NASA boss says US may lose latest space race with China NASA Administrator Bill Nelson believes China could control territory and resources on the Moon if it lands astronauts and builds critical infrastructure before the US. Founded just under 30 years ago, the China National Space Administration (CNSA) has made incredible progress in space exploration. It sent the first-ever …
But no doubt there is some other strategic resource up there to get the ape man excited
Yes, strategic resources, they are called bragging rights. The US had them and has been neglecting them for some time. Of course it is a race now that China wants some bragging rights too.
By being first in the second race you get whole new bragging rights and the winner may pound his fists on their chest when bragging about it. Just like our long time ago ape ancestors.
Administrator Bill "Ballast" Nelson should be the first one to realize that China and the US have different goals for the moon. In China, they see it as a way to push technology forward through getting there and coming up with novel ways to mine and process materials. The US sees a lunar initiative as a way to create jobs and funnel taxpayer money to the states and coffers of high-power, long standing politicians. Given those goals, the US may still be ahead.
The US might very well end up ahead anyway due to recent economic developments in China.
Xi Jinping is clamping down on the free market system in a move back to Maoist central planning and that will surely damage China's long term economic growth potential so that China will not match and surpass the USA. China also has an ageing population plus it is mishandling its Covid epidemic so producing more economic damage.
It's also worth pointing out that democratic states tend to be open with failures and errors in space whereas the autocracies tend to cover up their mistakes when they can. For example, when a space probe destined for Earth orbit, the Moon or Mars failed, it was just assigned a new Cosmos satellite number.
A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, Liu Pengyu, however, downplayed claims of competition."Some US officials have spoken irresponsibly to misrepresent the normal and legitimate space endeavors of China," Liu told Politico.
"The exploration and peaceful uses of outer space is humanity's common endeavor and should benefit all. China always advocates the peaceful use of outer space, opposes the weaponization of and arms race in outer space, and works actively toward building a community with a shared future for mankind in the space domain. Outer space is not a wrestling ground."
Bravo, China .... ever the cool gentleman and elegant mistress amongst earnest scholars and wayward scoundrels.
But what of the near future, China, in that other contested way out there space place and Live Operational Virtual Environment? Would the following statement be attractively agreeable? It is certainly neither designed nor shared here intentionally to be fractious or contentious.
Our engagement and exploration and exploitation of its other-worldly alien resources will quite naturally render extraordinarily forceful future insights and further novel ingredients for the clear leading advantage that such experience in the progressive delivery of vital modular infrastructure and secure failsafe communicative internetworking supply lines effortlessly provides for invaluable hindsight and almighty reflection and universal comprehension on/into what is much more a Greater IntelAIgent Games Play Arena with ACTive Cyber Threatening Areas, violently destructive and virulently toxic fields reserved and preserved for the capture and suitably just warrior treatment of future undesirables and present barbaric primitives alike.
Q: .... 'Tis the Great NEUKlearer Futures and HyperRadioProACTive IT Derivatives Market Bet to wager and place your monies and shirts on, deciding on whether you realise it more likely to be predominantly a Stealthy Exotic Erotic Eastern Delight rather than primarily a similarly Wild Wacky Western Confection for a New Enlightening Age of Cohabitating Earthly Civilisations disenfranchising of the self-harming destructive disgrace that invents and funds/pimps, pumps and dumps future warring factions?
A: ..... Yes, indeed. IT very definitely can be and therefore most certainly also is.
I'm going to have a look to see if there are enough decimal places on my calculator to see how much mass would need to be removed from the moon and transferred to earth to make a meaningful difference to the moon's orbital period and semi minor axis compared to how it is already changing by tonnes per day.
The quick answer is 0kg.
The Earth spins inside a gravitational field made uneven by the Moon. This causes tidal bulges on Earth that rotate around the planet. Friction from the moving bulges heats the Earth. The energy for that heat comes from the Earth's spin, increasing the length of a day. Conservation of angular momentum requires something else to rotate more: that would be the Moon getting pushed into a higher orbit.
Over long time periods days get an average of 12µs longer per year and the Earth->Moon distance increases by an average of 22mm. Eventually one day will be one Moonth long - 47 current days.
Given the historical speed of Artemis progress Bill is right that they have to increase the pace or the Moon will get too far away for an SLS launch with reduced help from the Earth's spin. Clearly SLS and its predecessors were designed when the Moon was nearer and the Earth span faster. That explains why SLS can only get Orion to NRHO instead of all the way to Low Lunar Orbit.
And ?
If I recall correctly, the Moon is a rather large body (as far as moons go). There's enough space for more than two, unless you're of the "everything is mine" mentality.
The real problem is going to be that, just like petrol on Earth, water is a finite resource on the Moon. It had better be managed better than the Colorado River, else there will be no long-term presence of Man on the Moon.
"There's enough space for more than two, unless you're of the "everything is mine" mentality"
In the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, It's the USA and Soviet Union that have the Moon bases but in reality it will almost certainly be the USA and China with broke Russia being a mere obedient appendage of China.
They also don't worry too much about the cost either. If it needs funding it gets funded. ..... werdsmith
Something exceptionally well learned/copied/stolen from the competition and opposition's playbook/workshop manual, werdsmith, wherever that original may now be stored.
And something which whenever one is not smart enough to recognise is simply needed and accepted and to be treated by all assisted parties as just token, practically unnecessary but nevertheless still vital rewards to a leading supply contractor/single prime principal, effectively guarantees the offer of its proprietary intellectual property flight and metadata base information transfer to that easily conceived and perceived to be both the deadly competition and advanced opposition.
Such a simple strategic error of tactical judgement is thus gravely to be regarded and best completely avoided at whatever the cost for the price exacted by failure is astronomical and virtually incalculable.
Do you think UKGBNI fail spectacularly to be a worthy mega star in that field of empowering endeavour? Scrooges in the most vital of market places and thus destined to forever play second fiddle in flea pit orchestrations of master class events?
"Such a simple strategic error of tactical judgement is thus gravely to be regarded and best completely avoided at whatever the cost for the price exacted by failure is astronomical and virtually incalculable."
My oh! my; what an interesting thought, and why not also relate it to the intent of a present UK citizen . . . soon to move to a new nation and set out to present his work in a new language . . . that would result in at least two primary science subjects, physics and cosmology, being also, exclusively, taught in a new nation's language, such as to exclude all the existing US and UK universities from being the primary source of the new knowledge. How much will that simple strategic error "Cost"? Time remains of the essence.
My oh! my; what an interesting thought, and why not also relate it to the intent of a present UK citizen . . . soon to move to a new nation and set out to present his work in a new language . . . that would result in at least two primary science subjects, physics and cosmology, being also, exclusively, taught in a new nation's language, such as to exclude all the existing US and UK universities from being the primary source of the new knowledge. How much will that simple strategic error "Cost"? Time remains of the essence. ... Chris Coles
Quite so, Chris Coles, ..... and for some is the opportunity to make great fortunes in a foreign land of new customer clients too much of a rewarding temptation to miss and dismiss, although the simple truth nowadays is just as much and probably a great deal more can be achieved and both remotely rewarded and supplied to any consumer anywhere practically autonomously and relatively anonymously whenever Working From Home is virtually providing What The Fuck feeds and seeds and needs via Big Brother Boss FOSS Quantum Communication Channels.
How long before a few more dashes are added encompassing the moon too?
Then as soon as progress allows, lunar landing sites, missile systems and radio warnings "US Space ship you are entering Chinese security zone, leave immediately to avoid misjudgement and wrong consequences."
What you're suggesting is both incredibly complicated and even more expensive and it's just not worth it for the moon. Especially given the fact that within this decade at least three other countries will have demonstrated their ability to land stuff on the moon: Japan, India and South Korea.
I don't mind NASA getting more money but I really don't like the idea of the military getting even more influence over space policy than they already have. Lead by example and put research first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space
"Outer space does not begin at a definite altitude above the Earth's surface. The Kármán line, an altitude of 100 km (62 mi) above sea level,[8][9] is conventionally used as the start of outer space in space treaties and for aerospace records keeping."
I wonder how the US responds when a Russian or Chinese expedition rocks up next to one of their Antarctic bases to set up one of their own? Same situation applies in terms of territorial claims as on the Moon. So why are the US making these sorts of "worries" public with regard to the Moon?
This fellow suffers from the mindset that "If you're not winning then you're losing". Zero sum, in other words. Its what I grew up with and its really a road to nowhere.
Competition is useful but not this 'fight to the death' mindset. The Chinese, for example, have come up with a strategy for managing dust on their Mars lander's solar panels. The obviously learned about the need to do this from the American experience. Now we get to find out whether their approach works and if it doesn't what's wrong with it.
... and I think China fits the bill quite nicely.
I always found it rather strange the US didn't allow China to participate in the ISS due to their space command also being linked to their military.
It does make me wonder how the US Air Force managed to get the X37B working so quickly without working with NASA - the X37 and the space shuttle look remarkably similar for the layman ...
Ah - yes - I remember now - it's OK when the US does it because it's for truth, democracy and the rule of law!
Started as a NASA project:
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
