Is it legal to go to the moon?

monkeyfudge · 29-12-2008 07:01PM

Kernel wrote: »

Monkeyfudge, do you think he's gonna build this in his back garden?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvWHnK2FiCk

Who are we to stand in the way of a man and his simple dreams.

galwayrush · 29-12-2008 07:03PM

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Who are we to stand in the way of a man and his simple dreams.

He'll never get it past the County Council,

nobodythere · 29-12-2008 07:12PM

The moon doesn't exist. It's just me using a torch to fool you!

Kernel · 29-12-2008 07:50PM

monkeyfudge wrote: »

Who are we to stand in the way of a man and his simple dreams.

I like smashing dreams. Crushing enemies, seeing them driven before me and hearing the lamenting of the women. It's a hobby of mine!

skyhighflyer · 29-12-2008 10:21PM

[QUOTE=1979 United Nations Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and
Other Celestial Bodies]

Article 11:

The Moon is not subject to national appropriation by any claim of sovereignty,
by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.[/QUOTE]

There's nothing in there to say you can't go to the moon, so yes, it's probably legal to do so. There's a prohibition on States claiming ownership of the moon but it doesn't say anything about individuals being prohibited to stake out a spot.

KnifeWRENCH · 29-12-2008 11:20PM

I'm sure there are substances out there that will give you the illusion that you're on the Moon. But these would certainly be illegal.

no.1 · 29-12-2008 11:27PM

I own a square kilometre of the moon you can come stay in my gaff.

deleriumtremens · 29-12-2008 11:57PM

Theres no such thing as the moon, pfft

KnifeWRENCH · 30-12-2008 12:07AM

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Theres no such thing as the moon, pfft

So it is just the back of the Sun?
Egad! That janitor was right... :eek:

Homer Sexual · 30-12-2008 12:36AM

Holy crap! 5 pages! I went looking in Astromomy & Space, as I thought that's where i posted this. I thought they deleted it!

Van Allen Belt: Don't worry, I looked into it, and 30 mins of exposure is harmless.

Some people need to read my OP again. I'm modifying a light aircraft with radiation shielding, and everything else I need. I don't need that much air supply or food. I'm not planning on going for long. I recently lost my job, so I don't really care about returning. I've no family or friends so I won't be missed. I know it's a long shot, but i'll bring a radio and my laptop to see if I can get any knid of signals. I'll modify a microwave dish and router to use with my ethernet port. See what happens.

KerranJast · 30-12-2008 12:39AM

There's nothing to stop private individuals going into space. It's a bit like the New World. No one owns it until people actual live on it and have guns to protect it. Until such stage as the US/China/EU/India/Google have a Moon base that's armed, you can do whatever the hell you like.

Oh a lesson 101 of space travel (and basic physics) it takes the same amount of force to negate the gravitational pull of the Earth no matter what the mass of the object being launched e.g. a similar sized rocket is needed to put the Shuttle into space as a small satellite. The only difference is the shuttle needs to go further out and requires more fuel for orbital manoeuvers, space walks and such and such.

monkeyfudge · 30-12-2008 12:44AM

Homer Sexual wrote: »

Van Allen Belt: Don't worry, I looked into it, and 30 mins of exposure is harmless.

How do you plan to get there in 30 minutes?

Homer Sexual · 30-12-2008 12:47AM

no no it only takes 30 mins to pass though it. Takes a few days to get to the moon.

noel farrell · 30-12-2008 12:58AM

hi i passed through it today its in co kildare

BendiBus · 30-12-2008 01:14AM

This video may be of some assistance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDa25M-de70

The_B_Man · 30-12-2008 01:17AM

So what if u dont have enough thrust/EV to get out into space? Is it like hittin a glass ceiling and u cant get any further? Would ya be flying up then all of a sudden *clunk* and you stop in your tracks, and end up looking like a fly stuck in a shop window?

30-12-2008 01:45AM

galwayrush wrote: »

Speaking of thrust, would one sixth dose of Viagra do on the moon?:p

Seeing as how the OP's going to be the only person there, probably not a whole lot.

nobodythere · 30-12-2008 03:10AM

KerranJast wrote: »

Oh a lesson 101 of space travel (and basic physics) it takes the same amount of force to negate the gravitational pull of the Earth no matter what the mass of the object being launched e.g. a similar sized rocket is needed to put the Shuttle into space as a small satellite. The only difference is the shuttle needs to go further out and requires more fuel for orbital manoeuvers, space walks and such and such.

Ah no.

F=ma -> Force needed by rocket of mass m to move at acceleration a. If mass goes up, force needed goes up.

The reason they need similar sized rockets is because the fuel takes up most of the weight

craiginireland · 30-12-2008 03:20AM

Practical Question: With that whole zero gravity thing going on, what happens when you need to use the toilet?

pfishfood · 30-12-2008 03:22AM

Dont know about the legality. But its one hell of a way to head through the pearly gates:D

KerranJast · 30-12-2008 03:24AM

grasshopa wrote: »

Ah no.

F=ma -> Force needed by rocket of mass m to move at acceleration a. If mass goes up, force needed goes up.

The reason they need similar sized rockets is because the fuel takes up most of the weight

Ah no.

The velocity required for any single body to "escape" the gravitational influence of any other body is dependent only on the mass of the second body, that is, the body being "left behind."

I can print the long Applied Maths derivations I had to sit through back in the day but I'd bore everyone to death suffice is to say they are a lot more complicated that F=ma. F=ma is warped when you're dealing with bodies of planetary size.

The Bollox · 30-12-2008 03:26AM

Elephant Monkey wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=390WaPcxnFI

Have a look :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=390WaPcxnFI

and I thought Armageddon was bad...

Oswald Osbourne · 30-12-2008 04:10AM

Elephant Monkey wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=390WaPcxnFI

Have a look :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=390WaPcxnFI

I imdb'd Billy Bob and the first guess I went for was "Manure (2009)". I was surprised as anyone when this didn't turn out to be the corresponding title.

S.I.R · 30-12-2008 06:48AM

some one you may meet in space

Agent Smith · 30-12-2008 07:54AM

robinph wrote: »

Rockall has already been claimed by the UK so as to stop the Ruskies putting a nuclear base there. Some poor sod had to spend a week(?) sitting on the rock on his own.

Apparently they don't own it

Dáil &#201 wrote: »

Written Answers - Rockall Island.

Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding the ownership of Rockall Island off the Irish coast; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7283/04]

Mr. Cowen: Concern in regard to the issue of Rockall arose in the past from then unresolved fears that jurisdiction over Rockall and similar rocks and Skerries was thought to be central to the mineral rights in the adjacent sea bed and to fishing rights in the surrounding seas. However, during the course of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, the Irish delegation worked hard to establish a satisfactory legal regime applicable to islands. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was adopted at Montego Bay at the conclusion of the conference on 10 December 1982, provides at Article 121 paragraph 3 that, “Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf”.
Article 121(3) applies to Rockall. Ireland ratified the convention on 21 June 1996. The United Kingdom acceded to the convention on 25 July 1997. It is accordingly accepted by both States that Rockall cannot be used as a basis for delimiting their respective continental shelves or fisheries zones. While the United Kingdom continues to claim jurisdiction over Rockall, this claim is not accepted by Ireland. Each country remains aware of the position of the other.

If thats not my Tax Euros at work, i don't know what is?

nobodythere · 30-12-2008 07:25PM

KerranJast wrote: »

Ah no.
I can print the long Applied Maths derivations I had to sit through back in the day but I'd bore everyone to death suffice is to say they are a lot more complicated that F=ma. F=ma is warped when you're dealing with bodies of planetary size.

What do you mean the body being left behind? Like the launch rocket?

Big Chief · 30-12-2008 07:28PM

maybe you should give lsd a try, better buzz, same feeling and you get to live afterwards...

although by the looks of the post it seems as though you possibly have overdosed on lsd

Ross_Mahon · 30-12-2008 07:32PM

Lets just say i want to build a huge moon base, Will i need planning permission up there? It has nothing to do with blowing the earth up...just ermm...Research..:)

galwayrush · 30-12-2008 07:36PM

You may actually be the first ever person to make it to the moon............:D

KerranJast · 30-12-2008 07:49PM

grasshopa wrote: »

What do you mean the body being left behind? Like the launch rocket?

The Earth. The velocity required for an object to escape the Earths gravitational pull depends on the local acceleration due to gravity, the mass of the gravitational body (i.e. Earth) and the distance of the escaping object from the centre of gravity of the gravitational body i.e. the height of the launch craft from the Earths surface.

ve = square root (2GM/r)

ve=escape velocity, G=gravitational constant, M=mass of gravitational body, r=height of craft from Earth surface.

Is it legal to go to the moon?

Comments