月球為何能成為價值數(shù)十億美元的生意？
Why the Moon Could Be a Multibillion-Dollar Business | Bloomberg Primer
譯文簡介
距離人類最后一次踏上月球已經(jīng)過去50多年了，各國政府和企業(yè)家們正爭先恐后地將這個距離地球最近的鄰居商業(yè)化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下來，就必須在著陸器技術(shù)和月球建設方面實現(xiàn)最高水平的創(chuàng)新。在本期節(jié)目中，我們將探討人類和機器人如何才能開辟一條通往星際生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透過復雜的術(shù)語，揭示了即將改變?nèi)蚴袌龅募夹g(shù)背后的商業(yè)秘密。本系列節(jié)目共分六集，橫跨地球，為您全面解讀那些爭相塑造我們“不可能”的未來的行業(yè)。
正文翻譯
距離人類最后一次踏上月球已經(jīng)過去50多年了，各國政府和企業(yè)家們正爭先恐后地將這個距離地球最近的鄰居商業(yè)化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下來，就必須在著陸器技術(shù)和月球建設方面實現(xiàn)最高水平的創(chuàng)新。在本期節(jié)目中，我們將探討人類和機器人如何才能開辟一條通往星際生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透過復雜的術(shù)語，揭示了即將改變?nèi)蚴袌龅募夹g(shù)背后的商業(yè)秘密。本系列節(jié)目共分六集，橫跨地球，為您全面解讀那些爭相塑造我們“不可能”的未來的行業(yè)。
Bloomberg Primer透過復雜的術(shù)語，揭示了即將改變?nèi)蚴袌龅募夹g(shù)背后的商業(yè)秘密。本系列節(jié)目共分六集，橫跨地球，為您全面解讀那些爭相塑造我們“不可能”的未來的行業(yè)。
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 4 )
收藏
More than 50 years after humans last stepped foot on the moon, governments and entrepreneurs are racing to commercialize Earth’s closest neighbor. But to return and stay will require the highest levels of innovation in lander technology and lunar construction. On this episode of Bloomberg Primer, we explore what it will take for humans and robots to forge a clear path toward interplanetary life.
Bloomberg Primer cuts through the complex jargon to reveal the business behind technologies poised to transform global markets. This six-part, planet-spanning series offers a comprehensive look at the "impossible" industries vying to shape our future.
距離人類最后一次踏上月球已經(jīng)過去50多年了，各國政府和企業(yè)家們正爭先恐后地將這個距離地球最近的鄰居商業(yè)化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下來，就必須在著陸器技術(shù)和月球建設方面實現(xiàn)最高水平的創(chuàng)新。在本期節(jié)目中，我們將探討人類和機器人如何才能開辟一條通往星際生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透過復雜的術(shù)語，揭示了即將改變?nèi)蚴袌龅募夹g(shù)背后的商業(yè)秘密。本系列節(jié)目共分六集，橫跨地球，為您全面解讀那些爭相塑造我們“不可能”的未來的行業(yè)。
I’m not surprised the Moon is gradually moving away from Earth.
我并不驚訝于月球正在逐漸遠離地球。
nice, may be that is why we're reaching out more. Also, make it part of our home.
很好，也許這就是我們更加努力接觸月球，還要把它變成我們的家園的一部分的原因。
Are you trying to say that the earth is abhorrent and the moon is moving away in disgust??? lol
你是想說地球很討厭，月球因為厭惡而遠離嗎？哈哈。
Far better to mine the desolate moon than the awful destructive seafloor mining.
在荒涼的月球上采礦遠比可怕的破壞性海底開采要好。
Depends how much mass we take from the moon. It can disrupt orbit over time.
這取決于我們從月球帶走多少物質(zhì)，這可能會隨著時間擾亂軌道。
@toekkababy5329 people think mass and orbits are permanent, crazy
@toekkababy5329 人們認為質(zhì)量和軌道是永久的，這太瘋狂了。
@replynotificationsdisabled Do you have any idea how much mass the moon has, and what it would take to change it by any measurable amount. Honestly people will believe anything.
@replynotificationsdisabled 你知道月球的質(zhì)量有多大，以及改變它的質(zhì)量到可測量的程度需要什么嗎？老實說，人們什么都信。
@havenmist2216 Three Gorges Damb allegedly slowed down the Earth rotation a little bit, so...
@havenmist2216 據(jù)說三峽大壩讓地球自轉(zhuǎn)稍微慢了一點，所以……
@Salabar_ By like 1/17 millionth of a second per day. Meaning over the period of 500 years, the Earth's rotation will be 1 second behind where it would have overwise been. My guess is the dam will not be there in 500 years. The moon is like 7*10^22 kilograms. There is no way we're making a measurable difference to its gravitation or orbit.
@Salabar_ 每天大約慢了1700萬分之一秒。這意味著在500年的時間里，地球自轉(zhuǎn)會比原本慢1秒。我猜大壩500年后不會還在那兒。月球的質(zhì)量大約是7*10^22千克，我們不可能對它的引力或軌道產(chǎn)生可測量的影響。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
@jaehparrk to even think about the amount of mass you'd have to remove form the moon to make a noticable effect on Earth's tides is terrifying. Edit: you could probably build entire continents with 1% of the moon's mass.
@jaehparrk 想想為了對地球潮汐產(chǎn)生明顯影響需要從月球移除的質(zhì)量，這簡直可怕。編輯：你可能用月球1%的質(zhì)量就能建造整個大陸。
Yes more space stuff! I wish we did so much more and it went faster. I want us to explore and master space asap.
是的，我們需要更多關(guān)于太空的內(nèi)容！我希望我們能做更多，進展更快。我想讓我們盡快探索并掌握太空。
space is the opposite of a dead end. It’s endless possibilities. Earth is the dead end.
太空不是死胡同，而是有無限可能。地球才是死胡同。
@jmoney4695 Maybe. A few thoughts Im having.. so say we mine some rocks within our solar system.. expend a ton of energy doing so... how much tonnage would we need to bring it back to earth profitably.. the weight will be insane, so the counter force would be too.. to slow it down then enter orbit.. and decend.. that alone makes it seem farfetched. We'd need an infinite energy machine.. which we should develop before going among the stars..
@jmoney4695 也許吧。我有幾個想法……假設我們在太陽系內(nèi)開采一些巖石……耗費大量能量……我們需要帶回多少噸才能盈利……重量會非常驚人，因此反作用力也是……要減速然后進入軌道……再下降……僅這一點就顯得遙不可及。我們需要一臺無限能量的機器……我們應該在探索星際之前先開發(fā)這個。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
In the economic case segment, something I found to be missing was the utilization of lunar resources for satellites or other parts of orbital infrastructure for earth. The lack of gravity and atmosphere on the moon is what makes it ideal as a factory for things we would usually launch from the surface of the earth.
在經(jīng)濟案例部分，我發(fā)現(xiàn)缺少的是利用月球資源來制造衛(wèi)星或地球軌道基礎設施的其他部分。月球沒有重力和大氣，這使它成為制造我們通常從地球表面發(fā)射的東西的理想工廠。
It depends on the cost. I guess they are already making this type of things in ISS.
這取決于成本，我猜他們已經(jīng)在國際空間站上制造這類東西了。
The distance is prohibitive regardless. Until we have production bots in full automation on the moon it won't be justifiable.
無論如何，距離都是個障礙。除非我們在月球上實現(xiàn)全自動生產(chǎn)機器人，否則這無法證明是合理的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
It would actually cheaper for rockets to be launched from the moon into low earth orbit than launching a rocket from earth into low earth orbit.
實際上，從月球發(fā)射火箭到低地球軌道比從地球發(fā)射到低地球軌道的成本更低。
You are conveniently not counting the cost of transport of Rockets and fuel and the Station to get them to the moon in the first place.
你忽略了將火箭、燃料和空間站運送到月球的成本。
You believe in space travel so they served you content on your level.
你相信太空旅行，所以他們?yōu)槟闾峁┝朔夏闼降膬?nèi)容。
It's just a slick ad brochure meant for coffee tables or the back of airplane seats. Don't take these people too seriously.
這只是一個光鮮的廣告宣傳冊，適合放在咖啡桌上或飛機座椅背后，別太把這些人當真。
Seems like if landing is such a problem then the first thing we should be building on the moon are landing pads.
看起來如果著陸是個大問題，那么我們在月球上應該做的第一件事就是建造著陸平臺。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Therein lies the problem with our Society. Unless something has a monetary value We tend to ignore it altogether. Give me knowledge over making a dollar any time. Learning something new that you didn’t know the day before is its own reward. We need to change our priorities if We’re ever to grow as a Species & contribute something worthwhile to the overall growth of universal knowledge.
這就是我們社會的問題所在。除非某件事物有貨幣價值，否則我們往往會完全忽略它。隨時給我知識勝過賺錢，學習前一天不知道的新東西本身就是一種回報。如果我們想作為物種成長并為宇宙知識的整體增長做出有價值的貢獻，我們需要改變優(yōu)先級。
Couldn't agree more. We need to change how we measure success.
我完全同意，我們需要改變衡量成功的方式。
How many megacapitalists need to realize this before they can destroy even the bloody moon?
有多少超級資本家需要意識到這一點，才能毀掉那該死的月球？
It’s not about ‘money’ it’s about value. Money is a stand in for value. On the long list of human priorities it does not make sense (ie is not valuable enough) to pour the huge amount of resources into going on these adventures for exploration’s sake. Is it worth walking over the hill to see what’s on the other side? Sure. And if it costs a bajillion dollars? Not so much.
不是“錢”而是價值的問題，錢只是價值的替代品。在人類優(yōu)先級清單上，為了探索而投入大量資源去冒險沒有意義（即價值不足）。翻過山去看另一邊值得嗎？當然。如果這要花費無數(shù)美元呢？就不那么值得了。
Ironically, your words are an indication for lack of knowledge. knowledge is value. For value to be transferred there needs to be a medium, i.e. "medium of exchange". Mediums of exchange are monetary. Knowledge scales, propogates, fostered, created and facilitated through the global monetary system; money enables knowledge. Sober up from the hippie intoxication of yours.
諷刺的是你的話表明你缺乏知識。知識就是價值，為了傳遞價值，需要一個媒介，即“交換媒介”，交換媒介是貨幣。知識通過全球貨幣系統(tǒng)擴展、傳播、培養(yǎng)、創(chuàng)造和促進；金錢使知識成為可能。清醒點，擺脫你的嬉皮迷醉吧。
I’m giving you a Thumbs down for not being serious. If you want positive things to often occur to begin with- & certainly if you want them to become increasingly available and cheaper et al over time to more people- we humans have found that often using the profit motive & creating whole new private industries is the best way to bring those about. - Dave Huntsman
我給你點了個踩，因為你不夠認真。如果你希望積極的事情一開始就經(jīng)常發(fā)生——當然，如果你希望它們隨著時間變得越來越可得、便宜等等，我們?nèi)祟惏l(fā)現(xiàn)利用利潤動機并創(chuàng)建全新的私營產(chǎn)業(yè)是實現(xiàn)這些的最佳方式。- 戴夫·亨茨曼
I'm very skeptical of the business case for the lunar economy. The cold hard truth is that the numbers just do not pencil out. It's something like $1M/day to support each human on the ISS and the cost of a lunar colony or base would be much, much higher. Bloomberg should interview economists, not astronauts and artists for insight into the what commercial opportunities might be possible on the moon.
我對月球經(jīng)濟的商業(yè)案例非常懷疑，冷酷的事實是數(shù)字根本算不過來。支持國際空間站上每人每天大約需要100萬美元，而月球殖民地或基地的成本會高得多。彭博社應該采訪經(jīng)濟學家，而不是宇航員和藝術(shù)家，以了解月球上可能有哪些商業(yè)機會。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
It isn't viable if paying clients are supposed to be individuals on earth. But whoever controls the moon controls space, so governments are very interested in it. Companies compete for government contracts to build the necessary infrastructure to control space and the moon. There's your cold hard business case from an economist. Admittedly not very romantic tho.
如果付費客戶是地球上的個人，這不可行。但誰控制月球誰就控制了太空，所以政府對此非常感興趣。公司競標政府合同來建造控制太空和月球的必要基礎設施，這就是經(jīng)濟學家給出的冷酷商業(yè)案例。不得不說，這不太浪漫。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Here we go. Finally some science sense. If you want to begin living in space and on other planets, START with practicing that process on the Moon.
開始了，終于有點科學道理了。如果你想開始在太空和其他星球上生活，那就先從在月球上練習這個過程開始。
“The moon is terrible — and that’s exactly why it’s valuable. No air, extreme cold, deadly radiation… yet nations and billionaires are racing to claim it. It’s the most hostile business deal in history, but whoever cracks it could own the future. Lunar gold rush in full effect!”
“月球很糟糕——這正是它的價值所在。沒有空氣，極寒，致命輻射……然而國家和億萬富翁們競相爭奪它。這是有史以來最具敵意的商業(yè)交易，但誰能破解它，誰就能擁有未來。月球淘金熱全面展開！”
The early expeditions to the new world were also deadly, expensive, and had a -100% return on investment yet many nations were racing to claim it.
早期對新世界的探險也是致命的、昂貴的，投資回報率為-100%，但許多國家競相爭奪它。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Loved how the video explained everything visually in a really clear way! And the aesthetics were quite nice!
我很喜歡視頻用非常清晰的視覺方式解釋了一切！而且美學也很不錯！
The Apollo program was too early. The technology wasn't ready. And the gaps in the technology had to be stuffed with truck-loads of money, be it more fuel because of more weight, or more engineering man-hours because a lack of computing tools. And that cost was basically a mortgage for the space program of the next decades.
阿波羅計劃太早了，當時的技術(shù)還沒有準備好，技術(shù)上的差距只能用大量資金填補，無論是因重量增加需要更多燃料，還是因缺乏計算工具需要更多工程人力，這些成本基本上是為未來幾十年的太空計劃背上了抵押貸款。
It has to start out as a rich people tourist destination first. One the reliability factor comes into effect, more people will travel to a Lunar settlement.
它必須先成為富人的旅游目的地。一旦可靠性因素生效，更多人會前往月球定居點。
It will be interesting to see how governments and big companies will try to monetize moon when we land on it again, i think first we will see mining for rare earth materials, than maybe some micro factories,... Great video, cant wait to see more form this series.
看到政府和大公司再次登陸月球后如何將其貨幣化會很有趣，我想首先我們會看到稀土材料開采，然后可能是微型工廠……很棒的視頻，我迫不及待想看這個系列的更多內(nèi)容。
guiding asteroids into impacts with the moon or orbit for mining might be an interesting method.
引導小行星撞擊月球或進入軌道進行開采可能是一種有趣的方法。
I think it should be obvious to all thinking people that, if we are going to explore and exploit the resources of our Solar System (with MANNED missions), the Moon is our lucky stepping-stone for wading into deeper space. We are lucky to have a sizeable moon, and we probably wouldn't be here in the first place without it. In other words, get real, people: Moon First; Mars Second!
我想對所有有思想的人來說應該很明顯，如果我們要探索和開發(fā)太陽系的資源（通過載人任務），月球是我們進入更深太空的幸運墊腳石。我們很幸運擁有一個相當大的月球，如果沒有它，我們可能一開始就不會在這兒。換句話說，現(xiàn)實點，朋友們：先月球，后火星！
Nice overview, but it is often looked over that Firefly did not land in a 'new' spot, whereas Intuitive Machines lander 'Athena' tried to land near the south pole, which is incredibly difficult. The reason they tried this was to try to find evidence for frozen water. Hard feats are hard to pull off. There's no point in doing something that's been done before.
不錯的概述，但常常被忽視的是，F(xiàn)irefly沒有在“新”地點著陸，而Intuitive Machines的著陸器“Athena”試圖在靠近南極的地方著陸，這極其困難。他們嘗試這樣做的原因是尋找凍水存在的證據(jù)。艱難的任務很難完成，做已經(jīng)做過的事情沒有意義。
Right. That's why we should get a man on the moon for the first time cuz they sure as heck didn't go in the 1960's.
對。這就是為什么我們應該首次把人送上月球，因為他們在1960年代肯定沒有去過。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Imagine what humanity could achieve if we stopped killing each other. All those trillions of dollars spent on war every day.
想象一下，如果我們停止互相殺戮，每天在戰(zhàn)爭上花費的數(shù)萬億美元，人類能取得什么成就？
We could all achieve quite a bit if we don't spend hundreds of billions of dollar on human space exploration.
如果我們不花數(shù)千億美元在人類太空探索上，我們都能取得很多成就。
@Melior_Traiano IF we were a species that decided superiority via technological space races, etc it would be a lot better some could argue.. But everything out of balance can be horrible. Slaves to the unending rocket factory doesn't seem nice either. Human-slaughter seems like the worst innovation and economic driver though.. A little crude no?
@Melior_Traiano 如果我們是一個通過技術(shù)太空競賽等決定優(yōu)越性的物種，有人可能會說這會好很多……但一切失去平衡都會很可怕。做無止境火箭工廠的奴隸似乎也不好。屠殺人類似乎是最糟糕的創(chuàng)新和經(jīng)濟驅(qū)動力……這有點粗俗，對吧？
Someone else doing better is a national security issue because we're lazy.
別人做得更好就成了國家安全問題，因為我們很懶惰。
I'm not seeing the national security issue. There's no critical resources currently being extracted from the moon and is dubious if there will ever be any because it cost so freaking much to bring it back.
我沒看到國家安全問題。目前月球上沒有開采任何關(guān)鍵的資源，而且由于運回成本高得離譜，是否有任何資源被開采都值得懷疑。
You know, ever since the last manned mission. Every few years another documentary pops up about how "we're going back to the moon." You almost have to wonder if we are going back.
你知道，自從最后一次載人任務以來，每隔幾年就有一個關(guān)于“我們將重返月球”的紀錄片冒出來，你幾乎會懷疑我們到底會不會回去。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
This time we are tho. Lots of missions happening this year, a manned orbit of the Moon next year, manned landing in 2027, Chinese manned orbit in 2028 and then they will also land in 2030. USA, ESA and Co, China and Russia all have plans of making bases on the Moon next decade.
這次我們真的要回去了。今年有很多任務，下一年有人繞月飛行，2027年載人著陸，2028年中國載人繞月，然后他們也會在2030年著陸。美國、歐洲航天局及其合作伙伴、中國和俄羅斯都計劃在下個十年在月球上建立基地。
There are many missing pieces in these ideas. I hope they figure those out. The big issue is that the volume of launches at present and into the future will create so much junk in space that we'll eventually be earthbound due to collision hazards. This is likely a problem even with the number of reusable stages in use currently.
這些想法還有很多缺失的部分，我希望他們能解決這些。最大的問題是現(xiàn)在和未來的發(fā)射量將產(chǎn)生大量的太空垃圾，最終我們會因為碰撞風險而被困在地球上。即使現(xiàn)在使用了許多可重復使用的火箭模塊，這也可能是個問題。
As Intuitive Machines is the only publicly-traded company to land on the moon intact (albeit the wrong way up), I was hoping to hear more about them. Their price-to-sales is only 4.4, but their revenue grew 187% between 2023 and 2024. Their financials are very inconsistent, but they have occasionally made profit. And with them already looking to iterate to another launch with SpaceX, and with the government contracts that they get, I see them as having huge potential for the future.
作為唯一一家完整登陸月球的上市公司（盡管是倒掛著陸），我希望聽到更多關(guān)于Intuitive Machines的信息。他們的市盈率僅為4.4，但2023年至2024年收入增長了187%。雖然他們的財務狀況很不穩(wěn)定，但偶爾也有盈利。而且他們已經(jīng)在計劃與SpaceX進行下一次發(fā)射，憑借獲得的政府合同，我認為他們未來有巨大潛力。
Providing homes for the homeless here on earth is more beneficial to humanity than disturbing the peaceful Moon.
為地球上的無家可歸者提供住房而不是擾亂平靜的月球?qū)θ祟惛幸妗?/b>
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
If only we didn't lose the technology to go to the moon.
如果我們沒有失去去月球的技術(shù)就好了。
We didn't lose the technology, we lost the machines and craftsmanship of the time. Not only did we lose the machines to build the Saturn V, we stopped making the machines to make those machines. We could go through all the R&D to restart production from scratch but not only would that be ludicrously expensive, but would also just be a worse product than you could do with modern technology.
我們沒有失去技術(shù)，我們失去了那個時代的機器和工藝。我們不僅失去了制造土星五號的機器，還停止了制造那些機器的機器。我們可以重新進行所有研發(fā)，從頭開始生產(chǎn)，但這不僅會貴得離譜，而且產(chǎn)品也會比用現(xiàn)代技術(shù)做出來的差。
@notgreg123 Japan, Russia, India and China say they have landed craft on the moon in this century, but not people. Did we lose the technology for oxygen, temperature control and radiation shielding? Why cant they send a person around the moon and back? Interesting questions.
@notgreg123 日本、俄羅斯、印度和中國說他們在本世紀登陸了月球探測器，但沒有載人。我們失去了氧氣、溫度控制和輻射屏蔽的技術(shù)嗎？為什么他們不能送一個人繞月球一圈再回來？有趣的問題。
@havenmist2216 I mean sure. You could just strap someone on one of those landers, plug their spacesuit into a life support system that'll last long enough and send them off. That would probably work. But why would you knowingly send someone to the Moon with no way to get back.
@havenmist2216 我的意思是當然可以。你可以把一個人綁在那些著陸器上，把他們的宇航服接入一個能維持足夠長時間的生命支持系統(tǒng)，然后送他們上路。這可能會奏效。但為什么你要在明知沒有返回的方法的情況下還送人去月球？
@notgreg123 Maybe someone can, i don't know, put enough oxygen tanks and fuel in the ship for the trip back. Just spit-balling here. Unless we have lost common sense as well as the technology to go to the moon.
@notgreg123 也許有人可以，我不知道，在飛船里放足夠的氧氣罐和燃料來回程。我在這里只是隨便說說。除非我們不僅失去了去月球的技術(shù)，還失去了常識。
@havenmist2216 unfortunately real life isn't as simple as Kerbal Space Program and those landers were never designed to be remotely capable of carrying people. They're tiny compared to the Apollo LM. The problem with adding life support systems is that it adds mass and you therefore need more fuel to carry it. But then you also need more fuel on top of that to carry the weight of the extra fuel you just brought. Then if you want to make it capable of returning to lunar orbit you need even more fuel and even more fuel to carry that fuel and pretty soon it becomes extremely difficult and expensive to develop. You'd also have a really hard time getting it all the way to the Moon in the first place unless you have really big rockets. You'd also need an entirely separate spacecraft to actually get the astronauts back to Earth from lunar orbit which doubles the development time and effort. So no, it's not as simple as just throwing in some oxygen tanks and extra fuel. The tanks are already filled to the brim on launch and still barely make it because that's all they're meant to do.
@havenmist2216 可惜現(xiàn)實生活不像《坎巴拉太空計劃》那么簡單，那些著陸器從設計上就完全不具備載人能力，它們和阿波羅登月艙比起來小得多。增加生命支持系統(tǒng)的問題在于會增加質(zhì)量，因此需要更多燃料來攜帶它，但隨后你還需要更多燃料來攜帶剛剛增加的額外燃料的重量。如果想讓它能返回月球軌道，你需要更多燃料，還要更多燃料來攜帶那些燃料，很快開發(fā)就變得極其困難和昂貴。除非你有非常大的火箭，否則一開始就很難把這些東西送到月球。你還需要一艘完全獨立的飛船來實現(xiàn)從月球軌道把宇航員帶回地球，這會使開發(fā)時間和努力翻倍。所以，不，這不是簡單地扔幾個氧氣罐和額外燃料的問題。發(fā)射時油箱已經(jīng)裝滿，仍然只能勉強完成任務，因為它們就是為此設計的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
One small step for a man. one giant leap for mankind. When USA was in it for human civilisation. Today, under Trump, Amstrong would have to say: One small step for an American, one giant leap for America!
我的一小步，人類的一大步。那時美國是為了人類文明。今天，在特朗普領(lǐng)導下，阿姆斯特朗得說：美國人的一小步，美國的一大步！
There are only two reasons for going to the Moon: 1) geopolitical - prestige, national security, international soft power, etc 2) human adventure - doing great & mighty things for their own sake. There are no economically viable business reasons and there never have been. Yes, there have been lots & lots of powerpoint slides and CGI renders, but the math on investment pitches have never added up.
去月球只有兩個理由：1）地緣政治——聲望、國家安全、國際軟實力等；2）人類冒險——為了偉大而做偉大的事。從來沒有經(jīng)濟上可行的商業(yè)理由。沒錯，雖然有很多很多PPT和CGI渲染，但投資提案的數(shù)學計算從未說得通。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處