China Claims It's Discovered a New Mineral in Its 2020 Samples from the Moon (scmp.com) 52
China is claiming it discovered a new lunar mineral in moon samples it retrieved in 2020. From the South China Morning Post:
The mineral, called Changesite-(Y), was found in rock and dust samples retrieved from the moon by China's Chang'e-5 mission, the nation's first mission to return a lunar sample, which launched in 2020.
A research team from the Beijing Research Institute of Uranium Geology, a subsidiary of the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), isolated a single crystalline particle of the material from more than 140,000 lunar particles using hi-tech processes, including X-ray diffraction, according to Wang Xuejun, a party official with the CNNC. The particle was about 10 microns in diameter, or about one-tenth of a human hair, Wang told a press conference on Friday....
Meanwhile, Wang added that the research team had for the first time measured the concentration of a future fusion energy source, in the lunar sample. "It provides fundamental scientific data for future assessment of helium-3 in lunar samples and their exploration," Wang said.
If confirmed, it would provide "more basic scientific data for the evaluation and development of lunar resources," according to an executive with the China Atomic Energy Authority, while also deepening mankind's knowledge of the solar system. (It would be the sixth new mineral discovered on the moon.)
Speaking at a press conference, he told the audience that China "has also become the third country to retrieve lunar samples and discover new lunar minerals after the U.S. and Russia." The article points out that China hopes to land another sample-collecting probe to the moon "around 2024," and that a senior lunar program designer said China "could" land astronauts on the moon by 2030.
A research team from the Beijing Research Institute of Uranium Geology, a subsidiary of the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), isolated a single crystalline particle of the material from more than 140,000 lunar particles using hi-tech processes, including X-ray diffraction, according to Wang Xuejun, a party official with the CNNC. The particle was about 10 microns in diameter, or about one-tenth of a human hair, Wang told a press conference on Friday....
Meanwhile, Wang added that the research team had for the first time measured the concentration of a future fusion energy source, in the lunar sample. "It provides fundamental scientific data for future assessment of helium-3 in lunar samples and their exploration," Wang said.
If confirmed, it would provide "more basic scientific data for the evaluation and development of lunar resources," according to an executive with the China Atomic Energy Authority, while also deepening mankind's knowledge of the solar system. (It would be the sixth new mineral discovered on the moon.)
Speaking at a press conference, he told the audience that China "has also become the third country to retrieve lunar samples and discover new lunar minerals after the U.S. and Russia." The article points out that China hopes to land another sample-collecting probe to the moon "around 2024," and that a senior lunar program designer said China "could" land astronauts on the moon by 2030.
finding and securing Helium-3 fuel sources (Score:1)
For the fusion power generator that doesn't exist. I feel like our Moon exploration puts the cart before the horse.
Re: (Score:2)
> As opposed to going to the moon to plant a flag for dick-measuring and fucks sake? Hit a golf ball and go dune hopping in a buggy?
Armstrong and Aldrin wanted to take scientific measurements and grab samples but NASA told them they were there to play 18 holes and that's it.
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to going to the moon to plant a flag for dick-measuring ?
Ah! That explains why NASA is making so much fuss about including a black man on the next moon landing.
Re: (Score:1)
Why? We know fusion exists, we know that Helium-3 is probably best method for it that isn't totally impossible.
So if finding/using/refining 3He is part of our moon missions, then why not?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
We know fusion exists in fucking STARS. The gravitational confinement concept is well proven. Magnetic, inertial, or whatever, not so much.
Nobody's gotten close to break-even even with the D-T reaction, let alone figured out how to build an actually useful power generator around the thin, ultra-hot, ultra-delicate plasma with a bunch of big unwieldy magnetic containment stuff around it.
Helium 3 is a LOT harder to fuse than those hydrogen isotopes. Like after you have hydrogen working, you could easily have
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Kim Jung-Un doesn't defecate. So unless you're some crazy right-wing conspiracy theorist who thinks the government is lying, then he has achieved a sustained internal nuclear reaction. Korea (they're both the same) has achieved what no other nation has.
Re: (Score:2)
Kim Jung-Un doesn't defecate. So unless you're some crazy right-wing conspiracy theorist who thinks the government is lying, then he has achieved a sustained internal nuclear reaction. Korea (they're both the same) has achieved what no other nation has.
Can someone please mod this +1 Funny? It's the best thing I've seen today.
There is one thing... (Score:1)
If you had a giant tank of helium 3 out in the yard today, you couldn't do anything useful with it at all,
I'll bet you could actually charge a substantial premium for filling children's balloons with it, since they'd have 3x as much lift!
But yeah as far as fusion goes, the only time we'll have fusion on Earth is in 7.9 billion years or so when the Sun expands to envelop the Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
Hehe.
When the sun's expanding that's because the fusion is failing, and the outer layers have no fusion at all. So. Not even then!
Re: (Score:1)
When the sun's expanding that's because the fusion is failing, and the outer layers have no fusion at all. So. Not even then!
Damn it, not even the Sun is able to get fusion to the Earth!
Re: (Score:2)
But yeah as far as fusion goes, the only time we'll have fusion on Earth is in 7.9 billion years or so when the Sun expands to envelop the Earth.
Not likely because fusion happens at the core of the sun, not the outer layers. Also, fusion is happening all the time on Earth. Fusors are a thing, and children sometimes build them for science fairs. Not to mention that it sometimes happens from cosmic rays, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If you had a giant tank of helium 3 out in the yard today, you couldn't do anything useful with it at all, and that's likely to stay true for at least decades, if not centuries or forever. Lack of fuel is not the limiting factor for fusion, let alone lack of that fuel.
Uh, what about filling balloons? Making your voice all squeaky?
- Warning, make sure there's someone around to perform mouth to mouth and get oxygen back into your lungs if you overdo it on the squeaky voice, inert gases may displace both oxygen and CO2 from your lungs. C02 is the gas that actually regulates breathing and creates the sensation of suffocation. If you have not been inhaling enough oxygen, you'll run out of CO2 as well and your lungs won't know that they even need to breathe and you'll just ple
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct that CO2 initiates the breathing reflex, but you're flat out incorrect if you think the body is not acutely aware of hypoxia.
Re: (Score:2)
Oxygen deprivation is not a pleasant experience.
I suppose that depends on perspective and the individual. Generally, without buildup of CO2 making it feel like your lungs are going to explode, oxygen deprivation is like being drunk or taking a sedative. Often people experience euphoria, but they can also experience irritability.
You are correct that CO2 initiates the breathing reflex, but you're flat out incorrect if you think the body is not acutely aware of hypoxia.
At the level of individual cells, maybe, but that seldom makes it to the conscious level. When was the last time that you experienced any conscious unpleasantness from, for example, resting on a limb and cutting off blood supply?
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose that depends on perspective and the individual. Generally, without buildup of CO2 making it feel like your lungs are going to explode, oxygen deprivation is like being drunk or taking a sedative. Often people experience euphoria, but they can also experience irritability.
It often involves panic. Intense panic.
At the level of individual cells, maybe, but that seldom makes it to the conscious level. When was the last time that you experienced any conscious unpleasantness from, for example, resting on a limb and cutting off blood supply? There are unpleasant sensations involved, but they happen when you shift and blood flow returns. One of the symptoms of lack of oxygen is specifically lowered awareness. Someone trained in diving, etc. might recognize the symptoms and panic, but most people are just going to get confused, probably kind of dumb and happy, then fall asleep. Then, the lungs, whose cells might be aware at some level that they're starved for oxygen, still don't do anything because there isn't a high enough level of CO2 to tell them to operate.
Your limb is not your brain.
Symptoms of hypoxemia (low blood oxygen):
Headache
Restlessness
Anxiety
Confusion
Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath (dyspnea)
Rapid heart rate (tachycardia)
It is a myth that oxygen deprivation is a fun way to go.
Re: (Score:2)
It often involves panic. Intense panic.
If you're aware that it's happening. If you're a diver, maintaining careful awareness of your physical condition, then panic is a lot more likely than if you're a random partygoer, huffing helium balloons.
Your limb is not your brain.
That is true. It's also frequently stated that your brain has no pain receptors, however.
I will also note that hypoxemia is usually caused by disease. Even a diver is usually going to experience a more gradual decline in supplied oxygen. Plus, in both cases of disease and a diver running out of air, the CO
Re: (Score:2)
If you're aware that it's happening. If you're a diver, maintaining careful awareness of your physical condition, then panic is a lot more likely than if you're a random partygoer, huffing helium balloons.
You can't back that back-of-the-napkin statistical assertion.
Certainly it's related to rate of central nervous dysfunction progression.
If unconsciousness comes quickly enough, you're likely unaware of what's going on.
If it's slow, however, you are aware.
That is true. It's also frequently stated that your brain has no pain receptors, however.
Nobody anywhere claimed that the problem was nociceptive (is that even a word?)
The problem is that the brain is self-aware of its own dysfunction, and in the average person, time to dwell on that leads to panic. Particularly as symptoms like headache, ta
Re: (Score:2)
You can't back that back-of-the-napkin statistical assertion.
Certainly it's related to rate of central nervous dysfunction progression.
If unconsciousness comes quickly enough, you're likely unaware of what's going on.
If it's slow, however, you are aware.
I'm talking specifically about the case where someone is directly breathing in helium from a balloon repeatedly, displacing both oxygen and CO2 in their lungs. They breathe in helium, breathe out a mix of CO2 and helium (while talking in a squeaky voice, breathe back in helium, then breathe out their dwindling CO2 for a few rounds. If they realize what's happening, then they will probably stop, but it's going to happen pretty quickly.
Also, I think that there is not a big intersection between people who will
Re: (Score:2)
It would be ridiculous to wait until we get fusion working and then wait more decades to figure out how to get He-3.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:finding and securing Helium-3 fuel sources (Score:4, Insightful)
My skepticism is colored because I was a child in the summer of 89 and we were all very excited about fusion [wikipedia.org]. Popular media was talking about how society was going to change with fusion and we were convinced we were on the cusp of everyday fusion. To the degree that we had popular conspiracy theories that big oil was trying to hide the truth of just how close to fusion we were.
That was 33 years ago. Turns out fusion is very hard, and for years lab reactors measured runtimes in seconds, only recently have we been able to run them for several minutes. [smithsonianmag.com] I'm convinced we're a long way off from sustained fusion reactions suitable for running a moonbase with necessary facilities to recharge equipment and even synthesize chemical propellent for rockets, landers, or MMU. Maybe Mg-CO2 propellant from some pretty severe processing of basalt, maybe just cook off some gas from the basalt and compress it for directional thrusters. Once you have cheap energy it opens up a whole slew of possibilities. But it's so far off.
I view every mission that spends serious money searching for H3 on the Moon as cover for something else. The US and Chinese government can't really interested in H3, it has no immediate purpose and it can be searched for at a later date still in time for any fusion-reactor-on-the-Moon mission. Because building and planning a mission takes years. Show me a lab reactor that can run for 90 days and small enough to for a rocket to lift and we can focus on qualifying a new design and search for a good H3 site while we build it.
What are governments doing on the Moon if not for useless H3? That's what I'd like to know. Is it just a little light science and curiosity? Friendly competitive spirit between the world's space powers? A more nefarious search for military sites in violation of treaties leading us to a new space cold war?
I believe a space Cold War is actually more likely to occur before we have practical reliable fusion power in space. I say this because we can already build working fission power plants and radioactive decay power modules and could conceivably place them on the Moon or in orbit. The political climate on Earth can turn to shit much more quickly than we could possibly crack the nut of fusion power.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes sense to start now to learn how to do it. Even if they don't line up, we'd have learnt a lot out of it and do other things with the new knowledge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hard proof of cold fusion is discussed in this interview showing excess helium was detected in cold fusion experiments. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
That the cold fusion is often irreproducible suggests that microscopic or nano-scale features or defects in the palladium may be in play. No other metal that has been tried has worked, I think Japan spent a decade looking. There's not enough palladium to power the world, so the phenomenon would need to be implemented in a more common metal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Nah. They will make a virus out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, the oil extraction industry. what a smart example of a long vision pivotal achievement for humanity ... if we manage to survive it.
Not Chinesium? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Xit? Surely that would please President and Paramount leader!
Re: (Score:2)
They wouldn't use the English name for China if they did, but actually the name is derived from the Chinese moon goddess Chang'e.
Interesting that they didn't name it after China. Nihonium is named after Japan, or "Nihon" in Japanese. And of course there is americium.
Glad to be dead... (Score:2)
Yay for Capitalism and free markets! (Wave flag of your country here)
You heard it here first, by which I mean, I read H.G. Wells, "The Time Machine".
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the opening to Start Trek VI:
Re: Glad to be dead... (Score:1)
Moon them (Score:2)
China. Not minerals.
Now you know why NASA is going back to the moon, with a permanent base this time.
Beat the Rooskies, then slashed the budget. No pressure for decades. Oops, gotta light a fire under our ass again.
Where Are The Lunar Mining Entrepreneurs? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not to mine helium-3, or water, or any other material that we already have on Earth and would require currently non-existence remote hard vacuum refining equipment, but just to collect moon rocks and regolith (aka "moon dust").
Samples of from the Moon are extremely limited on Earth, and access to them is very limited as well. None of the samples collected by the U.S., USSR, or The only sample originating from the Moon that are available for sale are bits that arrived here by natural processes. Lunar meteorite samples run up to $300/g, the only Moon rocks you can buy.
If "asteroid mining" outfits can be taken seriously they should be clearing the very low bar of a bringing back Moon rocks. Simply by scooping them up from the nearby body they will acquire materials far more valuable than the mundane resources like cheap platinum (now down to a measly $27/g). You can currently put a mission into GTO orbit for $14/g (Falcon 9) so there is considerably upside available there depending on the mass fraction of that for a sample return, plus the cost of your mission hardware.
If they can't make the numbers work for just collecting rocks on the Moon, asteroid mining is a pipe dream and the outfits claiming to be devoted to that are just a hobby for tech billionaires to dump their excess cash.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a sustainable business model. If a company develops the technology to do it and starts brining back enough moon rock to cover their costs, the price of it will fall as it becomes more common. And then other companies and NASA will be bringing it back too as their lunar programmes advance.
Harvesting/Mining Moon should be forbiden... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Until it's confirmed outside of China (Score:2)
It's bullshit. China's most copious export.