Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Moon

Scientists Discover 200 Pits On the Moon That Are Always 63F/17C In the Shade. (livescience.com) 52

Posted by EditorDavid from the it's-the-pits dept.
"Lunar scientists think they've found the hottest places on the Moon," reports Live Science, "as well as some 200 'Goldilocks' zones that are always near the average temperature in San Francisco."

Long-time Slashdot reader fahrbot-bot shared their report: The moon has wild temperature fluctuations, with parts of the moon heating up to 260 degrees Fahrenheit (127 degrees Celsius) during the day and dropping to minus 280 F (minus 173 C) at night. But the newly analyzed 200 shaded lunar pits are always always 63 F (17 C), meaning they're perfect for humans to shelter from the extreme temperatures. They could also shield astronauts from the dangers of the solar wind, micrometeorites and cosmic rays.

Some of those pits may lead to similarly warm caves. These partially-shaded pits and dark caves could be ideal for a lunar base, scientists say.

"Surviving the lunar night is incredibly difficult because it requires a lot of energy, but being in these pits and caves almost entirely removes that requirement," Tyler Horvath, a doctoral student in planetary science at the University of California, Los Angeles and lead author on the NASA-funded research published online July 8 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, told Live Science.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Scientists Discover 200 Pits On the Moon That Are Always 63F/17C In the Shade. More

Scientists Discover 200 Pits On the Moon That Are Always 63F/17C In the Shade.

Comments Filter:

  • You mean it's friggin' cold [quoteinvestigator.com]?

  • 17C is too chilly for me, can you find a 21C pit for me, please?

  • Lunar Gateway (Score:3)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Sunday July 31, 2022 @11:48AM (#62749238)

    Shut up and build a lunar base already. And btw, I think I would prefer living on the Moon instead of Mars. Though Mars may be good for a visit. Less gravity on the moon, though with a slightly higher meteor risk?

    • The gravity being low is a problem for us beings who evolved to live in 1G. It's probably less of a problem on Mars.

      • Low gravity isn't a big problem, we got much of that figured out with ISS. Like many things in government there's an acronym for the problems we face on survival outside of Earth's atmosphere, NASA called it RIDGE.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
        https://www.nasa.gov/sites/def... [nasa.gov]

        These can be summarized with the acronym âoeRIDGE,â short for Space Radiation,
        Isolation and Confinement, Distance from Earth, Gravity fields, and Hostile/Closed
        Environments.

        Gravity is a problem, that's why it is in the acronym. But on the moon there is at least some gravity so the problem becomes much smaller. With the higher gravity of Mars the problem gets lower. Radiation becomes a smaller issu

        • Low gravity isn't a big problem [...] Gravity is a problem, that's why it is in the acronym.

          Okay

          But on the moon there is at least some gravity so the problem becomes much smaller. With the higher gravity of Mars the problem gets lower.

          That's what I said, yeah.

          Of all the problems for human survival on the moon or Mars the problem of gravity is low to non-existent.

          Complete bollocks.

          • I should have been more precise and called it a solved problem. Of all the problems of humans living outside of Earth's atmosphere the one problem we have solved with considerable data to show it is a solved problem is that of gravity. We have seen people live in micro-gravity conditions for months at a time and return to Earth with very little time needed to become re-acclimated.

            On a mission to Mars the astronauts would be expected to perform strength exercises so they aren't helpless for days or weeks o

        • Of all the problems for human survival on the moon or Mars the problem of gravity is low to non-existent. The time to and from the moon and Mars would be where an astronaut would have to contend with the issues of gravity, not just the lack of it to make it difficult to perform their daily routine but the sudden restoration of gravity once they leave the craft and land on a big rock like the moon, Mars, or Earth

          And why did you think he mentioned gravity as a problem. It is a major problem if those humans ever want to return to Earth gravity. Unless you intend that all humans that go to the moon must stay there they rest of their lives, it is a problem. Stays as short as a year in ISS have shown a large number of effects [sciencefriday.com]

          • And if people DO plan to spend the rest of their lives on the moon or Mars, then you're almost certainly talking a permanent colony.

            And a colony means children developing in low gravity. That promises to be a much larger problem than adults just surviving it.

        • But on the moon there is at least some gravity so the problem becomes much smaller.

          We don't actually know that. This is a pure guess on your part. We do not know when a small gravity field is large enough to make the problem "much smaller" and it may well be that 1/6 G is not sufficient.

          Throwing wishful thinking at a problem is no solution to it.

          • Agreed. We have some good reasons to believe that even lunar gravity should provide a substantial improvement in some aspects of microgravity health problems.

            But there's still a lot of ground to cover between that and it being a "much smaller" problem overall.

            There are some reasons to be hopeful, but until we have people living there for prolonged periods we won't really know how severe the impacts are.

      • We may have evolved to live in 1G, but my smartphone connects at 3G.

  • From the fine article:

    That same process happened billions of years ago when massive volcanic events on the moon created the famously dark lava fields on the lunar surface called "maria," which is Latin for seas.

    That's what they call "maria"? Must be a regional thing, on Earth we call the wind "maria".
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • Missing the point entirely (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cyga74 ( 7375032 ) on Sunday July 31, 2022 @12:08PM (#62749276)
    Caves are good radiation shielding, and for some temperature control, but thermal engineering on the moon is trickier than you might think, and there are lots of reasons you might not want to be in a cave. Plus, caves tend to be in Mare, and the poles are highlands material, which is thought to have little to no lava caves. The reason to go to the poles is not just the water. We know astonishingly little about the location, state, or how to mine that water anyway. The reason to go to the poles on the moon is that you can be in sunlight for months at a time, instead of the 14 day day/night cycle everywhere else on the moon. NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate in actively working these problems. https://lsic.jhuapl.edu/ [jhuapl.edu] if you are interested in joining, or in more info.

    • Re:Missing the point entirely (Score:5, Informative)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Sunday July 31, 2022 @05:05PM (#62750078) Homepage Journal

      I wonder if we will end up staying very long on the Moon anyway. It's not ideal as a base, not just because of the awkward day/night cycle but because the regolith wrecks everything. Due to not having an atmosphere or water, the regolith doesn't get eroded and retains its sharp edges. One of the major issues with extending the Apollo surface missions was that the equipment, the EVA suits, the rover, the drills, the cameras, it all got wrecked by the dust. The suits in particular were basically worn out by the time they lifted off.

      Some stuff is easier to do in gravity, but the down-sides are considerable.

      • I suspect we will. It's essentially the ultimate industrial asteroid, 27x more massive than the entire asteroid belt combined, and conveniently located right next door to Earth. Asteroids are likely to have a similar sharp dust problem, potentially worse without significant gravity to help it settle, so it's a problem we'll have to solve if we want to get at their rich deposits of precious metals.

        The lunar regolith is a rich industrial resource in its own right. ~43% oxygen by mass, and pushing 10% of bo

    • If the location maintains a steady 63F, then doesn't thermal engineering basically amount to regulating your IR emissions into space? And a mylar "tarp" over your base would do that beautifully for anything on the surface.

      What tricky thermal engineering challenges do you see with underground construction? Subsurface temperature probes have shown that temperatures become roughly constant only 1m below the surface. And I've seen estimates that those temperatures should be as high as 23C (73F) at the equato

      • And a mylar "tarp" over your base would do that beautifully for anything on the surface. [...]

        Subsurface temperature probes have shown that temperatures become roughly constant only 1m below the surface.

        For radiation shielding, you need about 3m of "dense rock equivalent" around your living space (so, 4-5m of uncompacted regolith ; balance your energy investment between compacting, sintering and shovelling).

        So, unless you're planning on your taikonauts dieing of cancer before finishing their 5-year post

        • Absolutely. But it seems that few of the early outpost plans are even considering doing that, and early mission durations will likely be much shorter than for the ISS.

          Hopefully it won't be too long before we get comfortable operating earth-moving equipment on the moon. Then we can get serious about building real habitats and industrial capacity.

          There's another benefit to building underground - something unique to planets. You can use gravity to hold your air in. On the moon it takes a depth of 20m of ba

          • I seem to recall hearing that stable lava tubes could be miles across on the moon.

            I think we've talked about this before. As a caver and a geologist, I am extremely dubious about both the bulk mechanical strength of the observed cave roofs - which have, after all collapsed under their own weight in order for us to be able to see them - and the "gas-tightness" of the walls (measuring the porosity and permeability of rock to gases having been part of my pay cheque since the mid-90s).

            You might want more tradi

            • I think we may have, and I stand by my assertions.

              The gas-tightness of the natural walls is irrelevant - it's not going to be perfect, so you'll need to add a gas-impermeable layer regardless. What's gained is that unlike an inflatable habitat on the surface, the gas-impermeable layer doesn't need to be reinforced enough to support the massive tensile forces that rapidly accumulate when subjecting large areas to 10 tons/m^2 of atmospheric pressure. It only has to be strong enough to support the forces tha

              • Falling rocks in that situation are also completely unrealistic

                I'll see you at the FAI (Fatal Accident Inquiry), probably with you in the dock. (Is killing an employee through reckless disregard of safety considerations a criminal offence in your country? It is here. I've assisted at the trade union in taking cases to court.)

                As for collapsing - you're taking a structure that hasn't yet fallen down,

                How do we know there is a cave to look for? Generally because a "skylight" has been detected in a satellite sur

  • Who cares what the average temperature is? San Francisco probably has the same average temperature as New York. The issue is not the average, but the standard deviation.

    • Who cares what the average temperature is?

      Nobody, when the temperature is constant. It's the same thing.

      But the newly analyzed 200 shaded lunar pits are always always 63 F (17 C)

      It's so always 17C they said it twice. (yes it's like that in the article too)

      That's the constant temperature in those places. Comparing to the average of San Francisco is just for people who don't understand C or F... whoever they might be ?

  • The Moon has basically no atmosphere, this temperature they are talking about - what is it? The temperature of the Moon's soil? Not much of a consolation if any.

    • The Moon has basically no atmosphere, this temperature they are talking about - what is it? The temperature of the Moon's soil?

      Yes.

      Not much of a consolation if any.

      Huh? It's the temperature you'd be at if you build a little pressurized habitat-dome there.

      It wouldn't take much to warm it up, either.

  • "Surviving the lunar night is incredibly difficult because it requires a lot of energy, but being in these pits and caves almost entirely removes that requirement," Tyler Horvath, a doctoral student in planetary science

    This claim is not in the paper and is offered without any support, but is suspicious as the only way heat can be lost is a vacuum is radiation, multi-layer radiation shields are a well known technology, and actual lunar modules will continually generate heat from their internal processes (like lighting and human metabolism). Looking at an actual study of temperature regulation on a lunar base [tmpmozilla...0004815pdf] indicates that "surviving the lunar night" is not incredibly difficult at all that does not require a lot of energy

  • That's obviously not air temperature, since there is no atmosphere in the Moon. It must be the temperature of the ground.
    • Not quite. Each cubic centimetre of moon atmosphere still has about 1,000,000 molecules. Many orders of magnitude less than earth, but enough to still have a temperature. But you are right in that what really matters is the thermal resistance from the ground to your suit and the suit to the very weak moon air.

  • I expect a land rush!

  • is a harsh mistress.

    No water ice in those caves. Somebody will have to make a decision about which problem is worse.

  • There is no atmospheric temperature in space as atmospheric temp. is a property of convection which does not exist in a vacuum.

    They must be talking about surface heating in the moon's soil and rocks and YMMV when building a base there

  • The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer on the Moon.

Slashdot Top Deals

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Close