consumers - but there are none. The down-payment on a space based civilization is higher than society wants to pay. Maybe in 10,000 years when resources begin to dwindle and we haven't collapsed yet.

Cost of producing it in space and bringing it back to Earth < cost of producing it on Earth

That's it, that's all there is to it. Everything else is secondary to that one simple equation. Once that < becomes a > you'll get all the space mining you could dream of.

>>9756063
> cost effective
You have absolutely no idea how much it costs to put anything in or bring anything back from orbit.