On 2/18/2016 12:18 AM, Anthony D. Baye wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 2/17/2016 8:46 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>> Le 17/02/2016 09:24, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> I am also considering taking it underground and using some form of
>>>>> geothermal
>>>>> energy. Obviously it would need to use a lot of energy for cooling as
>>>>> well.
>>>>
>>>> Not much geothermal (selenothermal might be a more appropriate term)
>>>> energy present I am afraid. Contrary to Earth, the Moon does not have a
>>>> hot mantle and only a small core, partly molten.
>>>
>>> If you could harvest the momentum between moon and earth (moon is
>>> getting further away from earth as time goes on, meaning "moon is
>>> acquiring more orbital speed"... hence energy), you could have some
>>> energy for your nanobots and make the moon stays longer with the earth.
>>>
>>
>> There is a big temperature difference between the day and night sides of
>> the Moon. So maybe a thermopile solution could be found.
>>
>>
> I was just thinking the same thing.  Large numbers of thin rods of different
> metals extending through the core from dark side to light side, and you have a
> thermocouple.
>

I would have thought that a series of Thermopile Arrays on the surface 
would be a better engineering solution. You would not need to worry 
about hitting the core. But if you were going to drill to the core. 
Taking the heat directly would be a better solution.

> On the other hand, if you want to get really wild, make it a photonic computer
> and use the light of the sun directly.
>

An even better solution.

> It would be immune to gamma rays and Electromagnetic interference, and if you
> used volumetric data storage, you would probably never run out of space.
>

That is true. "640K ought to be enough for anybody." ;-)



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message