• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

China's and others' missions to the Moon

Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
3,619 (0.86/day)
System Name Skunkworks
Processor 5800x3d
Motherboard x570 unify
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A
Memory 32GB 3600 mhz
Video Card(s) asrock 6800xt challenger D
Storage Sabarent rocket 4.0 2TB, MX 500 2TB
Display(s) Asus 1440p144 27"
Case Old arse cooler master 932
Power Supply Corsair 1200w platinum
Mouse *squeak*
Keyboard Some old office thing
Software openSUSE tumbleweed/Mint 21.2
His point -> .











Your head -> o
His point is the same point as those who protested the Apollo moon missions because some American kids were hungry. By that logic we'll NEVER make any progress.
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
551 (0.09/day)
Location
Pacific Coast
System Name Z77 Rev. 1
Processor Intel Core i7 3770K
Motherboard ASRock Z77 Extreme4
Cooling Water Cooling
Memory 2x G.Skill F3-2400C10D-16GTX
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080
Storage Samsung 850 Pro
Display(s) Samsung 28" UE590 UHD
Case Silverstone TJ07
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Seasonic PRIME 600W Titanium
Mouse EVGA TORQ X10
Keyboard Leopold Tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Time Spy: 7695
Wrong, but anyway.... unless you have verifiable scientific proof that it's easier to cool a planet than heat one up, i'm out of that conversation.
If Mars' atmosphere is already 95% carbon dioxide, if you lower that by 94.5% in order to make it not toxic to us, wouldn't it get colder?
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
352 (0.20/day)
If Mars' atmosphere is already 95% carbon dioxide, if you lower that by 94.5% in order to make it not toxic to us, wouldn't it get colder?
Mars' atmosphere may be 95% CO2, but the "air pressure" is less than 1% of Earth's at sea level.
That's roughly the same as at the very top of Mount Everest.

TL;DR - There's not enough to breath, even if the mix was correct for humans.
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
2,660 (1.72/day)
His point is the same point as those who protested the Apollo moon missions because some American kids were hungry. By that logic we'll NEVER make any progress.

No.

We got to the moon because smart people on earth solved problems like 'How will we breath when we get there????' BEFORE the astronauts got there.

The fact that you ignore such simple questions proves that you aren't serious about the problem.

-------

Then a few things went wrong, but smart people on Earth counteracted those problems and allowed various Spacemen to return home safely.

Meanwhile, we have a company who can't even launch a non-explosive rocket and today's idiots think the exploding rocket will take them to lol Mars.
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
551 (0.09/day)
Location
Pacific Coast
System Name Z77 Rev. 1
Processor Intel Core i7 3770K
Motherboard ASRock Z77 Extreme4
Cooling Water Cooling
Memory 2x G.Skill F3-2400C10D-16GTX
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080
Storage Samsung 850 Pro
Display(s) Samsung 28" UE590 UHD
Case Silverstone TJ07
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Seasonic PRIME 600W Titanium
Mouse EVGA TORQ X10
Keyboard Leopold Tenkeyless
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Time Spy: 7695
Mars' atmosphere may be 95% CO2, but the "air pressure" is less than 1% of Earth's at sea level.
That's roughly the same as at the very top of Mount Everest.

TL;DR - There's not enough to breath, even if the mix was correct for humans.
That's bad too; so what does that mean regarding the subject of heating it up? Even more hopeless?
 

de.das.dude

Pro Indian Modder
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
8,809 (1.71/day)
Location
Stuck in a PC. halp.
System Name Monke | Work Thinkpad| Old Monke
Processor Ryzen 5600X | Ryzen 5500U | FX8320
Motherboard ASRock B550 Extreme4 | ? | Asrock 990FX Extreme 4
Cooling 240mm Rad | Not needed | hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 Corsair RGB | 16 GB DDR4 3600 | 16GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX6700XT 12GB | Vega 8 | Sapphire Pulse RX580 8GB
Storage Samsung 980 nvme (Primary) | some samsung SSD
Display(s) Dell 2723DS | Some 14" 1080p 98%sRGB IPS | Dell 2240L
Case Ant Esports Tempered case | Thinkpad | Antec
Audio Device(s) Logitech Z333 | Jabra corpo stuff
Power Supply Corsair RM750e | not needed | Corsair GS 600
Mouse Logitech G400 | nipple
Keyboard Logitech G213 | stock kb is awesome | Logitech K230
VR HMD ;_;
Software Windows 10 Professional x3
Benchmark Scores There are no marks on my bench
No.

We got to the moon because smart people on earth solved problems like 'How will we breath when we get there????' BEFORE the astronauts got there.

The fact that you ignore such simple questions proves that you aren't serious about the problem.

-------

Then a few things went wrong, but smart people on Earth counteracted those problems and allowed various Spacemen to return home safely.

Meanwhile, we have a company who can't even launch a non-explosive rocket and today's idiots think the exploding rocket will take them to lol Mars.


Thats not the same. NASA had a fixed budget where they could not take risks. Also, manufacturing 50 years back was very slow for complicated components, not to mention quality issues were persistent.
This means a lot of man hours went into the whole process, which is expensive (expensive, not just money wise).

What is possible now is to quickly pump out new parts after development, and then destroy them in tests. Destructive testing if you will, to figure out the limit of different components. This is something which was unknown (theoretical limits were known, but not the actual practical limits)

This means development is much much more faster for the same time + money spent compared to old days.

Same thing in software dev. Old days, CPU time was expensive, and debugging was a PITA, forcing devs to be extra careful and avoid mistakes. Now CPUs are so powerful and cheap, that test driven development is a real thing.
You code based on what test scenarios that you need to pass.

source: ex Mechanical Engineer, currently, software developer for one of the worlds largest banks.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2020
Messages
2,106 (1.49/day)
Location
Bulgaria
This means development is much much more faster for the same time
So, may I remind you that you need evidence of development, other than unplanned rapid disassembly, that occurred in much less time after the project began. Well, I don't see enough success and progress with Starship, for example, to be fit to fly with people, and it's been quite a few years since development started. It will be a few more years before human missions. So, there will be further delays to the lunar missions and ultimately the development of a Starship will be longer in calendar time than that of Saturn-Apollo.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
5,498 (0.78/day)
Location
Ikenai borderline!
System Name Firelance.
Processor Threadripper 3960X
Motherboard ROG Strix TRX40-E Gaming
Cooling IceGem 360 + 6x Arctic Cooling P12
Memory 8x 16GB Patriot Viper DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Ventus 2X OC
Storage 2TB WD SN850X (boot), 4TB Crucial P3 (data)
Display(s) 3x AOC Q32E2N (32" 2560x1440 75Hz)
Case Enthoo Pro II Server Edition (Closed Panel) + 6 fans
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 760W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Logitech G613
Software Windows 10 Professional x64
Meanwhile, we have a company who can't even launch a non-explosive rocket and today's idiots think the exploding rocket will take them to lol Mars.
That's a rather shortsighted comment to make, considering the Falcon did plenty of exploding yet is now the world's most reliable space launch vehicle and the only reusable one; and the most recent Starship test resulted in the vehicle surviving and successfully completing all its major objectives. Y'all really need to keep up to date with this stuff if you're going to try to use it as a point against SpaceX.

As for Mars... Musk understands marketing well enough to know that keeping his company's name in the news is good business, regardless of how feasible the claims he's making may or may not be.

Thats not the same. NASA had a fixed budget where they could not take risks. Also, manufacturing 50 years back was very slow for complicated components, not to mention quality issues were persistent.
This means a lot of man hours went into the whole process, which is expensive (expensive, not just money wise).

What is possible now is to quickly pump out new parts after development, and then destroy them in tests. Destructive testing if you will, to figure out the limit of different components. This is something which was unknown (theoretical limits were known, but not the actual practical limits)

This means development is much much more faster for the same time + money spent compared to old days.

Same thing in software dev. Old days, CPU time was expensive, and debugging was a PITA, forcing devs to be extra careful and avoid mistakes. Now CPUs are so powerful and cheap, that test driven development is a real thing.
You code based on what test scenarios that you need to pass.

source: ex Mechanical Engineer, currently, software developer for one of the worlds largest banks.
Waterfall vs agile, basically.

So, may I remind you that you need evidence of development, other than unplanned rapid disassembly, that occurred in much less time after the project began. Well, I don't see enough success and progress with Starship, for example, to be fit to fly with people, and it's been quite a few years since development started. It will be a few more years before human missions.
See my response to dragontamer.

So, there will be further delays to the lunar missions and ultimately the development of a Starship will be longer in calendar time than that of Saturn-Apollo.
It isn't particularly fair to compare the timelines of a single company in 2024 to those of the most wealthy nation on the planet in 1960. Speaking of which, that nation's official space agency in 2024 has experienced significant and repeated delays in getting back to the Moon, so SpaceX might actually end up beating NASA in the end...
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,707 (0.56/day)
That's bad too; so what does that mean regarding the subject of heating it up? Even more hopeless?

I'd say so.

Let's take a stupid plan...and walk it out. I'm going to center this on Musk....because his ideas are a rehashing of decades old bad math.

The primary issues with Mars are the magnetosphere doesn't exist, the amount of solar radiation is much smaller than on Earth, and the atmosphere is much thinner. The proposal is to drop some nukes on where they can find large locked bodies of water, or material that will vaporize given enough energy. Think about those perchlorates...which are largely a substance that latches onto water molecules (it's a basic description...please forgive the over simplification).

What this does is generate a lot of heat, create a lot of atmospheric pressure by turning trapped solid water into gas, and with bad Musk math you could theoretically use those nuclear explosions to at least partially liquify the core of the planet and maybe get a magnetosphere going...again based off of virtually no reliable scientific data. All of this sounds great as a thought exercise...until you start doing some real thinking.

1) There's no real proof that liquefaction of a planetary core generates a magnetic field...and even less proof that we could do it. That's an enormous amount of nukes...that are hand waved away as somehow both huge and controllably small. This is where the theory breaks down against a cursory mathematical thought experiment...and a Jerry Breckheimer film (The Core) is proven to be a silly thing to claim as a realistic solution.

2) The amount of water and other light gasses that would need to be liberated for just about 49% of Earth's atmospheric pressure (to get the current 1% to 50%) would be 2.695 quadrillion tons. That's right...Earth's mass is about 1 millionth that of its atmosphere (Britannica), at 5.5 quadrillion tons. This is oversimplification given that Mars is about 1/10th the mass of Earth...but it does a lot to illustrate the difference between "we just need a little extra gasses" and "we can have a comfy to breathe in atmosphere.

3) The last bit is that Mars is farther from Sol than Earth. This seems obvious...but the solar irradiance on Mars averages to 590 W/m^2 versus 1000 W/m^2 on Earth. Roughly 60% of the sun's energy doesn't sound like a deal breaker...until your atmosphere is basically incapable of storing heat because it's so thin. The proposal I've seen for this is to use the natural oxides in the soil to separate into metals and oxygen using electrolysis, sinter the metal into a foam to act as an insulative layer, and construct new buildings out of primarily iron and steel reinforcements combined with ceramics from local soil. If you can harvest solar energy constantly, even at a low level, the electrolysis provides some heat and a usable metal for construction...assuming you have infinite time. IE...it's time to do something like this with a drone years before we send people, so on day one they've got a ready made stockpile of insulation and construction materials. Lord knows that even a large solar array just won't have the juice to keep people warm on its own.



The TL;DR is that colonizing Mars is a pipedream. I know people want to pretend it's for the good of the species...but right now we just don't have the tech or an easy enough planet to terraform. I applaud that people want to protect humanity from extinction...but I don't see a huge amount of people lining up for the suicide mission. People who say otherwise are aspiring to a solution...but I've yet to see one introduce a concrete plan not made out of as many dreams as good science.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
5,498 (0.78/day)
Location
Ikenai borderline!
System Name Firelance.
Processor Threadripper 3960X
Motherboard ROG Strix TRX40-E Gaming
Cooling IceGem 360 + 6x Arctic Cooling P12
Memory 8x 16GB Patriot Viper DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Ventus 2X OC
Storage 2TB WD SN850X (boot), 4TB Crucial P3 (data)
Display(s) 3x AOC Q32E2N (32" 2560x1440 75Hz)
Case Enthoo Pro II Server Edition (Closed Panel) + 6 fans
Power Supply Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 760W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Logitech G613
Software Windows 10 Professional x64
Low Earth Orbit is not Mars.

Progress for one is not necessarily progress for the other.
Oh come now! Starship is intended to perform lunar landings as part of Artemis - you can't honestly claim that returning humans to the Moon's surface isn't a step towards eventually landing humans on the Red Planet, even though I have little confidence the latter will happen in this century.
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
2,660 (1.72/day)
Oh come now! Starship is intended to perform lunar landings as part of Artemis - you can't honestly claim that returning humans to the Moon's surface isn't a step towards eventually landing humans on the Red Planet, even though I have little confidence the latter will happen in this century.

The issues to be solved with Humans on Mars will better be solved by filling a vacuum chamber in Antartica with Humans and trying to see how long they live without any external Oxygen or external food.

The psychological and fitness tests to subject a human to that kind of journey are likely the hardest part. We already know that we can fling objects to Mars. The question is how much stuff do we need to send with Humans (including Oxygen and other life support), and how lightweight we can make all that equipment.

And we're not even talking about "reaching Mars" here. This topic until now is talking about LOL Terraforming Mars and changing its temperature by +80C so that its more habitable for humans. Okay, there's only so much bullshit I can take before calling this all a John Keely style scheme to just wring people out of their money.

Everyone agrees that Elon's #1 goal here is to obtain money from investors, right? Okay, just making sure we're all on the same page with the correct mindset to understand the situation. Taking money while failing to deliver realistic progress on an impossible task is a 100+ year old tradition in the scheme of con-artists. Its easy to fail when the results don't matter and when everyone thinks its a long-shot anyway. At some point, the fantasy becomes so absurd that the only possible explanation is that its a con-artist money-stealing attempt rather than a serious attempt at technological progress.
 
Last edited:

Ruru

S.T.A.R.S.
Joined
Dec 16, 2012
Messages
11,544 (2.73/day)
Location
Finland
System Name 4K-gaming
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X h2o
Motherboard Gigabyte B550M Aorus Elite
Cooling Custom loop
Memory 32GB Kingston HyperX Fury DDR4-3466
Video Card(s) Asus GeForce RTX 3080 TUF h2o
Storage ~3TB SSDs + 6TB external HDDs
Display(s) Acer 27" 4K120 + Lenovo 32" 4K60
Case Corsair 4000D Airflow White
Audio Device(s) Asus TUF H3 Wireless
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 750W
Mouse Logitech MX518 + Asus TUF P1 mousepad
Keyboard Roccat Vulcan 121 AIMO
VR HMD Oculus Rift CV1
Software Windows 11 Pro
Benchmark Scores It runs Crysis
I still wonder that why man hasn't been on Moon for the last ~50 years?

Though I think that they visited Moon and now they just research it with unmanned technology.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
20,985 (3.40/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Ryzen R9 7950X
Motherboard GIGABYTE Aorus Elite X670 AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory 64GB (4x 16GB) G.Skill Flare X5 @ DDR5-6000 CL30
Video Card(s) XFX RX 7900 XTX Speedster Merc 310
Storage Intel 905p Optane 960GB boot, +2x Crucial P5 Plus 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Display(s) 55" LG 55" B9 OLED 4K Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) TOSLINK->Schiit Modi MB->Asgard 2 DAC Amp->AKG Pro K712 Headphones or HDMI->B9 OLED
Power Supply FSP Hydro Ti Pro 850W
Mouse Logitech G305 Lightspeed Wireless
Keyboard WASD Code v3 with Cherry Green keyswitches + PBT DS keycaps
Software Gentoo Linux x64 / Windows 11 Enterprise IoT 2024
Mars' atmosphere may be 95% CO2, but the "air pressure" is less than 1% of Earth's at sea level.
That's roughly the same as at the very top of Mount Everest.

TL;DR - There's not enough to breath, even if the mix was correct for humans.
That's actually around 33x less dense than the top of Mt Everest, just FYI.

As for the moon, it has no atmo but had the massive benefit of being closer.
 
Top