I see from the news that Pres. Bush is going to announce plans for NASA to return to the Moon, and go on to Mars, sometime in the next 10-15 years. Great news! Obviously, it won’t be long before someone takes a unicycle to the Moon.
Anybody want to speculate on what a “lunicycle” might look like? Just think about it… the drops you could land at one-sixth of a gravity, the jumps you could clear, the lower likelihood of painful falls.
You could imagine two kinds of riding: an “indoor” sort of trials riding inside some large pressurized space where you could ride in street clothes, or “outdoor” Muni (Mooni??) where you’d have to ride on the lunar terrain with a spacesuit on. What kind of uni would you design for low-gravity trials or Muni? What sort of tire would work well in the lunar soil (will we see 6-inch Gazzas?!)? What sort of speed could you reach on a Coker on the Moon? How light a frame and wheel set could you make? I’d guess a lunicycle would look ridiculously light and fragile by terrestrial standards.
Any thoughts?
“…to boldly unicycle where no one has unicycled before…”
I think with the ‘no’ gravity, people would find more fun in doing things not involved with riding on the ground, where we have to make use of our situation, so would they.
The Luni would have to be capable of being ridden in a space suit, and capable of riding in deep, ultra-fine powder.
We sent a lander to take pictures of Mars. I say it would be infinitely more extraordinary (and cheaper) to just send Kris Holm with a muni and a Nikon. Watch for his new video- Into the Thunder… um… Planet
Yes, the gravity is lower (from memory, about 1/6 Earth gravity) but if you bunny hopped UP and came straight back down, you would put the same amount of energy in, and therefore you’d get the same amount of energy out. In fact the landing would be heavier, because you’d lose nothing to aerodynamic drag.
The gravity would accelerate your fall more slowly, but over a longer period.
It would be safer doing simple drops, though, comparing drops of equal height.
Of course, the equipment would be expensive an heavy. Air bottles, or perhaps a rebreather, would be heavy and bulky.
Pumping your tyre up would take less time, as you wouldn’t have to compensate for the ambient pressure, which is 1 Bar on earth, and 0 Bar on Luna.
Of course, some of the older posters on here will refer to our largest satellite as Selene, rather than Luna.
Roger, do you have any Cavorite-coated Nimbus frames in stock?
I don’t know how realistic Bush’s plans are for us paying for new manned space missions (they would cost a lot more than what we did in the 60’s), but I think it would be a great goal for us to have. There is nothing like pushing the limits of human achievement to give us a sense of wonder and possibility.
Obviously you need to have gravity for a unicycle to be fun. To ride on in orbit, for example, you’d have to build up some centrifugal force or something. Give me the moon for that. Indoors on the moon, you wouldn’t have to worry about all the environmental gear you’d need to carry outside. So how about an indoor Trials course? You could still land bigger drops than in Earth gravity, because you’d have more time to absorb your inertia as you came down (I think). You should be able to invent lots of new tricks right off the bat, but only after relearning to ride the thing in the first place.
If I had enough indoor space on the moon, however, I’d get into human-powered flight. I read an interesting science fiction story once, where people were living inside the moon, in large underground spaces. This would provide the headroom. Supposedly you’d be light enough to fly under you own power. That might make the unicycle seem a bit quaint by comparison…
Possible limits of human achievement, which would give me, for one, a sense of wonder and possibility:
Ensuring that all 6 000 000 people on the planet are fed and have access to fresh water.
Ensuring that all 6 000 000 people on the planet have the opportunity to learn to read and write.
Eradicating major diseases like AIDS which are ravaging whole countries in Africa.
Introducing free and democratic elections to every country in the world. I write as a subject of an hereditary monarchy, knowing that many of my readers live in a country where the current President received the fewest votes in a two horse race…
Oh, and getting 3 or possibly 4 people to walk on Mars at a cost roughly equivalent to that of achieving either of the first two on the above list, and possibly the third and fourth.
But let’s not get too serious. This is a unicycle forum, after all.
Actually, if you hollowed out the moon evenly, the gravity on the inside would cancell and you’d be waitlessa, so yes, you could fly under your own power, but it’d kinda be cheating.
Also, Bush’s plan for the moon is a load of bullsh**. If congress gives NASA the $800 million per year, it’ll come out of their science budget, and basically not be any budget increase. Not to mention that the moon’s only habitable near the poles where there might be water, and where the sunlight is weak enough to keep the temperatures to a reasonable range. Near the equator the moon’s surface can reach temperatures of up to 400 degrees farenheight, and a lack of an strong magnetosphere makes it so you’re exposed to extra rediation and things like that. Also, by the time we’re established enough on the moon to go for unicycle trials and the like people like Ryan Atkins and me will have been dead for about 30 years. I think Bush has no idea what he’s saying, and our chance of getting an established moonbase is way too close to nil. And as for Mars, to quote sky and telescope “Going to Mars actually is rocket science.” Really, humanity has much more pressing concerns than unicycling on the moon or Mars, and those won’t happen for at least another century and a half.
Bevan
P.S. If we could technologically get people to Mars, there’d be the problem of keeping them alive for the trip. During the 6month+ trip, the astronauts would be exposed to over 10 times the amount of radiation a nuclear plant worker is exposed to per year. Also, whenever there’s a solar flare, the astronauts would have to rush into a protected space in order to keep from being seriously burned with radiation. Not to mention, what do you do when you get there? What if you break your arm? “Um Houston, I just snapped my humerus and need to be medivaced back to Earth” “Sorry, you’re 6 months journey from home, without enough fuel for a return trip manufactured yet, in 1/2 of Earth gravity. Looks like you’re dead. Sorry 'bout that.” Not to say that it wouldn’t be fun to ride down the rim of a giant crater, but we can do that in Arizona anyway.
Also, someone post a counterpoint to this, and correct me if I’m wrong about anything.
I agree with Mike except for the bit about forcing democracy on all countries. Democracy may be a good concept but it is not perfect because it ends up with candidates putting each other down to make themselves look better, and they argue more than they agree, even though their goals are often the same. Party politics are a screwed up way of doing things in my opinion.
I don’t even believe anyone has made it to the moon yet, and I don’t think anyone will make it anytime soon. I watched this program about the conspiracy theory about how Nasa did one of the biggest scams in history, trying to trick the whole world into thinking they had been to the moon. The proof against it was so conclusive, and Nasa’s reaction was so pathetic that I believed the program. The crosshairs painted on the camera lens were partially covered by images of spacemen and landers in the photos. The flag they planted appeared to be blowing in a breeze. Two landscapes, supposedly on places far apart on the moon, had identical backgrounds, and could have been shot in the desert somewhere in Arizona or something. They had heaps more proof too and Nasa had no feasable arguement to dispute it.
I totally agree with that, most of the time he says whatever he thinks his voters want to hear. I’m glad Bush isn’t my president, and I feel sorry for those who have him as a leader, and even more sorry for those who support him. I think war and moon/mars missions are a waste of the worlds resources, and like Mikefule said, there are heaps more important uses the money could be put to.
I wouldn’t trust a Fox TV special on any subject. This is a station that airs shows like “Deadliest Police Chases” and “Girls Gone Wild.” I must point out that most privately owned TV networks are in the business for the purpose of making money. A special on a controversial issue sells ads.
I do agree, however, that much of the Space program is a waste of money. The world has more important issues to deal with.
I’m not sure what a “lunar” unicycle would look like. It would need a wide tire for traction. I don’t think it would be able to be built lighter, as a person on the moon still has the same momentum as he does on Earth. A person’s weight is different on the moon, not his mass.
Mikefule has some great ideas, shared by a great many I’m sure. But before everybody blames NASA for all the world’s problems, may I just point out that in 1996, people in the US spent over $22.7 billion on their PETS (see http://www.buscom.com/food/GA034X.htm), and that figure was expected to reach $28.5 billion by 2001. I believe a similar figure is spent annually on hair care! Now before all you pet owners (or people with hair) get mad, all I’m saying is that there are many places to look for money that might be better spent elsewhere - like making sure all those 6 thousand million people have decent unicycles, too…
thanx for bringing this up
i was itching to but i guess a lifetime of being called a loon for questioning the moon-landings made me hesitant
chilliwack’s post links to a bunch of sites, pro and anti, take the time to work thru them and make up your own mind (and get a bunch of material for scintilating dinner conversation)
ps. if they DID land on the moon, i’m sure they landed on the grassy knoll, that’s why u can’t see any dust
Rowan and Gild, you sure like to stir things up! Get yourselves a damn telescope. Better yet, build one of your own, so you won’t have to worry about conspriacies by the telescope companies. Then do some research about where the moon landings claim to have been.
Then see for yourselves. We did not clean up after ourselves up there. Tire tracks, flags, footprints (might be a bit hard to make out), The bottom half of each LEM, and the Mariners and other probes that have landed (or crashed) there.
Then return to newsgroup and tell us what you saw. There’s plenty of other stuff going on in the world to not believe…
My dad worked for NASA from 1962-67. He did not go to the moon, but he worked on real science that really exists. If we can put things in orbit (buy a cheap telescope), there’s no reason we can’t go farther.
