assuming the moon broke up, it wouldn't form a ring for a considerable time. Rings are the result of collisions and conservation of momentum. It takes time for that to form the ring/concretion disk.  Meanwhile, earth would be bombarded with meteors including large scale strikes.

This was the premise of Neal Stephenson's book Seveneves. Worth reading particularly for the orbital station concepts.

Upon reading the title of this thread I thought it was about the theoretical concept of Asgardia being built on the moon rather than in orbit of the Earth.

Upon lengthy discussion I have come to the conclusion that this is a must if Asgardia is to be successful.  There is far too much that can/will go wrong if built in orbit however if the principal we have begun to build is transported to the Moon instead we will be able to achieve it far better, easier and effectively!

I'd like to see a spinning habitat. When Asgardia is up an running, I would hope to see our efforts directed towards building variable speed rotation habitats. They could be used to find a perfect g force for long term living and solve the majority of health problems. As far as I know, the ISS was not made into a ring because along with a lack of research into centrifugal forces on people, z ero g research was a higher priority for all the investment money.

I want to believe in having the blind and the deaf in space but I don't think it will happen since there needs to be communication in something so dangerous.

The elderly may not experience as much pain but the pain they feel when returning to Earth would be too much for them.

Most examples have something going against them as well. I'd love to hear other's thoughts on this as well though!

Also, keep in mind that technology might make those disabilities obsolete, creating better quality of live for people.  Especially for those suffering from chronic pain and debilitating degenerative diseasses.

Well now that's an interesting concept! I recently watched a new episode of a long running British Scifi series in which they postulated that robots would be able to be our perfect assistants and ensure our future Happyness forever.

However robots took there programming to the letter, despite having intelligence, through observations discovered that emotions carry like a wave through a populatation.  Basically resulting in the machines declaring war on emotions that were not happy and killing anyone who demonstrated such emotions.

What I'm getting at is that any AI system or robotics system designed to assist in such a large way would have to be very well contained.  Robots, after all, even with intelligence would still have to carry out basic programming on some level, and open up many scenarios for well intentioned programmers to introduce human error into a system.

@FloydKelly

I can build a chatbot for way cheaper than a 100 $. In fact I can built the thing for free, and host it myself just like my personal site. If ever Asgardia admin likes it, all I have to do is turn the source code over to Asgardia so that Asgardia may integrate it in the front page or something.

@Nihylum

The chatbot I'd build is basically a sophisticated logic gate. It wouldn't be able to learn, nor would it have any emotions.

I would suggest using one of the nice chatbot systems that are available to the public.  The server is about $100 a year and some can link directly into Twitter social media API for repeatedly answering question Tweets.  I don't know about other platforms like Facebook or Instagram, but Twitter is a nice start and the chatbot can be always expanding.  Much care should be used in planning something like this.  First, there is the brand, the name Asgardia, and how it would fit with another branded name and marketing concept to be fun for the public to see and use.  Second, there is the topic of words and predicate managing within the bots core system, to avoid a slow AI, the topics need to be arranged tightly.  My 2 cents - over and out.

Ocean's volume: 1.35 billion cubic kilometers
Weight of the ocean: 1.31x10^21kg

Weight of the moon: 7.35x10^22 kg
Approximate percentage of the moon which might be calcium oxide: ~8%
Weight of moon that might be calcium oxide: 5.88 x 10^21kg

Impact of reducing the moon's mass by the quantity of material necessary to reduce the pH of the oceans: ?????

SYG

sorry 4 nonsense post, thought many came to asgardia neither for money or fame, we r attracted here by the bravery and determination to achieve a goal so close yet still a little far.  maybe some get tired of empty talk and being laughed at daydreamer. this is a project as said, bringing up solutions and training for better solutions, every tiny step would strengthen ppl's TBF for this project.