And this is how the adventure began.
Japan’s Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) will send a transforming robot to the Moon. The space agency announced its plans and revealed the design depicted below today. You’re looking at a device JAXA says will be 80mm in diameter, before transformation, and weighs in at 250 grams. JAXA transforming moonbot. Copyright JAXA …
It's open to debate if natural numbers include zero or not, but if they do, zero would no be divisible by itself.
I'm a computer guy, so it's quite obvious that zero is a natural number.
For example, as we all know the cake is a lie! ... therefore, it is quite possible for you to have zero pieces of cake. It follows on from this that zero must be a natural number.
Having zero beers is also possible, but quite sad. This round's on me.
Why do I suddenly have this dreadful feeling that an ABEND is upon us?
Between both your posts you posit that zero can not be a natural number ("Zero is divisible by all natural numbers" and, because no number is divisible by zero, q.e.d.), and that zero is a quite obviously a natural number.
Could zero be the Schrödinger number?
Since watching WALL-E some 12 years' ago, I have occasionally wondered how difficult it would be to build & send a good many single-function solar-powered robots to the moon to build components for a future space station, although what exactly they could actually do is probably more the pertinent question.
Is this just a matter of the lack of political will and billions required to fund it or are there are real engineering problems that can't be gotten around?
Short Answer: Yes....
Long Answer: Yes and Yes... :P
Single function Robots cant build a house on Earth at this time, so you cant really expect them to build one in a vastly more difficult environment like Space or the Moon. So yes there are real (and pretty huge) engineering problems to this Idea. BUT, if there was enough funding, no doubt solutions could be found, although you are looking at at least a 10 year (more like 20 year) project, and politicians dont think beyond the 3-4 year election cycle, so you wont get any political will to put the Billions in to overcome the robot problem.
As such, I think you are more likely to see modules put together on Earth, launched to the Moon and assembled by humans than everything done by Robots. Humans are vastly more adaptable and can achieve much more, in much less time. And doing it this way, would likely fit within the election cycle funding gamble. There are a lot of projects looking along these lines, but beyond the occasional earth demonstrator I dont think theyve gotten that far (happy to be corrected if someone has more info).
3-D printer = Robot? I've seen a bit of press for 3-D printed houses. Just one example.
It doesn't seem a big leap that one of these rovers on Mars could have a 3-D printing arm. Water for your slurry becomes the issue.
I think you'll find that the 3D printer for these is bigger then the segments it prints (so half the size of the house probably). So first you need a robot bigger than your house section, to print the house section, and then some way to move said large section into position. Plus foundations to lay, doors/windows, etc. to install.
It's a nice starting point, but this is not a robot building the house on location, which is where the hard part comes in....
Still like i said a nice starting point, and good to see there actually making progress on this topic...
Size matters, because the smaller the machine, the more roughness of the surface will be impediments. That’s why lunar & Mars rovers have large diameter wheels.
How do they expect it to move around on the rough surface of the moon, where ~80mm pebbles and lumps and bumps are expected to be commone.
Or did I misread the article, and it’s not supposed to be mobile?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022