No other man on the Moon ...

Nov 2019
96
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
Something biological? Curiosity probe [as for I know] wouldn't be able to determine this.
As good as curiosity is; it is not possible for Curiosity to look in every Corner and in the read the article it tells that the concentration of oxygene was getting higher%ual each year from 2012-2017.For me thats an indication about something that is growing like a liche for example thats my opinion i am no scientist so lets see what the spacescientist are saying.
Maybe we have contaminated mars with something biological without knowing?
 
Nov 2019
96
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
Maybe it is because of the Color of the Mars they associated him with war and so does the amazigh Gurzil - Wikipedia
There was a Picture of a Statue of Gurzil aka Mars/Ares located in the Ptolomeis Museum(Lybia),i am sure someone has removed it from the Internet.It was a Bullfaced statue but the corns were destroyed.I saw this statue on the hompage temehu.com
i dont know why they did this but they have forgotten remove the statue of Saturn if they want to hide the starmythology of amzighculture.Do These guy not the read the quran, in which God encourage the People for archelogy and to study history and not to destroy it?
 
Last edited:

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,763
San Antonio, Tx
Here is a very basic report on what it takes to shield from neutrons:
"Neutron Shielding Lead is quite ineffective for blocking neutron radiation, as neutrons are uncharged and can simply pass through dense materials. Materials composed of low atomic number elements are preferable for stopping this type of radiation because they have a higher probability of forming cross-sections that will interact with the neutrons. Hydrogen and hydrogen-based materials are well-suited for this task. Compounds with a high concentration of hydrogen atoms, such as water, form efficient neutron barriers in addition to being relatively inexpensive shielding substances. However, low-density materials can emit gamma rays when blocking neutrons, meaning that neutron radiation shielding is most effective when it incorporates both high and low atomic number elements. The low-density material can disperse the neutrons through elastic scattering, while the high-density segments block the subsequent gamma rays with inelastic scattering."
Here is the other problem that really also has no immediate solution available; bone loss from zero gravity. Orbiting astronauts lose 10% of bone density every 6 ,months in space, probability is thatnone orbiting astronauts would lose mass at a potentially greater speed. Meaning that by the time they got to Mars they would be unable to function in even Mars diminished gravity.
Yes. As things stand today, manned missions to Mars appear to be either impossible to impractical and far too dangerous to human life. If and when these seemingly intractable problems are “solved”, the human race probably needs to cool its jets as far as interplanetary travel is concerned. Putting a team down on the surface of Mars may be - at the furthest stretch of our intellectual and practical resources - possible, but I fear whoever makes it down to the surface, is not coming back Ever.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,401
Italy, Lago Maggiore
At the end we can make a comparison with the conquest of the Moon: deeds to tell to grandsons for sure, but actually it was an exceptional achievement obtained with a tremendous national effort [money, persons, resources ...].

There was a remarkable "fallout" at technological and engineering level, but what did we [well, Americans] leave on the Moon? A permanent base? Industries? Laboratories with scientists? A Spece port?

Not at all ... some flags, some plaques, tracks in the sand ... and the bottom sections of the LEMs.

Reality is that we are still in a kind of "pre space era" and that what we realistically can do today is to put a space station [without artificial gravity] in a low orbit around our planet. That's what we can do for real.

We can conquer Mars, but costs and risks would be incredibly high. And again ... what would we leave on Mars? A flag, a plaque and tracks in the sand ...
 
Nov 2019
96
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
Reality is that we are still in a kind of "pre space era" and that what we realistically can do today is to put a space station [without artificial gravity] in a low orbit around our planet. That's what we can do for real.
Maybe i think it is better not to go interstellar because after reading the headnews with a possible war in space it is not the Right time for it.Maybe the UN should be involved in all spacetravels as a controlinstance ,i mean if you travel by plane you also have to go to several checkpoints identiycheck(booking)securitychecks(Body and stuff) and even after that depending on the country it is not sure that you can fly.

Imagine a nation is refusing to fly to the moon in a jointmission and is uilding a base on it and is reclaimig it for this nation on earth and doesnt allow other nation to land on it how do you handle it.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,401
Italy, Lago Maggiore
With a temporary treaty without expiration date [or with a far expiration date].

And we've got an example on Earth: there is a land still to be "assigned" and it's an entire continent, that is to say Antarctica.

They delayed the problem by means of the Antarctic Treaty [note art. IV 1a Antarctic Treaty System - Wikipedia]. In good substance no power has renounced to territorial claims signing that treaty.

Regarding the Moon it exists something similar. Only a few countries have signed the "Moon Treaty", but which countries could plan to build settlements there? How many? US, Russia, EU, Cina, may be India, Japan, Brazil and UK [if EU won't allow the Kingdom to remain in ESA] in perspective. The treaty itself is not exceptional and this is also why it hasn't been widly ratified. Moon Treaty - Wikipedia
 
Nov 2019
96
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
Regarding the Moon it exists something similar. Only a few countries have signed the "Moon Treaty", but which countries could plan to build settlements there? How many? US, Russia, EU, Cina, may be India, Japan, Brazil and UK [if EU won't allow the Kingdom to remain in ESA] in perspective. The treaty itself is not exceptional and this is also why it hasn't been widly ratified. Moon Treaty - Wikipedia
Some difficult passages
  • Shall promptly inform the United Nations and the public of any phenomena which could endanger human life or health, as well as of any indication of extraterrestrial life. (Article 5.3)


  • All parties shall inform the United Nations as well as the public, of their activities concerned with the exploration and use of the Moon. (Article 5)


If the constitution of a Country is not in harmony with the treaty above a national Astronaut wouldnt follow that treaty also some wouldnt inform th UN or public when they found something in Advantage for their Nation.

"Only jointmissions" is missing in the treaty and also in the edited Version The Outer Space Treaty

Every night humanity is looking to the Moon and to the Mars(really dont know where his positon is Right now is and which part of earth can see him or Need obstacle ),so why cant the spacenation you have quoted work together.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,401
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Well, usually it's said that a mission to Mars will be an international mission. I'm afraid that the symbolic value of the conquest of the first extraterrestrial planet will win on this. After the run to the Moon we will see the run to Mars.

It wouldn't be negative: competition means development and more efficiency.
 
Aug 2019
571
North
The fact that the moon has only been visited once is evidence that back then all of it was just a matter of prestige between america and russia.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,401
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Btw, now Mars should be visible between Mercury and Spica. But now it's far. In October 2020 it will be 6 times more near [and so six times bigger in the sky].

Regarding the conquest of the Moon, it's clear that it was a political competition between the two superpowers who wanted to demonstrate which was the best system in absolute ... and they didn't proceed step by step.

The most rational way to conquer the Moon was to build a wide space station orbiting around this planet, to assemble a space ship there, with some modules and a LEM and then to travel to the Moon. No giant rockets required and costs diluted in many years. But they needed a quick success and so they run. The result was great, but isolated, unique.

At least it seems that to reach Mars [just because there is no geopolitical competition in progress] they are going to proceed step by step.