Have you seen how people reacted to SpaceX sattelites destroying milkyway views?
That's nonsense. You can only see those satellites for an hour or so immediately after sunset, and immediately before sunrise. This is obvious when you think about it: the Starlink satellites are in very low orbits, so the sun has to be just below the horizon for sunlight to be able to reach them.
SpaceX has also done a lot of work making the satellites harder to see, with anti-reflective coatings, etc.
I wonder how many people bitching about this have actually seen Starlink satellites for real? I have plenty of times out in deep rural areas. But only for short periods of time. That's a good tradeoff to bring internet access to the entire world (including the rural areas that are dark enough to see them in the first place!).
People get the views they can afford, friend. When I lived in the East Bay, we laughed at the prices people in San Francisco paid. You see we paid less, but had an actual view of San Fran! They paid more, and had a view of Oakland! 🤣🤣🤣
A scenario for human Mars exploration includes moon bases where vehicles can be refueled and supplied, and then go on to Mars. This will one day reduce the need to do heavy lift from Earth.
There isn't a sunny and shady side of the moon, FYI. There are some places that are always in shadows near the poles, but basically everywhere else is sunny and dark about half the time.
In my opinion people populate where the work is located. At least for as long as it takes to do the work. Maybe that's not population. People I know that work harsh conditions, say off shore in the Gulf of Mexico, generally live within a few hours drive of the coast. But usually people rotate at remote locations.
If a real population develops I imagine it would straddle the dark and light sides for efficiency.
Right, but you gotta get the water to the Sunnyside. Just like any economic model, some will mine and transport to production and some will produce at the site.
Wait.. Do you mean produce as in human food? I'm talking about O2 and Hydrogen for going to Mars.
What will they find that will be different from the light side?
The far side is ideal for telescopes that have the whole moon as a shield protecting from noise from earth 🌒
Also if we ever build industrial production on the moon - the far side wouldn't destroy our view.
I dont think they will be caring about the view when they build up there.
It's still far in the future. At least decades I think. Who knows what the popular opinion will be until then.
Have you seen how people reacted to SpaceX sattelites destroying milkyway views?
That's nonsense. You can only see those satellites for an hour or so immediately after sunset, and immediately before sunrise. This is obvious when you think about it: the Starlink satellites are in very low orbits, so the sun has to be just below the horizon for sunlight to be able to reach them.
SpaceX has also done a lot of work making the satellites harder to see, with anti-reflective coatings, etc.
I wonder how many people bitching about this have actually seen Starlink satellites for real? I have plenty of times out in deep rural areas. But only for short periods of time. That's a good tradeoff to bring internet access to the entire world (including the rural areas that are dark enough to see them in the first place!).
I didnt know they were destroying the views...
Hopefully they will have something up there soon.
But I dont think humans could live up there indefinitely.
Yes, decades.. But I think we (humanity) will have something on the moon this decade. Maybe lunar orbit.
We have the space station up there already, right?
ISS in Low Earth orbit only. China is building a new one right now, too.
Humans always care about the view. We spend billions on telescopes.
l dont know....
Half the view in a city is obstructed by skyscrapers.
People get the views they can afford, friend. When I lived in the East Bay, we laughed at the prices people in San Francisco paid. You see we paid less, but had an actual view of San Fran! They paid more, and had a view of Oakland! 🤣🤣🤣
Hence why I am saying people dont care about the view.
They hope for vast amounts of water. Which can make O2 to breathe and H for rocket fuel.
Is that what the big deal is?
They are looking for water?
A scenario for human Mars exploration includes moon bases where vehicles can be refueled and supplied, and then go on to Mars. This will one day reduce the need to do heavy lift from Earth.
Interesting.
Would you want to populate the sunny or shady side of the moon?
There isn't a sunny and shady side of the moon, FYI. There are some places that are always in shadows near the poles, but basically everywhere else is sunny and dark about half the time.
Correct. I conflated far side and sunny vs polar or dark areas, especially in deep craters , where they hope lots of water (ice) is located.
Do they believe water is on the moon?
I thought it was just very dusty and dry.
In my opinion people populate where the work is located. At least for as long as it takes to do the work. Maybe that's not population. People I know that work harsh conditions, say off shore in the Gulf of Mexico, generally live within a few hours drive of the coast. But usually people rotate at remote locations.
If a real population develops I imagine it would straddle the dark and light sides for efficiency.
True.
I just thought you could make more produce and do things in the sun compared to doing everything in the shade.
Right, but you gotta get the water to the Sunnyside. Just like any economic model, some will mine and transport to production and some will produce at the site.
Wait.. Do you mean produce as in human food? I'm talking about O2 and Hydrogen for going to Mars.
The far side is ideal for telescopes that have the whole moon as a shield protecting from noise from earth 🌒
Also if we ever build industrial production on the moon - the far side wouldn't destroy our view.