- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SpaceX to shift focus from mars to building a “city” on the Moon
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:39 am to UltimaParadox
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:39 am to UltimaParadox
My understanding for the purpose of it is it would significantly increase bandwidth and connectivity, not make it any faster, I should have clarified that
1
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:41 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
My understanding for the purpose of it is it would significantly increase bandwidth and connectivity
You'll still be limited by the upload/download speed of the spacecraft. If you're broadcasting to multiple craft, great. If just one, it won't improve anything.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:42 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Lonnie Utah
I think we are seeing why Elon gets billions in investments just throwing shite out there
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:44 am to Lonnie Utah
Ok. So what?
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:47 am to Volvagia
quote:
Just because you watched Moon doesn’t make you knowledgeable about moon mining economics. Yes, helium-3 is more abundant on the moon than on earth, but it’s still fairly rare. Like 10 parts per billion.
You’re replying to the wrong person chap.
I’m the guy who thinks it might just be a bad idea to start mining the thing that controls our oceans’ tides
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:51 am to Handsome Pete
quote:
How does a city on the moon secure the future of civilization?
Because it’s like Star Trek.
This is the logic being used.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:54 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Ok. So what?
If you don’t understand the problem(s) extra satellites do and don't solve, then what exactly are you bringing to the conversation other than just regurgitating something you've hear and think is cool (and it's cool) but don't understand?
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 8:55 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:56 am to Lonnie Utah
Great non answer. The question is: So what?
Why does that matter? We shouldn't go through the various layers of technological challenges to do these things?
Just don't do what Musk is proposing because of the current barriers? Don't try to figure out how to make these things work?
Why does that matter? We shouldn't go through the various layers of technological challenges to do these things?
Just don't do what Musk is proposing because of the current barriers? Don't try to figure out how to make these things work?
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 8:56 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:57 am to Fun Bunch
It’ll cost around 90-100k to get a pound of material back to earth. That’s even with SpaceX’s technology making it far cheaper.
Why would we go to the moon for iron, aluminum, silicon, etc when it’s 5 cents/pound, 3 cents/pound, and 23 cents per pound respectively here on earth?
Why would we go to the moon for iron, aluminum, silicon, etc when it’s 5 cents/pound, 3 cents/pound, and 23 cents per pound respectively here on earth?
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:57 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Why does that matter? We shouldn't go through the various layers of technological challenges to do these things?
Because engineering is about solving real constraints, not imaginary ones. Extra satellites improve bandwidth, coverage, and reliability, they do not reduce latency (in fact, they INCREASE IT), which is the actual problem being discussed. You don’t spend billions engineering around theoreticals when the limitation is fundamental physics. You identify the real bottlenecks and solve those.
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 9:00 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 8:59 am to UltimaParadox
quote:
I think we are seeing why Elon gets billions in investments just throwing shite out there
Yea this thread is hilarious
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:00 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
I think in the 2030s once this is getting closer to reality, they will abandon the concept of humans being there for awhile and it will be Optimus robots and drones doing everything on the moon and then mars, at first.
Here’s the catch as I see it. Only robots will be able to take part in space activities that take any appreciable time to complete. Humans are a product of this particular planet and cannot survive long term outside of it. The ideas of interplanetary travel much less interplanetary civilizations are the realm of science fiction. And you can’t just spend science fiction into being.
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 9:01 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:00 am to JasonDBlaha
quote:
Musk is a fricking fraud. He’s not a scientist or engineer. He’s a businessman who thinks that throwing an endless amount of money at something will eventually make it work.
You got him figured out dawg, just an old conman worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Apparently the most successful conman of all time.
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 9:01 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:01 am to Decatur
quote:
Because it’s like Star Trek.
This is the logic being used.
It is an interesting thought experiment: what degree of development would allow for enough self sufficiency to survive being cut off from earth forever.
No more spare parts or replacements
This post was edited on 2/9/26 at 9:02 am
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:05 am to Volvagia
quote:
Why would we go to the moon for iron, aluminum, silicon, etc when it’s 5 cents/pound, 3 cents/pound, and 23 cents per pound respectively here on earth?
I could think of a couple of reasons. 1)To mine rare isotopes and minerals that are scarce on Earth or that simply wouldn’t form under geological conditions found on Earth today. Or 2). To support in-space manufacturing and construction, where lifting material out of Earth’s gravity well dominates the cost.
In short, you don’t mine the Moon to ship bulk commodities back to Earth. You mine the moon to avoid launching those materials into space from Earth in the first place. The energetic savings of launching from a body where the gravity is 1/6 could offset the extra cost of mining and manufacturing there.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:11 am to thejudge
quote:There's gravity on the moon.
Also with zero gravity easier to launch massive payloads offsite.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:13 am to Lonnie Utah
Except there really isn’t much on the moon that is uncommon on earth. Certainly not rare enough to offset the cost of shipping it to earth, never mind the mining operations themselves.
Hell, the moon used to BE the earth. It’s why it’s so relatively big.
Helium-3 is mentioned but I expressed that earlier.
Also pointed out the value as a building material for space projects (although we are probably a century from having that level of sophistication in space).
But people keep on bringing up moon mining as a way to make moon cities and what not economically self sustaining. Or at least self supporting.
It won’t.
Hell, the moon used to BE the earth. It’s why it’s so relatively big.
Helium-3 is mentioned but I expressed that earlier.
Also pointed out the value as a building material for space projects (although we are probably a century from having that level of sophistication in space).
But people keep on bringing up moon mining as a way to make moon cities and what not economically self sustaining. Or at least self supporting.
It won’t.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:26 am to Fun Bunch
we need to branch out eventually we will run out of resources on earth and have to go back to the stone age.
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:28 am to JasonDBlaha
quote:
Musk is a fricking fraud
quote:
JasonDBlaha
Posted on 2/9/26 at 9:31 am to Fun Bunch
I'll stay here. Send me a postcard when you arrive.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News