Our moon with atmosphere?

[FBM]

I was surprised at the "mostly oxygen" statement, so I googled it. There's a smidge more iron than oxygen (Earth, I mean), but I'm still surprised that oxygen is so high. Anyway, I only did 2 univ-level classes in chemistry, and that was over 2 decades ago, so I'd have no idea how to liberate oxygen from SiO2, if that's what the moon has.

It's much easier if there is water on the moon. That's why that recent probe was crashed into a deep crater that never sees the sun. The theory is that there would be large deposits of water-ice.

They have declared that they DID detect water in the dust that was thrown up, so they are fairly confident that there are large quantities of water in the deeper craters. There's also water in the surface soil, according to the tests. So oxygen is available in large amounts, by just electrolysing the melted water, using solar panel power.
But it wouldn't stay as an atmosphere, if you released it. It would just escape into space.

If it could be prevented from escaping, you would still have to have a huge quantity of atmosphere on the Moon, for people to be able to live without a pressurised suit, or building.
Without the pressure of our atmosphere, our body fluids will boil at normal body temperature.
So you don't just need enough oxygen to breathe, you need enough gases to give an atmospheric pressure of 1 bar, for healthy living.

And as the gravity is lower on the Moon, that means that the Moon would need two or three times the depth of gases that there are on the Earth.

Seems hard to avoid building the greenhouses. But the greenhouses would also help trap heat, which would be a good thing, too, wrt human and algae habitability, as well as speeding up the enzymatic reactions that the algae would depend on to break down the silica compounds.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sorry, Thump, but the gases won't be "left behind" if they don't escape Earth's gravity.

Uh, Gawd? I know this. I'm being facetious. I was hoping my point about "face full of smoke" would draw that into focus.

Sorry, pre-coffee I have very little perception of humor.

[mistermack]

Seems hard to avoid building the greenhouses. But the greenhouses would also help trap heat, which would be a good thing, too, wrt human and algae habitability, as well as speeding up the enzymatic reactions that the algae would depend on to break down the silica compounds.

The greenhouses would need to filter out the harmful radiation that our atmosphere removes as well.

It would just be more practical to have underground facilities, pressurised to 1 bar, lit with electricity, and covered with a few feet of soil.
That's about the only way for humans and other life to survive on the moon without a pressure suit.
I suppose you could design a modular pressurised unit, and just keep linking them up till you had most of the moon covered.

But it would never be healthy for humans to live there, your bones would lose density because of the lower gravity.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It would just be more practical to have underground facilities, pressurised to 1 bar, lit with electricity, and covered with a few feet of soil.
That's about the only way for humans and other life to survive on the moon without a pressure suit.

Bore into crater walls. You can have windows that way.

[mistermack]

It would just be more practical to have underground facilities, pressurised to 1 bar, lit with electricity, and covered with a few feet of soil.
That's about the only way for humans and other life to survive on the moon without a pressure suit.

Bore into crater walls. You can have windows that way.

I would build on the plains. Its easier all round.
I would make hexagonal modules, like honeycomb, but with flat bottoms and tops. That way, the equal pressure in the next cell would keep the walls in place. And put a layer of moon dust on the roof. That would hold in the pressure on the ceiling, and provide insulation and protection from cosmic and solar rays. I don't know about lighting it. If you wanted to use sunlight, maybe there are filters or prisms that can spit the harmful stuff from the useful light.
But otherwise, LEDs etc could light it all perfectly well.

I think that most work on the Moon would be done in mines, anyway, so people would be used to working underground. Mining in low gravity might be a lot easier than mining on Earth.
The pit props could be much weaker because the weight on them would be so much less. And the same goes for all of the machines that move the rock around. And you wouldn't have water dripping everywhere. It would be bloody cold though.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Micro- and not-so-micrometeorite hits. I would like several feet of rock over my head, please.

[Rum]

I used to love pictures like these when I was a kid. I even thought I might be one of those guys in those neat spacesuits one day..

[mistermack]

I used to love pictures like these when I was a kid. I even thought I might be one of those guys in those neat spacesuits one day..

It's nice, but I can't work out what the roof is for.
As they have to wear pressure suits, they may as well not have a roof.
And if there was 15 pounds pressure, on every square inch of that roof, it would have to be pretty strong.

It looks good though.
I've only ever dreamed of being in space once. It didn't go well.
We lost all power, and it started getting cold. I knew what that mean't. I was really glad to wake up.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The really believable luna settlements in SciFi are underground. Heinlein got it right.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Sorry, Thump, but the gases won't be "left behind" if they don't escape Earth's gravity.

Uh, Gawd? I know this. I'm being facetious. I was hoping my point about "face full of smoke" would draw that into focus.

Sorry, pre-coffee I have very little perception of humor.

No prob, I was just trying my hand at:

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Good luck with that before 10 am around here.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yeah, so I see. Hmph.

[FBM]

The greenhouses would need to filter out the harmful radiation that our atmosphere removes as well.

It would just be more practical to have underground facilities, pressurised to 1 bar, lit with electricity, and covered with a few feet of soil.
That's about the only way for humans and other life to survive on the moon without a pressure suit.
I suppose you could design a modular pressurised unit, and just keep linking them up till you had most of the moon covered.

But it would never be healthy for humans to live there, your bones would lose density because of the lower gravity.

Ah. Or some of both. Above-ground tubes for radiation-resistant plants, which would help filter and freshen the air, connected to just-below-surface tubes for radiation-sensitive beasties, like us. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/sc ... ctivemoon/

As for bone density loss, yeah. I think the ISS's exercise program can only go so far towards preventing bone loss. What's the record for someone being in space these days? *google* Ah. About 438 days. And that was micro-gravity. It would be quite a bit stronger on the moon, so maybe a person could manage a few years on the moon safely. Maybe.

[mistermack]

As for bone density loss, yeah. I think the ISS's exercise program can only go so far towards preventing bone loss. What's the record for someone being in space these days? *google* Ah. About 438 days. And that was micro-gravity. It would be quite a bit stronger on the moon, so maybe a person could manage a few years on the moon safely. Maybe.

You can have artificial gravity in space, with a spinning space station.
So long as it's greater than 200 metres diameter ( I think from memory ) people don't experience nausea from the spinning motion.
So you can have one orbiting the Moon, and people could work on the Moon for a month, and then have a couple of weeks off in the space station at normal gravity. I would think that something like that would do to prevent bone density loss. A bit like working on an oil-rig.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They demonstrated human powered centrifuges that would probably do the job. One person pedals and another balances out while "just along for the ride". The study suggested that the passenger would actually get more benefit than the "power source."