Ask Science
Ask a science question, get a science answer.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
view the rest of the comments
I wonder how regolith might work out as shielding, as proposed in some popular sci-fi series. Its added mass, to be sure, but regolith plus infernal pressure vessels is probably a good trade-off for the mechanical complexity and added mass.
I suspect you meant a different word, but it's honestly better this way.
Lol, yeah I did but now I'm definitely leaving it
There was a proposed method of making a space habitat that I found fascinating, though someone smarter than me would have to address its plausibility. This would have been in a book from Heinlein, Asimov, Niven, or Pournelle, possibly a collection of non-fiction essays on colonizing space.
The idea is that you find a sufficiently large asteroid with high iron content. You hollow out a cylinder in the core and pack it with water ice, and then plug the end. Then you spin the thing on its axis while bathing it with lasers or focused solar light. This heats the surface until it is molten. Eventually the heat penetrates to the water ice core, which boils, inflating the molten iron like a balloon. Once the thing has cooled, you have a hollow space where you can start building your habitat, and a nice robust outer layer, and the whole thing is spinning to simulate gravity.
Again, I don't know if this falls into the category of "sounds neat but is totally implausible," or "sounds insane but is actually technically entirely sound," but it stuck with me as a neat way to build a habitat.
I'm going to go with “sounds neat but is totally implausible.” Not totally implausible, but it's a lot of work just to roll a bunch of unpredictable dice with the chaotic behavior of the boiling water and the chemical composition of the asteroid.
The water vapor is going to find the path of least resistance and come erupting out of the molten metal, probably quite explosively and you're going to loose a bunch of valuable mass in the process.
EDIT: There may be a way to do this and get more predictable results (if you have a ton of energy to melt the asteroid very fast and very uniformly from all directions at once) but it still sounds unnecessarily complicated. There are simpler, cheaper ways to get better, more controlled outcomes.