Colonizing the Moons

Logistics aside, would it really be possible to colonize the moons of the gas giants?

It's my understanding that planets tend to have radiation belts around them.  Would the massive radiation from a planet like Jupiter make it impossible to live on its moons or are some of them outside this belt?  Or could people just live in protected domes of some sort?

Let's find out!

>>1

We'd just have to live in HEV suits or we'd have to construct biodomes with radiation protection.

>>1
As far as I know, the radiation belts are much closer to the planets than the moons; for example Earth's Van Allen radiation belt ends at about 65,000 km, whereas Earth's moon sits at about 380,000 km. Moons close enough to be affected by a planet's radiation belt would likely experience tremendous tidal forces, making them unuseable for colonization.

Also, you can't make radiation protective domes. The dome would have to be made of solid lead or some other heavy metal to block the radiation; not only is this impractical for obvious reasons, but it would also block sunlight, making the inside of the dome uninhabitable.

I'm very curious about other factors affecting the colonization of moons. This is a fantastic question for /sci/; finally some intelligent scientific discussion.

>>4
Fuck you, you fucking faggot, GTFO

>>5
Needs more 41.9999999 = 42? AMIRITE?

>>6
41.9999999 = 41.9999999

Dig out an installation underground, fill it with air. Produce oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide using Lithium oxide like they do in submarines.

cost = astronomical

There had better be a good reason, such as mining uranium.

>>8
Like OP said, logistics (i assume refering mostly to cost, and time spent getting there) aside

>>9
We could just rocket up 100s of astronauts and equipment and continue to re-supply the moon base once it's built. Easy.

>>8
There had better be a good reason, such as mining uranium.
Are you kidding? That's not a good reason at all. There's already shitloads of uranium on Earth. It's abundant here. Why go all the way to some moon to get it?

>>11
Uranium deposits on earth are like 1 part per million in lumps of rock 500 metres underground.

There is a moon made of pure gold!

>>12
And? You're telling me this is somehow less accessible than one of Jupiter's moons? Guess what genius, 1 part per million 500 metres underground IS an abundance of uranium.

"It has been estimated that there is anywhere from 10,000 to five billion years worth of uranium-238 [on Earth] for use in [fast breeder] power plants [22]."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power

>>14
My point was it gets increasingly difficult to extract uranium as you capitalise on the rich deposits. The easier you can get uranium the more money you get and if you consider the expense needed to collect 1 mg of uranium dispersed into millions of molecules throughout 1 ton of rock and to enrich the uranium that is not uranium 238 it is obvious to see rich deposits = $$$. IF we expend all the rich deposits on earth and are stuck extracting uranium from sea water, it might then be cheaper to go to the moon to extract the rich deposits there.

My point was it gets increasingly difficult to extract uranium as you finnish extracting the rich deposits.**

>>15
Not even close dude. The most expensive component of nuclear power is by FAR the reactors and purification plants themselves; thousands of years worth of uranium to power it is practically free in comparison. Even if you doubled the price of uranium, the cost of nuclear power would go up by only about 5%:
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/cohen.html

You have no idea what you're talking about; you're clearly just guessing, and have no facts whatsoever to back up anything you're saying.

>>17
Welcome to 4chan.

>>17
FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING FAG

>>17
You are extremely stupid if you don't understand my point, so let's try this one point at a time.

Once you mine the rich deposits you are left with deposits which are not as rich.

This means as time goes on and you have less rich deposits left and it is more expensive to extract uranium. If remaining deposits only contain at most 1 part per million it will cost $8000 to extract a pound of uranium. If doubling the cost of uranium increases the cost of nuclear power by 5%, this will increase the cost of nuclear power by 500%.

There is an extremely low density of uranium in the oceans, but a practically infinite supply like you said. However it is more expensive to extract uranium from the oceans than from rich deposits on land. Can you understand the differences between these concepts? The amount of uranium in the ocean and the density of uranium in the ocean?

I'll stop here, give me a hint that you understand these 4 points and are not trolling.

>>20
And you are extremely stupid if you don't understand my point, so let's try this slowly and loudly:

Our uranium deposits won't become that difficult to mine for A BILLION YEARS. Yes, with current trends, in a billion years we will run low and costs will skyrocket. You're a fucking genius, there, are you happy?

Even though it's much more difficult to mine than coal or oil, the cost of the nuclear plants themselves are currently astronomical in comparison, and will continue to be that way for tens of thousands of years; by this time nuclear fission will be long have been replaced by a more economical power source such as nuclear fusion. The cost of mining uranium will never, ever become an issue. It will always be abundant for as long as it is needed, and going to the moons to get it is sheer lunacy.

>>21
We will have to go to the moon.

[aa]　　                 ∧＿∧　　 ／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
  　　　　　　　　　 （　´∀｀）　＜  Emma Nilsdotter is really the voice of britney spears!
  　　　　　　　　／　　　　|　　　 ＼＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
  　　　　　　　/ 　　　 　 .|　　　　　
  　　　　　　 / "⌒ヽ |.ｲ |
  　　　＿＿ |　　　.ノ | || |＿＿
  　 .　　　 ノく＿＿つ∪∪　　 ＼
  　　　＿（（＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿_＼
  　　 ￣￣ヽつ￣￣￣￣￣￣ | |￣

>>21
i always dig up the oceans for my uranus

>>23
[aa]　　                 ∧＿∧　　 ／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
  　　　　　　　　　 （　´∀｀）　＜  Emma Nilsdotter is really the voice of britney spears!
  　　　　　　　　／　　　　|　　　 ＼＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
  　　　　　　　/ 　　　 　 .|　　　　　
  　　　　　　 / "⌒ヽ |.ｲ |
  　　　＿＿ |　　　.ノ | || |＿＿
  　 .　　　 ノく＿＿つ∪∪　　 ＼
  　　　＿（（＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿_＼
  　　 ￣￣ヽつ￣￣￣￣￣￣ | |￣

you could possible make a dome that protects from radiation by passing a huge current through it and using the flux to stop radiation...it would be ALOT more efficient than simply making a huge dome of lead.

cant a electromagnetic field strong enough stop radiation?

cant a faraday cage stop radiation?

>>27
>>28
No. >>26 Mixed up electromagnetic pulse with electromagnetic radiation as he is a retard who gets all his scientific information from forums and TV.

>>26
>>27
>>28
Quick experiment, point a flashlight at the wall and move a magnet next to it. SPOILERS: Nothing happens.

>>30
Yeah, and if you put two balls next to eachother, they won't roll towards eachother, so gravity doesn't exist either, amirite?

Gravity is apparent. Effects of electromagnetic pulses on electromagnetic radiation is not apparent.

>>31
They don't roll towards eachother because of static friction, dipshit. Do it in space and they will. lern2physics

>>33
WOW!!1 Are you saying that it's a flawed experiment??!? Kind of like the one described in >>30?

>>34
There is no such thing as a flawed experiment.

>>35
Fine, flawed conclusion, yada yada.

>>35

There is. It's not as hard as you think, to stuff up an experiment because it was bound for failure from the start. Think variables and biased factors.

>>26 is kind of on the right track, metals are good at blocking electromagnetic radiation due to their high electron density.  If the dome contained super high density plasma, as is found in inertial confinement fusion reactors, you could achieve as good of radiation shielding as a lead dome 10000 times as thick.

aa]　　                 ∧＿∧　　 ／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
  　　　　　　　　　 （　´∀｀）　＜  Emma Nilsdotter is really the voice of britney spears!
  　　　　　　　　／　　　　|　　　 ＼＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
  　　　　　　　/ 　　　 　 .|　　　　　
  　　　　　　 / "⌒ヽ |.ｲ |
  　　　＿＿ |　　　.ノ | || |＿＿
  　 .　　　 ノく＿＿つ∪∪　　 ＼
  　　　＿（（＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿_＼
  　　 ￣￣ヽつ￣￣￣￣￣￣ | |￣
  

>>38
Right, because a magnetic containment dome of high density plasma is a hell of a lot easier to build than a dome of lead. Good fucking thinking.

>>31

balls will touch

>>40


they are, I use one as a home for my guinea pigs :3

>>42
I liek guinea pigs ^___^!