One of the good things to come out of NASA shutting down is that the unemployed Rocket Scientists have now been hired at places like SpaceX and making more money than ever now.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
I am probably the most anti-waste money on stupid things in space (namely human space exploration including the ISS) at present time. However, after a little deep thought, I realized that this isn't that far-fetched of an idea. As far as composition - we've already demonstrated that we can probe an object in space to detect its composition.
Someone above said that the price of platinum is around the price of gold. Imagine finding a huge chunk of gold up there and being able to bring it into Earth orbit. All your equipment would have to do is break it into chunks to be returned to the Earth. I had done the math - the space shuttle's payload capacity is 50,000 pounds. Each launch is under 500,000,000 dollars. The space shuttle was overly expensive because it had both cargo and human payload capacity. Logically, a vehicle designed ONLY for cargo (and return to Earth) should be able to be sent up for less than that price - and might even be able to be made with increased capacity. Imagine launching something like the Apollo capsules into space - all you'd really need to do is position a craft with an ablative heat shield around a large hunk of the gold/platinum/whatever, and return it to earth - landing strip not necessary - a controlled descent into a shallower part of the ocean, or better yet, middle of the desert. But, a space shuttle type capacity, at present value of gold per ounce, and at similar launch cost, still yields over 100 million dollars profit per launch.
Of course, having 25 tons of platinum hit the market just once per year is likely to greatly drop the value of platinum. Then again, you could replace China as far as having control of the world's markets of rare elements. If you can mine them cheaper, then everyone else goes out of business and relies on you. Then, after everyone else (mostly China) shuts down their mine operations, then you raise the price.
And lastly, for what it's worth - OMG! They're moving around?! I've got bad news for you... The Earth is moving too - yet that doesn't seem to be a problem for mines on Earth.
Last edited:
cybrsage
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2011
- 13,021
- 0
- 0
We are moving at the exact same speed as the Earth - so our relative speed is zero to start up a mine. An asteroid's relative speed is much faster than zero.
Once on it, you are right, the relative speed is the same.
This is absurd. Doing ANY kind of work at all in space is incredibly difficult. Read up on how hard the Hubble servicing missions were, or STS-49, the shuttle mission to repair Intelsat VI. The idea that you can economically mine more minerals in space with current technology is laughable. The closes comparison is probably drilling for oil on the bottom of the ocean, except at least you can get your equipment to the bottom of the ocean for free. Imagine if it cost thousands of dollars a pound just to sink a drill bit. There is absolutely no way this will be economical.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
All exploration is absurd. We had idiots who thought they could profit from sailing due west bypassing a land route. Well that was over half a millennia ago and it still can't be done. What a waste of money.
There's a difference between exploration and a commercial venture that you're hoping to make profitable. I am pro-space exploration, but I am under no illusions that asteroid mining or anything of that nature will become economically feasible until there is some sort of revolutionary breakthrough in propulsion technology.
I am sick and tired of people who don't know what they're talking about comparing crazy space-mining schemes to seafarers in the 1500s. The differences between them are so huge that it is not in any way a meaningful comparison. Right now it costs thousands of dollars per pound to get anything into LEO, and significantly more than that to get it out of Earth orbit. There is no technology on the horizon that promises to change that cost by any really meaningful amount. Until that does change it'll be absurdly expensive to mine for anything in space, and all of the silly comparisons to Christopher Columbus won't change that.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
When there is the demand, the research will be available to provide the new concepts/implementation
If they're serious about this then it's great because I believe that the money invested in technology development will benefit us all. I do not believe that we will see the profitable mining of asteroids within the next few decades. I hope hope I'm wrong but this isn't just a question of building a better mousetrap. We're butting our heads up against the laws of physics.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
If by "mined", you're thinking of lots of refined ores or something, then perhaps you're right. But, if by "mined", all we have to do is break an asteroid into chunks that can be transported back to the surface of the Earth, then see the math I did a couple posts before yours. The wildly overpriced space shuttle was able to bring back many tons of material from orbit. IF you could gradually alter the orbit of something valuable to put it into an orbit around the Earth, then all you'd need to do is develop a mechanism for breaking it into chunks that could be dropped back down to the planet's surface. Someone early in the thread said something to the effect that "it would completely burn up in Earth's atmosphere." That's not even close to true.
Especially if this can be done without having to launch humans, it seems like a very feasible undertaking. Far more feasible (at least without tons of deep thought) than something like setting up a base on the surface of Mars.
It would be very cool if they could extract water from a nearby asteroid. Anyone know what they mean when they say nearby? Closer than the moon?
I think that the ability to produce rocket fuel in space using a solar electrolysis machine would be very interesting. If it was no longer necessary to launch all the rocket fuel from Eath there are all kinds of possibilities. You could fill up a little Soyuz and send it from the ISS to the moon and back!
I think that the ability to produce rocket fuel in space using a solar electrolysis machine would be very interesting. If it was no longer necessary to launch all the rocket fuel from Eath there are all kinds of possibilities. You could fill up a little Soyuz and send it from the ISS to the moon and back!
The problem isn't necessarily breaking up the asteroid, or the economics of launching cargo ships and bringing back the pieces. It's how we get the asteroid into orbit. What would we use - some kind of space tugboat? Are we even technologically capable of this?
Distance isn't really the important thing, what probably matters more is how closely an asteroid's orbit matches the Earth's. Getting a satellite into geostationary orbit actually requires more delta-v than getting it into lunar orbit, even thought the Moon is much further away than GEO.
Sailing sailing over the solar system black in my solar sail asteroid tug canoe.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
I don't see why not. Though, the time scale of such a project is probably longer than most people would think. In fact, with today's technology, I wouldn't even want to attempt to guess how long such a mission might take - I would guess that it's not less than 30 years after the time of an initial launch.
Last edited:
I see no reason why 3D printing and self evolving software coupled with space robot testing can't create machines that operate with any desired capability. All they would need is AI to try different combinations to different tasks, and virtually at first then with real machines.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
Unless you have a harvesting option setup; why not just rip apart the asteroid itself. You are talking about something about the size of a half a basketball court at the most.
To guide the asteroid around, you would have to attach thrusters to it in multiple places to guide its movements.
Otherwise attach a tether and play tugboat.
cybrsage
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2011
- 13,021
- 0
- 0
I think it has a lot to do with having MUCH more money than they know what to do with and wanting to be immoralized as space pioneers. History books will record those who first mine asteroids, etc.
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 13,495
- 2,120
- 126
ermm... someone didn't quite get it.
you rendevouz with the asteroid. set up the drilling equipment, etc ..
by the time you have a payload, the asteroid might be as far as jupiter.
i wasn't talking about rotation; i was talking actual trajectory.
the whole thing isn't impossible .. but it's extremely unlikely. and people talking about it as if it's onna happen next wednesday.. stinks of scam.
you rendevouz with the asteroid. set up the drilling equipment, etc ..
by the time you have a payload, the asteroid might be as far as jupiter.
i wasn't talking about rotation; i was talking actual trajectory.
the whole thing isn't impossible .. but it's extremely unlikely. and people talking about it as if it's onna happen next wednesday.. stinks of scam.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
They have to identify an asteroid that is an earth like orbit and/or nudge it into where the orbit keeps it close to the moon/earth.
As few calculated shots of juice, for something that small, should be able to be calculated out.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter