• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Jestblaze's Thoughts

Best idea I've heard yet for moon/Mars development... I forget who came up with it, but it involved sending the return vessel unmanned first. If it landed successfully and able to launch, then you'd risk a manned mission. Each lander doubles as a new module for the permanent station, then the astronaut comes home in the return vehicle.
 
gnome said:
Best idea I've heard yet for moon/Mars development... I forget who came up with it, but it involved sending the return vessel unmanned first. If it landed successfully and able to launch, then you'd risk a manned mission. Each lander doubles as a new module for the permanent station, then the astronaut comes home in the return vehicle.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Zubrin's Mars Direct scheme. A big part of his plan was using propellant from Mars resources. Thus a 20 km/s delta V budget is broken into two legs, a 14 km/s leg and a 6 km/s leg.

Spudis' architecture calls for 16 missions prior to human lunar landing. He also calls for using local lunar resources to make propellant.
 
Last edited:
Cuddles said:
And how many could we actually mange? Let's use the shuttle as a baseline, although it was never actually capable of getting anywhere near the Moon (the highest was around 35,000 km for geostationary transfer, over 10 times too low).
Click to expand...

No.

The Shuttle couldn't get anywhere near geostationary transfer. The highest it ever got was 385 miles above earth - on the mission to launch the Hubble telescope.
 
Absence of nitrogen and carbon would make self sufficiency on the moon pretty hard.
 
Acleron said:
Absence of nitrogen and carbon would make self sufficiency on the moon pretty hard.
Click to expand...

I will post this a second time:

The October 2010 issue of Science looked at LCROSS ejecta. It evidently contains 5.5% water as well as nitrogen and carbon compounds:

N 6.6000%
CO 5.7000%
H2O 5.5000%
Zn 3.1000%
V 2.4000%
Ca 1.6000%
Au 1.6000%
Mn 1.3000%
Hg 1.2000%
Co 1.0000%
H2S 0.9213%
Fe 0.5000%
Mg 0.4000%
NH3 0.3317%
Cl 0.2000%
SO2 0.1755%
C2H4 0.1716%
CO2 0.1194%
C 0.0900%
Sc 0.0900%
CH3OH 0.0853%
S 0.0600%
B 0.0400%
P 0.0400%
CH4 0.0366%
O 0.0200%
Si 0.0200%
As 0.0200%
Al 0.0090%
OH 0.0017%

There is CHON at the lunar poles
 
Last edited:
HopDavid said:
I will post this a second time:

The October 2010 issue of Science looked at LCROSS ejecta. It evidently contains 5.5% water as well as nitrogen and carbon compounds:

N 6.6000%
CO 5.7000%
H2O 5.5000%
Zn 3.1000%
V 2.4000%
Ca 1.6000%
Au 1.6000%
Mn 1.3000%
Hg 1.2000%
Co 1.0000%
H2S 0.9213%
Fe 0.5000%
Mg 0.4000%
NH3 0.3317%
Cl 0.2000%
SO2 0.1755%
C2H4 0.1716%
CO2 0.1194%
C 0.0900%
Sc 0.0900%
CH3OH 0.0853%
S 0.0600%
B 0.0400%
P 0.0400%
CH4 0.0366%
O 0.0200%
Si 0.0200%
As 0.0200%
Al 0.0090%
OH 0.0017%

There is CHON at the lunar poles
Click to expand...

Yes, that is quite a difference from the general lunar regolith.

Oxygen 40% Silicon 20% Iron 12% Calcium 8.5% Aluminum 7.3% Magnesium 4.8%
Titanium 4.5% Sodium 0.33% Chromium 0.2% Manganese 0.16% Potassium 0.11%
Sulfur 540 ppm Carbon 200 ppm Nitrogen 100 ppm Hydrogen 40 ppm Helium 4 28ppm Helium 3 0.01 ppm
Click to expand...

So how much absolute C and N are present at the poles, because that is the relevant figure.
 
Acleron said:
Yes, that is quite a difference from the general lunar regolith.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the lunar poles are quite different from the lower latitudes.



Acleron said:
So how much absolute C and N are present at the poles, because that is the relevant figure.
Click to expand...

I will post this for a second time: 600 million tonnes of water ice at the north pole. In sheets two meters thick.

If the volatiles in the anomalous craters are in anything like the same proportions as the volatiles in the LCROSS ejecta, there is quite a lot of carbon and nitrogen in those places.
 
Possible physics of telepathic powers - My believed method

To start this forum you must have a clear knowledge of what quantum entanglement is and how it works.

Quantum entanglement is forcing one atom's photons to form the same pattern as another. Then it gains suggestive powers over the others internal movement and can change the path of it to match the new path of the first set of photons. Feel free to wikipedia quantum entanglement now if you are confused.

Mass quantum entanglement has not been successfully tested yet but I believe patterns lie a key part in it.

Thoughts are made up of energy patterns in the mind, multiple patterns.

First when I use telepathy I scan out sending a unique specific energy signal to lock me on to the person I'm looking for to the best of my abilities. I wait for a disruption matching what i perceive the energy wave would only cause the one person and generate a distance and direction from that.

Then I listen to a few of their thought waves as best as my ability <advanced see lightspeed and time it takes to travel vs instantaneous thought> and i create in my mind one exact thoughtform energy pattern they are created at just the right time and synchronize or entangle mine with theirs.

By altering mine slightly using the suggestive qualities of quantum entanglement I can change it then suggest more entanglements for a channel. Size of channel varys. Have fun.

Mind reading works similarly except after the original pattern entanglement you use that small quantum channel to see other patterns and instead of suggesting change to the patterns sit back and watch.
 
jestblaze said:
To start this forum you must have a clear knowledge of what quantum entanglement is and how it works.

Quantum entanglement is forcing one atom's photons to form the same pattern as another. Then it gains suggestive powers over the others internal movement and can change the path of it to match the new path of the first set of photons. Feel free to wikipedia quantum entanglement now if you are confused.

Mass quantum entanglement has not been successfully tested yet but I believe patterns lie a key part in it.

Thoughts are made up of energy patterns in the mind, multiple patterns.

First when I use telepathy I scan out sending a unique specific energy signal to lock me on to the person I'm looking for to the best of my abilities. I wait for a disruption matching what i perceive the energy wave would only cause the one person and generate a distance and direction from that.

Then I listen to a few of their thought waves as best as my ability <advanced see lightspeed and time it takes to travel vs instantaneous thought> and i create in my mind one exact thoughtform energy pattern they are created at just the right time and synchronize or entangle mine with theirs.

By altering mine slightly using the suggestive qualities of quantum entanglement I can change it then suggest more entanglements for a channel. Size of channel varys. Have fun.

Mind reading works similarly except after the original pattern entanglement you use that small quantum channel to see other patterns and instead of suggesting change to the patterns sit back and watch.
Click to expand...


Before you go looking for loopy pseudoscientific explanations for how "mind reading works," how about proving that you can actually do it?
 
jestblaze:

Sorry, but I do not think that you understand what quantum entanglement is, therefore I suggest that you stop trying to teach quantum entanglement to others.

In any event, it really does not matter to me (nor most most JREF Members) just how your telepathic powers work. Instead, all that we want to do is actually see your telepathic powers work.

After it has been proven that your telepathic powers do work, then the scientific community can start working on just how your telepathic powers work.

I hope that is clear.
 
AdMan said:
Before you go looking for loopy pseudoscientific explanations for how "mind reading works," how about proving that you can actually do it?
Click to expand...
I don't understand a word of what the OP is saying, but I do understand the difference between what works and what doesn't, from the viewpoint of predictability and statistical success. We would like the OP writer to demonstrate his abilities in a controlled environment, where his statistical success rate can be estimated.
 
JJM 777 said:
I don't understand a word of what the OP is saying, but I do understand the difference between what works and what doesn't, from the viewpoint of predictability and statistical success. We would like the OP writer to demonstrate his abilities in a controlled environment, where his statistical success rate can be estimated.
Click to expand...

 
jestblaze said:
To start this forum you must have a clear knowledge of what quantum entanglement is and how it works.
Click to expand...
i do have a clear knowledge of what quantum entanglement is and how it works.

thats why i stopped reading after this sentence
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom