Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #152998 > unrolled thread

Moon Farmers

Started byscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
First post2015-10-16 15:29 +0000
Last post2015-10-18 13:25 -0400
Articles 13 on this page of 93 — 20 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-16 15:29 +0000
    Re: Moon Farmers jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-17 13:22 +0000
      Re: Moon Farmers "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-10-18 05:06 +1100
        Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-18 11:20 -0400
          Re: Moon Farmers Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-18 11:48 -0500
            Re: Moon Farmers Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-18 19:08 +0000
    Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-17 12:23 -0700
      Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-18 11:20 -0400
        Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-18 17:38 +0100
          Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-18 13:20 -0400
        Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-18 11:53 -0700
          Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 07:12 -0400
            Re: Moon Farmers Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-19 09:37 -0400
            Re: Moon Farmers Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-19 09:42 -0400
              Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 11:54 -0400
                Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-20 10:12 +1100
            Re: Moon Farmers David Jones <djones60@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 07:47 -0700
            Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 10:58 -0400
              Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 10:10 -0500
                Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 11:26 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 13:52 -0500
                    Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 15:09 -0400
                      Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 14:53 -0500
                        Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 16:06 -0400
                          Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 18:46 -0500
                            Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-19 16:54 -0700
                              Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 21:02 -0500
                                Re: Moon Farmers Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-20 11:25 -0500
                              Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-20 07:25 -0400
                              Re: Moon Farmers Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-20 10:32 -0500
                                Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-20 11:55 -0500
                                Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-20 17:01 +0000
                                  Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-20 10:23 -0700
                                  Re: Moon Farmers Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-20 13:25 -0500
                                    Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-20 19:43 +0000
                                      Re: Moon Farmers Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-20 16:51 -0500
                                        Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-21 03:08 -0700
                                          Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 09:54 -0500
                    Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-19 20:14 +0100
                Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-19 11:40 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 13:53 -0500
                  Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-20 10:11 +1100
              Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 11:54 -0400
                Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 12:07 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-19 12:41 -0700
                Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-19 12:35 -0700
              Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-19 16:08 +0000
                Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 13:22 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 18:53 +0100
                  Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-19 18:54 +0000
                    Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 15:20 -0400
                      Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 14:54 -0500
                        Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 16:07 -0400
                      Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-19 21:14 +0100
                        Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 17:51 -0400
                          Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-20 09:35 +0100
                    Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-19 20:22 +0100
              Re: Moon Farmers Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-10-19 15:40 -0400
                Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-19 12:43 -0700
                  Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 15:59 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-20 07:25 -0400
                    Re: Moon Farmers Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-20 12:13 +0000
                      Re: Moon Farmers Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-20 18:04 +0000
                        Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-21 14:21 -0400
                          Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-21 19:52 +0000
                            Re: Moon Farmers Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-21 15:13 -0500
                              Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-21 17:19 -0700
                                Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-22 10:03 +0100
                                  Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-22 11:53 -0400
                                    Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-23 06:29 +0100
                                  Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-22 17:46 +0000
                                Re: Moon Farmers Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-23 05:57 -0400
                            Re: Moon Farmers Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-22 09:39 -0700
                              Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-22 17:48 +0000
                                Re: Moon Farmers Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-22 17:45 -0700
                              Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-23 05:57 +1100
                                Re: Moon Farmers Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-22 17:56 -0700
                                  Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-23 13:10 +1100
                                  Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-22 23:32 -0400
                          Re: Moon Farmers Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-21 20:07 +0000
                            Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-22 17:50 +0000
                    Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-20 14:10 +0100
                      Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-20 15:42 +0000
                        Re: Moon Farmers Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-20 19:07 +0100
                    Re: Moon Farmers Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-20 21:20 -0500
                Re: Moon Farmers Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-19 15:56 -0400
                  Re: Moon Farmers JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 18:43 -0500
              Re: Moon Farmers Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-19 18:00 -0400
            Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-20 10:08 +1100
        Re: Moon Farmers Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-18 19:10 +0000
        Re: Moon Farmers "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-10-19 15:30 +1100
        Re: Moon Farmers scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-19 13:15 +0000
      Re: Moon Farmers Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-18 13:25 -0400

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]


#153222

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2015-10-22 17:50 +0000
Message-ID<%l9Wx.163192$%c.113875@fx26.iad>
In reply to#153180
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>On 2015-10-21, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-10-20, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-10-20, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 1:40:52 PM UTC-6, Walter Bushell wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have no machines that will last hundreds much less thousands
>>>>>>> of years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's true that, due to insufficient demand, such machines cannot be ordered
>>>>>> from  stock at this time. Does that mean current technology is inadequate
>>>>>> to the challenge of making such machines? That is by no means certain.
>>>
>>> That depends on whether you believe Microsoft is the state of the art.
>>>
>>>>> Voyager did quite well, but that was decade(s?), not millennia. Technology
>>>>> has advanced a bit since than, but the only things humans have built to
>>>>> last that long have been the pyramids, which are a bit heavy for a space
>>>>> launch.
>>>>
>>>> Unless you're a Goa'uld.
>>>>
>>>> (Sorry).
>>>
>>> Or have spindizzies.
>>>
>> SO which city will you take up first?
>
>Been a *long* time since I read "Cities in Flight" (although it's in my
>SF collection in what I rather grandiously refer to as 'the library'.)
>
>But doesn't New York figure? Or at least, Manhattan?

Starts out in Scranton, IIRC.   But the second and third books are
primarily manhattan; last time I was downtown, I walked past city
hall thinking about Mayor Amalfi at the controls.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153120

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-10-20 14:10 +0100
Message-ID<20151020141057.f6e8c893be582df3cd3dda17@eircom.net>
In reply to#153116
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:25:10 -0400
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Voyager did quite well, but that was decade(s?), not millennia. Technology
> has advanced a bit since than, but the only things humans have built to
> last that long have been the pyramids, which are a bit heavy for a space
> launch.

	An Orion could probably be made to lift something that heavy - I
wouldn't want to be on the continent (or perhaps the planet) it lifts off
from though.

	Anyway we have *much* smaller things that have lasted as long as
the pyramids, many of them inside the pyramids which is probably a harsher
environment than interstellar space.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153122

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2015-10-20 15:42 +0000
Message-ID<OhtVx.104776$iQ4.11716@fx16.iad>
In reply to#153120
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:25:10 -0400
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Voyager did quite well, but that was decade(s?), not millennia. Technology
>> has advanced a bit since than, but the only things humans have built to
>> last that long have been the pyramids, which are a bit heavy for a space
>> launch.
>
>	An Orion could probably be made to lift something that heavy - I
>wouldn't want to be on the continent (or perhaps the planet) it lifts off
>from though.
>
>	Anyway we have *much* smaller things that have lasted as long as
>the pyramids, many of them inside the pyramids which is probably a harsher
>environment than interstellar space.

 The pyramids are a far more gentle environment than interstellar space.

 From _Radiation Hazard of Relativistic Interstellar Flight_ (Oleg G. Semyonov)

  Abstract:

      From the point of view of radiation safety, interstellar space is
      not an empty void. Interstellar gas and cosmic rays, which consist
      of hydrogen and helium nucleons, present a severe radiation
      hazard to crew and electronics aboard a relativistic interstellar ship.
      Of the two, the oncoming relativistic flow of interstellar gas produces
      the most intense radiation. A protection shield will be needed to block
      relativistic interstellar gas that can also absorb most of the cosmic rays
      which, as a result of relativistic aberration, form into a beamed flow
      propagating toward the front of the spaceship.

 Then there is the dust hazard.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_medium

  http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q2720.html

   At 50 percent the speed of light which is the minimum for
   interstellar travel you will cover enough distance in a short
   amount of time, that your liklihood of encountering a large
   interstellar dust grain becomes significant. Only one such impact
   would be enough to cause severe spacecraft damage given the kinetic
   energy involved. 

   ...

   But the situation could well be worse than this if the interstellar
   medium contains lots of ice globules from ancient comets and other things
   we cannot begin to detect in interstellar space. These impacts even at
   0.1c would be fatal...we just don't know what the 'size spectrum' of matter
   is between interstellar 'micron-sized' dust grains, and small stars,
   in interstellar space. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153131

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-10-20 19:07 +0100
Message-ID<20151020190749.45f000136ba2716ef9d877ba@eircom.net>
In reply to#153122
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:42:38 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
> >On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:25:10 -0400
> >Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Voyager did quite well, but that was decade(s?), not millennia.
> >> Technology has advanced a bit since than, but the only things humans
> >> have built to last that long have been the pyramids, which are a bit
> >> heavy for a space launch.
> >
> >	An Orion could probably be made to lift something that heavy - I
> >wouldn't want to be on the continent (or perhaps the planet) it lifts off
> >from though.
> >
> >	Anyway we have *much* smaller things that have lasted as long as
> >the pyramids, many of them inside the pyramids which is probably a
> >harsher environment than interstellar space.
> 
>  The pyramids are a far more gentle environment than interstellar space.

	Hmm - there's oxygen in them, it's nasty corrosive stuff.

>  From _Radiation Hazard of Relativistic Interstellar Flight_ (Oleg G.
> Semyonov)

	Yep that's a problem for people - rather less so for suitably
designed machines.

>  Then there is the dust hazard.
> 
>    At 50 percent the speed of light which is the minimum for
>    interstellar travel you will cover enough distance in a short
>    amount of time,

	If we run at 50% of the speed of light we're not talking about
needing machines good for millenia. If we need millenia then the dust
problem is not a problem.

>    But the situation could well be worse than this if the interstellar
>    medium contains lots of ice globules from ancient comets and other
> things we cannot begin to detect in interstellar space. These impacts
> even at 0.1c would be fatal...we just don't know what the 'size spectrum'

	Even 0.1C does not lead us to needing millenia. Requiring designs
that can last millenia to reach nearby stars implies speeds no more than
0.01C at these speeds dust is much less of a problem.

	All that being said if we want to launch interstellar probes then
the most promising speculative design I've come across is Robert Forward's
starwisp design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starwisp). These are
expected to move at 0.1 to 0.2C and will suffer dust and radiation damage
from which their only defense is being large but sparse and thin, so fast
moving dust will only cause local damage and not impart much energy to the
structure. The hope is that redundancy will take care of the rest.

	The really good part about the design is that the probe itself is
dirt cheap, the expensive bit (the power supply) stays here where it can be
used for other purposes if the starwisp turns out to have fatal
unanticapated problems.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#154699

FromWalter Bushell <proto@panix.com>
Date2015-11-20 21:20 -0500
Message-ID<proto-1227AE.21205520112015@news.panix.com>
In reply to#153116
In article 
<1635495737.467032585.623015.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-septem
ber.org>,
 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Voyager did quite well, but that was decade(s?), not millennia. Technology
> has advanced a bit since than, but the only things humans have built to
> last that long have been the pyramids, which are a bit heavy for a space
> launch.

I appreciate your talent for understatement. But they have to be that
big to store all that grain.

-- 
Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153097

FromDan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date2015-10-19 15:56 -0400
Message-ID<n03hpv$o6$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#153092
Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:

> In article <n030ab$lle$1@dont-email.me>,
>  Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> It's a time for astronomy and some targeted interstellar launches.
>> Yes, I know interstellar surveys take 1000s of years.  So what.
>
> We have no machines that will last hundreds much less thousands
> of years.

In interstellar space?

Okay, I checked.

I'm guessing with power, most other issues could be solved.
However, using an RTG you only get 100s of years.
Assuming you use Americium which has a lower power density,
you might get to 1000 years.

Seems like we still need some magic to be invented like
zero point energy.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153110

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-19 18:43 -0500
Message-ID<000b2bpm3d4uile6qbhq4sgfg2jo2h9853@4ax.com>
In reply to#153097
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:56:46 -0400, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
wrote:
>Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>
>> In article <n030ab$lle$1@dont-email.me>,
>>  Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It's a time for astronomy and some targeted interstellar launches.
>>> Yes, I know interstellar surveys take 1000s of years.  So what.
>>
>> We have no machines that will last hundreds much less thousands
>> of years.
>
>In interstellar space?
>
>Okay, I checked.
>
>I'm guessing with power, most other issues could be solved.
>However, using an RTG you only get 100s of years.
>Assuming you use Americium which has a lower power density,
>you might get to 1000 years.
>
>Seems like we still need some magic to be invented like
>zero point energy.

There are those fictional things called ShipStones.
-- 
JimP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153106

FromWalter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com>
Date2015-10-19 18:00 -0400
Message-ID<n03p62$7p8$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#153070
On 19/10/2015 10:58 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>
> Pointless competition.
>
> Besides that, given the formula:
>
> ESA + Russia > USA
>
> I say, so what?

What completion, It isn't lost on me that the US who once went to the
moon is now buying rides as its only method of getting to low earth orbit.

The other side of this is SPACEX and Vigin/Rutan doing some real access
innovation.

Someone is likely to build a space elevator cable in the next half
century or so.

w..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153107

From"78lp" <78lp@nospam.com>
Date2015-10-20 10:08 +1100
Message-ID<d8lbepFu7lbU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#153063

"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:177555715.466945722.652785.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:20:06 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> I did too.  I'm very disappointed.  Has anyone analyzed moon rock and 
>>> soil
>>> to see what it lacks to be able to grow crops (other than water)?
>>
>> I remember that some lunar material was tested through an attempt to grow 
>> plants
>> in it, and they did very well. This was a news report shortly after the 
>> Apollo 11
>> astronauts returned to Earth, I believe.
>>
>> John Savard
>>
>
> Now I see the ESA is going in with the Russians to build a manned Moon 
> base by 2030.

Bet that never happens.

> Bye-bye US lead in space.

Nope, they still lead with mars and the other stuff. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153055

FromGreymaus <mausg@mail.com>
Date2015-10-18 19:10 +0000
Message-ID<slrnn27ut1.30b.mausg@dmaus.org>
In reply to#153044
On 2015-10-18, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:30:00 AM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0614_wireplanting_2.html
>>> 
>>> "I'm a horticulturist," said Ray Russell, who managed a beautification
>>> program for the city of Owensboro before he retired. "I don't plant by
>>> the moon. I plant by the sun." 
>> 
>>> "The moon does have an obvious effect on the earth," such as the tides,
>>> Durham said. Certain animals reproduce according to the phases of the moon.
>>> When it comes to crop productivity, however, "there's no evidence either way," he said.
>> 
>> And here I thought the article would be about space colonies on the Lunar 
>> surface.
>> 
>
> I did too.  I'm very disappointed.  Has anyone analyzed moon rock and soil
> to see what it lacks to be able to grow crops (other than water)?
>
>

Almost everything, I would think, but crops are grown in water on earth,
with nutrients supplied.


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153061

From"78lp" <78lp@nospam.com>
Date2015-10-19 15:30 +1100
Message-ID<d8j9vnFdglmU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#153044

"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:489271670.466874270.151337.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:30:00 AM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0614_wireplanting_2.html
>>>
>>> "I'm a horticulturist," said Ray Russell, who managed a beautification
>>> program for the city of Owensboro before he retired. "I don't plant by
>>> the moon. I plant by the sun."
>>
>>> "The moon does have an obvious effect on the earth," such as the tides,
>>> Durham said. Certain animals reproduce according to the phases of the 
>>> moon.
>>> When it comes to crop productivity, however, "there's no evidence either 
>>> way," he said.
>>
>> And here I thought the article would be about space colonies on the Lunar
>> surface.
>>
>
> I did too.  I'm very disappointed.  Has anyone analyzed moon rock and soil
> to see what it lacks to be able to grow crops (other than water)?

Yes, nutrients for starters. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153066

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2015-10-19 13:15 +0000
Message-ID<y16Vx.92148$JM4.27309@fx04.iad>
In reply to#153044
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:30:00 AM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0614_wireplanting_2.html
>>> 
>>> "I'm a horticulturist," said Ray Russell, who managed a beautification
>>> program for the city of Owensboro before he retired. "I don't plant by
>>> the moon. I plant by the sun." 
>> 
>>> "The moon does have an obvious effect on the earth," such as the tides,
>>> Durham said. Certain animals reproduce according to the phases of the moon.
>>> When it comes to crop productivity, however, "there's no evidence either way," he said.
>> 
>> And here I thought the article would be about space colonies on the Lunar 
>> surface.
>> 
>
>I did too.  I'm very disappointed.  Has anyone analyzed moon rock and soil
>to see what it lacks to be able to grow crops (other than water)?

 Discussed (relative to the moon ganymede) in _Farmer in the Sky_.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmer_in_the_Sky

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#153050

FromMichael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Date2015-10-18 13:25 -0400
Message-ID<alpine.LNX.2.02.1510181325070.11725@darkstar.example.org>
In reply to#153036
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015, Quadibloc wrote:

> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:30:00 AM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0614_wireplanting_2.html
>>
>>    "I'm a horticulturist," said Ray Russell, who managed a beautification
>>     program for the city of Owensboro before he retired. "I don't plant by
>>     the moon. I plant by the sun."
>
>>   "The moon does have an obvious effect on the earth," such as the tides,
>>    Durham said. Certain animals reproduce according to the phases of the moon.
>>    When it comes to crop productivity, however, "there's no evidence either way," he said.
>
> And here I thought the article would be about space colonies on the Lunar
> surface.
>
Except we had context from the other thread.

   Michael

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web