If you where to live on the moon could you "recreate" earth's atmosphere? if yes , how?
931587
collect and condense all the extra carbon dioxide/ pollutants/emissons in the greenhouse gases layer in a gigantic oxygen tank, blast it to the moon for it to explode and release the gases. maybe it'll halt global warming?
840987
Your gonna need to get the force right.  You need to orbit the earth a few times, then use the gravity to get to the moon.  then, you need to orbit around the moon a few times, then earth, and come down.  Otherwise, you'll become a new addition to our solar systems family!
1100183
No, it is soooooooo far out of our atmosphere not a chance.  Even with a really big Microscope no.  For real?  By now that thing is gone been like 40 some years since it was put in, no cement on the moon, can't hold up.
403331
No, that is not even possible. Even if an explosion big enough to do the job were set off on the Moon, if it were set off at the Moon's south pole it would push the Moon away from the Earth, not toward it. And nobody on Earth, not the US government, not anybody, has the ability to make an explosion that big anyway.
135962
Actually, the moon does have an atmosphere, and EXTEAMLY thin, tiny, very small, negligible atmosphere.\n\nThe chances of getting hit are miniscule, there is virtually no risk.  You can see the moon of covered with impact craters, but remember, these happened over the course of billions of years.  The chances are very slim, you would have to VERY unlucky to be hit.
259470
It is quite possible to recycle oxygen and water for a station like the ISS. Great progress is being done in water recycling, they reuse the water we exhale and are working on reusing the water in urine. \n\nThe oxygen is trickier. The actual process is well known but the reactors needed are too energy hungry and may also be dangerous: they produce methane gas as an intermediate product. Using the moon and doing the work there would make more sense. There isn´t a lot of water there but oxygen is plentyful. It is the main component of lunar soil. Shipping all the waste from the ISS to the moon instead of dumping it and shipping oxygen and fresh water back makes more economic sense than permanently launch it from earth. \n\nThe waste would basically be sewage, CO2 (bound to lithiumhydroxide) and various wastes like plastic containers and food waste. As much water as possible would have been extracted from the waste. Water is mostly oxygen by weight and since there is plenty of oxygen it is a waste of energy. On the moon the plastic containers are cracked, turned into carbon and hydrogen as far as possible. Then you take lunar minerals like ilmenite (a slightly ferromagnetic iron-titanium oxide) and run a stream of hydrogen through it. Water is the result as the hydrogen reacts with oxygen in the mineral. You split the water into pure oxygen and hydrogen. You run the hydrogen through the mineral to get more water while you use the pure oxygen to incinerate all the other waste. You get even more co2 and water from this, which you use to extract more oxygen, and eventually you will end up with lots of oxygen and also metals like steel and titanium. (Biological processes aren´t used in the beginning as they are less reliant and predictable in space. All exhaust and ashes from the incineration is kept and stored as it will be used when biological waste digestors and food production are ready to be put into use.) You ship the oxygen to the ISS (along with fresh lithiumhydroxide canisters) to be turned into more carbon dioxide. We don´t want to ship CO2 (the oxygen) so a process where is reacts with hydrogen can be used. You get methane and water. The water is used aboard while the methane is shipped to the moon along with the other waste. By doing this the moon will become enriched with the volatiles (hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon) that are missing today.
713735
I own a very fine acre of the light side of the moon. It's kinda left a bit from the middle. I could send you a map.
56808
The forces and variables in play to keep planet earth livable, (i.e. distance from sun, gravitational pull of moon and influence on tides, etc), are very exact and precarious.  Any movement of the earth would probably upset life to the point of making this planet impossible to live on.\n\nJust a few thoughts:\nNo heat from the sun, we will freeze.\nIf the moon doesn't come with us, tidal waves and tsunamis will destroy the planet before homeostatis reasserts itself.\nWithout a gas giant like Jupiter nearby, there is nothing to catch stray meteors and comets that could easily destroy earth.\n\nJust some thoughts.  So if you want to drive the earth around the universe, just keep in mind that it'll kill us all.
388473
Wow! another brain-tickling question from Neuro-Prof! What imagination! Yeah, that would be pretty interesting to see. I think a planet with such conditions will be a home for people who'd be considered super-heros by us on earth. Silicon would make their skin rough and abrasive. That would be just awesome!\n\nNow, coming to your question, I think the conditions that would favour such an atmosphere should be-\n1- Extremely high pressure. Pyrolysis is one of the methods to break Si-H bonds.\n\n2- Extremely high temperature.\n\n3- Reducing Atmosphere / Abundance of Dihydrogen. As compared to our earth's oxidising atmosphere, a reducing atmosphere would contribute a lot more in breaking the Si-O bonds.\n\nGreat question, I must say.
581773
land parcels on the moon
960677
Yeah, I was born just in time to see the last apollo mission fly there.\n\nWill they go back? I sure hope so.  Just because there's no oil doesn't mean it's a worthless rock.  That worthless rock can be built into electronics, and solar panels.  A band of bottom line quality solar panels of a kilometer in width made to span the equator of the moon would put out a third of the energy needs for the world today.  There's a lot of lunar surface out there, and microwave relay stations can send that power anywhere you want.\n\nThere's also the whole helium three thing, but I dunno if that's really going to work or not.\n\nAnd of course, there's space tourism.  The old folks are sure to love spending some time on the moon, what with the romance of a full earth in view, and one sixth gravity to help them get around (and get it on!)\n\nPlus, the earth is so close, that you could use remote controlled robots operated by people on earth to do the construction work, so lunar colonies could make for more jobs down here.
676296
It's completely beyond our current science and technology to replicate the environment of Mars with such precision that we could be confident that we'd have the exact same (or even similar) conditions for life as exist on Mars.\n\nIn addition, how would we replicate Mars' environment when we know so little about it?  You'd need to send thousands of probes to Mars to get enough information to even *begin* such an experiment ... and by the time you'd finish that, you could've already run a full set of experiments on Mars testing directly for the past or present existence of native life forms.\n\nA planet's biosphere is an incredibly complicated thing.  It's something that scientists seem to only now be learning about our own biosphere, unfortunately a bit too late.
1050217
You could join NASA, but I don't think they'll let you in until you at least learn to spell. Anyway, they might send you to the moon, but you would just have to come back again eventually.
658680
We could build prisons on the moon..for all the worlds worst,the 1st world prison,,or maybe mars,,doubt thered be many prisoners years after that ..somehow..ppl would behave themselves
178177
Google has programs that do that for the earth and the moon but you will have to download some software to do it right and your computer will have to be fast, check it out.
1062260
While you could put a big mirror on the Moon to give more sunlight to the Earth, it would not always be there. The Moon is not always in the sky at night. Sometimes you see a full Moon which is up all night and sometimes a crescent Moon that sets a couple hours after the Sun.\nAnyway, why would you want to do that? To increase global warming? To disturb astronomers who need dark skies? To ruin the natural sleeping and waking cycles of animals and people?
199749
oil is the result of decayed organic material (dead plants and animals).  there would have had to have been life, LOTS OF IT, on the moon at one time, some sort of atmosphere at one time to promote both life and decay, some catrosphic event or chain of events would have had to happen to remove all evidence of both because to date there is evidence of none of these.   so....probably not.  besides, oil on the moon wouldn't matter unless we colonized the moon.  it would be too expensive (and currently impossible) to get it, pack it and bring it back safely.  there is no space craft to date (or anything near) that would be big enough to bring it back.  \n\non the other hand, they have considered putting some sort of fuel repository on the moon, much like the international space center, so that once a space craft has expended the enormous amount of fuel necessary to achieve escape velocity to get into space, it could land on the moon, fuel up and go a LOT further with a lot less fuel. there is no gravity or wind resistance in space, so you point in a direction give your engines a little boost and you could theoretically go for ever in that direction assuming you don't hit or get hit by anything or fly into the gravitational pull of any other planets or stars.  interesting stuff huh?\n\nwww.m-w.com   merriam websters definition of fossil fuel, which oil is\n\nMain Entry: fossil fuel\nFunction: noun\n: a fuel (as coal, oil, or natural gas) that is formed in the earth from plant or animal remains\n- fos·sil-fueled  /-"fyü(-&)ld/ adjective