>>12635984Speaking of telescopes, If I had a billion dollars I'd build the means to make big, cheap, liquid mirror telescopes ON THE MOON. Here's an article by a guy who pioneered this stuff:
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/liquid-mirror-telescopesHere's some basic math:
Assume 1 starshipload for the telescope receiver, support truss, dish, radio relay for the data and associated equipment.
Assume 1 starshipload of reflecting liquid (yes, there are materials that can be liquid and not evaporate in gravity)
A small construction crew with some small earthmoving equipment would build the site for a few weeks then leave once it's built.
Assume the fluid has the same density as water, and there will be a dish in the shape of a parabola and the fluid be 1cm deep when the dish is rotated slowly.
100 T = 100,000 kg = 100,000,000 g == cm^2
Radius = sqrt(Area/pi) = 5,641 cm; diameter = 11,284 cm. So a 112 m telescope. For context, the largest optical telescope planned for Earth is 33 m diameter.
If it was pointed at earth, what resolution would it get?
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/moon-hoax-why-not-use-telescopes-to-look-at-the-landersAngular resolution, in arcseconds ? = 11.6 / Diameter of dish; Angular size = 11.6/11,284 = 0.001
(object size/ distance) * 206265 = angular resolution,
moon-earth distance is 284472282 m.
because (4/284472282)*206265>0.002 we can see it (need to double the # due to Nyquist Sampling Theorem)
4 meter pixels on whatever part of earth is showing.
