月球为何能成为价值数十亿美元的生意？
正文翻译
距离人类最后一次踏上月球已经过去50多年了，各国政府和企业家们正争先恐后地将这个距离地球最近的邻居商业化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下来，就必须在着陆器技术和月球建设方面实现最高水平的创新。在本期节目中，我们将探讨人类和机器人如何才能开辟一条通往星际生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透过复杂的术语，揭示了即将改变全球市场的技术背后的商业秘密。本系列节目共分六集，横跨地球，为您全面解读那些争相塑造我们“不可能”的未来的行业。
Bloomberg Primer透过复杂的术语，揭示了即将改变全球市场的技术背后的商业秘密。本系列节目共分六集，横跨地球，为您全面解读那些争相塑造我们“不可能”的未来的行业。
评论翻译
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.
距离人类最后一次踏上月球已经过去50多年了，各国政府和企业家们正争先恐后地将这个距离地球最近的邻居商业化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下来，就必须在着陆器技术和月球建设方面实现最高水平的创新。在本期节目中，我们将探讨人类和机器人如何才能开辟一条通往星际生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透过复杂的术语，揭示了即将改变全球市场的技术背后的商业秘密。本系列节目共分六集，横跨地球，为您全面解读那些争相塑造我们“不可能”的未来的行业。
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.
距离人类最后一次踏上月球已经过去50多年了，各国政府和企业家们正争先恐后地将这个距离地球最近的邻居商业化。但是，要想重返月球并停留下来，就必须在着陆器技术和月球建设方面实现最高水平的创新。在本期节目中，我们将探讨人类和机器人如何才能开辟一条通往星际生活的清晰道路。
Bloomberg Primer透过复杂的术语，揭示了即将改变全球市场的技术背后的商业秘密。本系列节目共分六集，横跨地球，为您全面解读那些争相塑造我们“不可能”的未来的行业。
@markjoseph196
I’m not surprised the Moon is gradually moving away from Earth.
我并不惊讶于月球正在逐渐远离地球。
I’m not surprised the Moon is gradually moving away from Earth.
我并不惊讶于月球正在逐渐远离地球。
@Vijai-Vpandian
nice, may be that is why we're reaching out more. Also, make it part of our home.
很好，也许这就是我们更加努力接触月球，还要把它变成我们的家园的一部分的原因。
nice, may be that is why we're reaching out more. Also, make it part of our home.
很好，也许这就是我们更加努力接触月球，还要把它变成我们的家园的一部分的原因。
@T8ersalad
Are you trying to say that the earth is abhorrent and the moon is moving away in disgust??? lol
你是想说地球很讨厌，月球因为厌恶而远离吗？哈哈。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Are you trying to say that the earth is abhorrent and the moon is moving away in disgust??? lol
你是想说地球很讨厌，月球因为厌恶而远离吗？哈哈。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@Sunfrx
Far better to mine the desolate moon than the awful destructive seafloor mining.
在荒凉的月球上采矿远比可怕的破坏性海底开采要好。
Far better to mine the desolate moon than the awful destructive seafloor mining.
在荒凉的月球上采矿远比可怕的破坏性海底开采要好。
@toekkababy5329
Depends how much mass we take from the moon. It can disrupt orbit over time.
这取决于我们从月球带走多少物质，这可能会随着时间扰乱轨道。
Depends how much mass we take from the moon. It can disrupt orbit over time.
这取决于我们从月球带走多少物质，这可能会随着时间扰乱轨道。
@replynotificationsdisabled
@toekkababy5329 people think mass and orbits are permanent, crazy
@toekkababy5329 人们认为质量和轨道是永久的，这太疯狂了。
@toekkababy5329 people think mass and orbits are permanent, crazy
@toekkababy5329 人们认为质量和轨道是永久的，这太疯狂了。
@havenmist2216
@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 你知道月球的质量有多大，以及改变它的质量到可测量的程度需要什么吗？老实说，人们什么都信。
@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 你知道月球的质量有多大，以及改变它的质量到可测量的程度需要什么吗？老实说，人们什么都信。
@Salabar_
@havenmist2216 Three Gorges Damb allegedly slowed down the Earth rotation a little bit, so...
@havenmist2216 据说三峡大坝让地球自转稍微慢了一点，所以……
@havenmist2216 Three Gorges Damb allegedly slowed down the Earth rotation a little bit, so...
@havenmist2216 据说三峡大坝让地球自转稍微慢了一点，所以……
@adamoliver4094
@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_ 每天大约慢了1700万分之一秒。这意味着在500年的时间里，地球自转会比原本慢1秒。我猜大坝500年后不会还在那儿。月球的质量大约是7*10^22千克，我们不可能对它的引力或轨道产生可测量的影响。
@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_ 每天大约慢了1700万分之一秒。这意味着在500年的时间里，地球自转会比原本慢1秒。我猜大坝500年后不会还在那儿。月球的质量大约是7*10^22千克，我们不可能对它的引力或轨道产生可测量的影响。
@notgreg123
@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 想想为了对地球潮汐产生明显影响需要从月球移除的质量，这简直可怕。编辑：你可能用月球1%的质量就能建造整个大陆。
@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 想想为了对地球潮汐产生明显影响需要从月球移除的质量，这简直可怕。编辑：你可能用月球1%的质量就能建造整个大陆。
@Jason-gq8fo
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，我们需要更多关于太空的内容！我希望我们能做更多，进展更快。我想让我们尽快探索并掌握太空。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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，我们需要更多关于太空的内容！我希望我们能做更多，进展更快。我想让我们尽快探索并掌握太空。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@jmoney4695
space is the opposite of a dead end. It’s endless possibilities. Earth is the dead end.
太空不是死胡同，而是有无限可能。地球才是死胡同。
space is the opposite of a dead end. It’s endless possibilities. Earth is the dead end.
太空不是死胡同，而是有无限可能。地球才是死胡同。
@K-Man-k5n
@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 也许吧。我有几个想法……假设我们在太阳系内开采一些岩石……耗费大量能量……我们需要带回多少吨才能盈利……重量会非常惊人，因此反作用力也是……要减速然后进入轨道……再下降……仅这一点就显得遥不可及。我们需要一台无限能量的机器……我们应该在探索星际之前先开发这个。
@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 也许吧。我有几个想法……假设我们在太阳系内开采一些岩石……耗费大量能量……我们需要带回多少吨才能盈利……重量会非常惊人，因此反作用力也是……要减速然后进入轨道……再下降……仅这一点就显得遥不可及。我们需要一台无限能量的机器……我们应该在探索星际之前先开发这个。
@ChuckLarper-w1z
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.
在经济案例部分，我发现缺少的是利用月球资源来制造卫星或地球轨道基础设施的其他部分。月球没有重力和大气，这使它成为制造我们通常从地球表面发射的东西的理想工厂。
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.
在经济案例部分，我发现缺少的是利用月球资源来制造卫星或地球轨道基础设施的其他部分。月球没有重力和大气，这使它成为制造我们通常从地球表面发射的东西的理想工厂。
@mingouczjcz3800
It depends on the cost. I guess they are already making this type of things in ISS.
这取决于成本，我猜他们已经在国际空间站上制造这类东西了。
It depends on the cost. I guess they are already making this type of things in ISS.
这取决于成本，我猜他们已经在国际空间站上制造这类东西了。
@TFEWdirk
The distance is prohibitive regardless. Until we have production bots in full automation on the moon it won't be justifiable.
无论如何，距离都是个障碍。除非我们在月球上实现全自动生产机器人，否则这无法证明是合理的。
The distance is prohibitive regardless. Until we have production bots in full automation on the moon it won't be justifiable.
无论如何，距离都是个障碍。除非我们在月球上实现全自动生产机器人，否则这无法证明是合理的。
@mycommentwilltriggeryou9810
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.
实际上，从月球发射火箭到低地球轨道比从地球发射到低地球轨道的成本更低。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
实际上，从月球发射火箭到低地球轨道比从地球发射到低地球轨道的成本更低。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@TFEWdirk
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.
你忽略了将火箭、燃料和空间站运送到月球的成本。
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.
你忽略了将火箭、燃料和空间站运送到月球的成本。
@crypto_que
You believe in space travel so they served you content on your level.
你相信太空旅行，所以他们为你提供了符合你水平的内容。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
You believe in space travel so they served you content on your level.
你相信太空旅行，所以他们为你提供了符合你水平的内容。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@dawnabraham4415
It's just a slick ad brochure meant for coffee tables or the back of airplane seats. Don't take these people too seriously.
这只是一个光鲜的广告宣传册，适合放在咖啡桌上或飞机座椅背后，别太把这些人当真。
It's just a slick ad brochure meant for coffee tables or the back of airplane seats. Don't take these people too seriously.
这只是一个光鲜的广告宣传册，适合放在咖啡桌上或飞机座椅背后，别太把这些人当真。
@WigneyR
Seems like if landing is such a problem then the first thing we should be building on the moon are landing pads.
看起来如果着陆是个大问题，那么我们在月球上应该做的第一件事就是建造着陆平台。
Seems like if landing is such a problem then the first thing we should be building on the moon are landing pads.
看起来如果着陆是个大问题，那么我们在月球上应该做的第一件事就是建造着陆平台。
@ERAZERHEAD-54
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.
这就是我们社会的问题所在。除非某件事物有货币价值，否则我们往往会完全忽略它。随时给我知识胜过赚钱，学习前一天不知道的新东西本身就是一种回报。如果我们想作为物种成长并为宇宙知识的整体增长做出有价值的贡献，我们需要改变优先级。
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.
这就是我们社会的问题所在。除非某件事物有货币价值，否则我们往往会完全忽略它。随时给我知识胜过赚钱，学习前一天不知道的新东西本身就是一种回报。如果我们想作为物种成长并为宇宙知识的整体增长做出有价值的贡献，我们需要改变优先级。
@rikkafe6050
Couldn't agree more. We need to change how we measure success.
我完全同意，我们需要改变衡量成功的方式。
Couldn't agree more. We need to change how we measure success.
我完全同意，我们需要改变衡量成功的方式。
@miguelladinodevera614
How many megacapitalists need to realize this before they can destroy even the bloody moon?
有多少超级资本家需要意识到这一点，才能毁掉那该死的月球？
How many megacapitalists need to realize this before they can destroy even the bloody moon?
有多少超级资本家需要意识到这一点，才能毁掉那该死的月球？
@phillipraifordjohnson8371
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“钱”而是价值的问题，钱只是价值的替代品。在人类优先级清单上，为了探索而投入大量资源去冒险没有意义（即价值不足）。翻过山去看另一边值得吗？当然。如果这要花费无数美元呢？就不那么值得了。
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“钱”而是价值的问题，钱只是价值的替代品。在人类优先级清单上，为了探索而投入大量资源去冒险没有意义（即价值不足）。翻过山去看另一边值得吗？当然。如果这要花费无数美元呢？就不那么值得了。
@mRGuitarShow1
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.
讽刺的是你的话表明你缺乏知识。知识就是价值，为了传递价值，需要一个媒介，即“交换媒介”，交换媒介是货币。知识通过全球货币系统扩展、传播、培养、创造和促进；金钱使知识成为可能。清醒点，摆脱你的嬉皮迷醉吧。
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.
讽刺的是你的话表明你缺乏知识。知识就是价值，为了传递价值，需要一个媒介，即“交换媒介”，交换媒介是货币。知识通过全球货币系统扩展、传播、培养、创造和促进；金钱使知识成为可能。清醒点，摆脱你的嬉皮迷醉吧。
@dphuntsman
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
我给你点了个踩，因为你不够认真。如果你希望积极的事情一开始就经常发生——当然，如果你希望它们随着时间变得越来越可得、便宜等等，我们人类发现利用利润动机并创建全新的私营产业是实现这些的最佳方式。- 戴夫·亨茨曼
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
我给你点了个踩，因为你不够认真。如果你希望积极的事情一开始就经常发生——当然，如果你希望它们随着时间变得越来越可得、便宜等等，我们人类发现利用利润动机并创建全新的私营产业是实现这些的最佳方式。- 戴夫·亨茨曼
@Martocciaweb
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.
我对月球经济的商业案例非常怀疑，冷酷的事实是数字根本算不过来。支持国际空间站上每人每天大约需要100万美元，而月球殖民地或基地的成本会高得多。彭博社应该采访经济学家，而不是宇航员和艺术家，以了解月球上可能有哪些商业机会。
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.
我对月球经济的商业案例非常怀疑，冷酷的事实是数字根本算不过来。支持国际空间站上每人每天大约需要100万美元，而月球殖民地或基地的成本会高得多。彭博社应该采访经济学家，而不是宇航员和艺术家，以了解月球上可能有哪些商业机会。
@ChLop-zz3lq
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.
如果付费客户是地球上的个人，这不可行。但谁控制月球谁就控制了太空，所以政府对此非常感兴趣。公司竞标政府合同来建造控制太空和月球的必要基础设施，这就是经济学家给出的冷酷商业案例。不得不说，这不太浪漫。
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.
如果付费客户是地球上的个人，这不可行。但谁控制月球谁就控制了太空，所以政府对此非常感兴趣。公司竞标政府合同来建造控制太空和月球的必要基础设施，这就是经济学家给出的冷酷商业案例。不得不说，这不太浪漫。
@KED-y1i
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.
开始了，终于有点科学道理了。如果你想开始在太空和其他星球上生活，那就先从在月球上练习这个过程开始。
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.
开始了，终于有点科学道理了。如果你想开始在太空和其他星球上生活，那就先从在月球上练习这个过程开始。
@AWSQuantumAGISupremacy
“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——这正是它的价值所在。没有空气，极寒，致命辐射……然而国家和亿万富翁们竞相争夺它。这是有史以来最具敌意的商业交易，但谁能破解它，谁就能拥有未来。月球淘金热全面展开！”
“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——这正是它的价值所在。没有空气，极寒，致命辐射……然而国家和亿万富翁们竞相争夺它。这是有史以来最具敌意的商业交易，但谁能破解它，谁就能拥有未来。月球淘金热全面展开！”
@fearmetoo-le8dw
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.
早期对新世界的探险也是致命的、昂贵的，投资回报率为-100%，但许多国家竞相争夺它。
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.
早期对新世界的探险也是致命的、昂贵的，投资回报率为-100%，但许多国家竞相争夺它。
@aureliopuertamartin3631
Loved how the video explained everything visually in a really clear way! And the aesthetics were quite nice!
我很喜欢视频用非常清晰的视觉方式解释了一切！而且美学也很不错！
Loved how the video explained everything visually in a really clear way! And the aesthetics were quite nice!
我很喜欢视频用非常清晰的视觉方式解释了一切！而且美学也很不错！
@Andreas-gh6is
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.
阿波罗计划太早了，当时的技术还没有准备好，技术上的差距只能用大量资金填补，无论是因重量增加需要更多燃料，还是因缺乏计算工具需要更多工程人力，这些成本基本上是为未来几十年的太空计划背上了抵押贷款。
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.
阿波罗计划太早了，当时的技术还没有准备好，技术上的差距只能用大量资金填补，无论是因重量增加需要更多燃料，还是因缺乏计算工具需要更多工程人力，这些成本基本上是为未来几十年的太空计划背上了抵押贷款。
@ozahmed4523
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.
它必须先成为富人的旅游目的地。一旦可靠性因素生效，更多人会前往月球定居点。
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.
它必须先成为富人的旅游目的地。一旦可靠性因素生效，更多人会前往月球定居点。
@urbanstrencan
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陆月球后如何将其货币化会很有趣，我想首先我们会看到稀土材料开采，然后可能是微型工厂……很棒的视频，我迫不及待想看这个系列的更多内容。
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陆月球后如何将其货币化会很有趣，我想首先我们会看到稀土材料开采，然后可能是微型工厂……很棒的视频，我迫不及待想看这个系列的更多内容。
@donkeytwoddle
guiding asteroids into impacts with the moon or orbit for mining might be an interesting method.
引导小行星撞击月球或进入轨道进行开采可能是一种有趣的方法。
guiding asteroids into impacts with the moon or orbit for mining might be an interesting method.
引导小行星撞击月球或进入轨道进行开采可能是一种有趣的方法。
@samr.england613
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!
我想对所有有思想的人来说应该很明显，如果我们要探索和开发太阳系的资源（通过载人任务），月球是我们进入更深太空的幸运垫脚石。我们很幸运拥有一个相当大的月球，如果没有它，我们可能一开始就不会在这儿。换句话说，现实点，朋友们：先月球，后火星！
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!
我想对所有有思想的人来说应该很明显，如果我们要探索和开发太阳系的资源（通过载人任务），月球是我们进入更深太空的幸运垫脚石。我们很幸运拥有一个相当大的月球，如果没有它，我们可能一开始就不会在这儿。换句话说，现实点，朋友们：先月球，后火星！
@mattyrjackson4261
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.
不错的概述，但常常被忽视的是，Firefly没有在“新”地点着陆，而Intuitive Machines的着陆器“Athena”试图在靠近南极的地方着陆，这极其困难。他们尝试这样做的原因是寻找冻水存在的证据。艰难的任务很难完成，做已经做过的事情没有意义。
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.
不错的概述，但常常被忽视的是，Firefly没有在“新”地点着陆，而Intuitive Machines的着陆器“Athena”试图在靠近南极的地方着陆，这极其困难。他们尝试这样做的原因是寻找冻水存在的证据。艰难的任务很难完成，做已经做过的事情没有意义。
@federalreservewolflegend3523
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.
对。这就是为什么我们应该首次把人送上月球，因为他们在1960年代肯定没有去过。
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.
对。这就是为什么我们应该首次把人送上月球，因为他们在1960年代肯定没有去过。
@jerryjungle5717
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，如果我们停止互相杀戮，每天在战争上花费的数万亿美元，人类能取得什么成就？
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，如果我们停止互相杀戮，每天在战争上花费的数万亿美元，人类能取得什么成就？
@Martocciaweb
We could all achieve quite a bit if we don't spend hundreds of billions of dollar on human space exploration.
如果我们不花数千亿美元在人类太空探索上，我们都能取得很多成就。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
We could all achieve quite a bit if we don't spend hundreds of billions of dollar on human space exploration.
如果我们不花数千亿美元在人类太空探索上，我们都能取得很多成就。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@donkeytwoddle
@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 如果我们是一个通过技术太空竞赛等决定优越性的物种，有人可能会说这会好很多……但一切失去平衡都会很可怕。做无止境火箭工厂的奴隶似乎也不好。屠杀人类似乎是最糟糕的创新和经济驱动力……这有点粗俗，对吧？
@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 如果我们是一个通过技术太空竞赛等决定优越性的物种，有人可能会说这会好很多……但一切失去平衡都会很可怕。做无止境火箭工厂的奴隶似乎也不好。屠杀人类似乎是最糟糕的创新和经济驱动力……这有点粗俗，对吧？
@TJDash
Someone else doing better is a national security issue because we're lazy.
别人做得更好就成了国家安全问题，因为我们很懒惰。
Someone else doing better is a national security issue because we're lazy.
别人做得更好就成了国家安全问题，因为我们很懒惰。
@Martocciaweb
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.
我没看到国家安全问题。目前月球上没有开采任何关键的资源，而且由于运回成本高得离谱，是否有任何资源被开采都值得怀疑。
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.
我没看到国家安全问题。目前月球上没有开采任何关键的资源，而且由于运回成本高得离谱，是否有任何资源被开采都值得怀疑。
@thebigoof9458
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，自从最后一次载人任务以来，每隔几年就有一个关于“我们将重返月球”的纪录片冒出来，你几乎会怀疑我们到底会不会回去。
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，自从最后一次载人任务以来，每隔几年就有一个关于“我们将重返月球”的纪录片冒出来，你几乎会怀疑我们到底会不会回去。
@aprilpower1158
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.
这次我们真的要回去了。今年有很多任务，下一年有人绕月飞行，2027年载人着陆，2028年中国载人绕月，然后他们也会在2030年着陆。美国、欧洲航天局及其合作伙伴、中国和俄罗斯都计划在下个十年在月球上建立基地。
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.
这次我们真的要回去了。今年有很多任务，下一年有人绕月飞行，2027年载人着陆，2028年中国载人绕月，然后他们也会在2030年着陆。美国、欧洲航天局及其合作伙伴、中国和俄罗斯都计划在下个十年在月球上建立基地。
@Mark_Ocain
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.
这些想法还有很多缺失的部分，我希望他们能解决这些。最大的问题是现在和未来的发射量将产生大量的太空垃圾，最终我们会因为碰撞风险而被困在地球上。即使现在使用了许多可重复使用的火箭模块，这也可能是个问题。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
这些想法还有很多缺失的部分，我希望他们能解决这些。最大的问题是现在和未来的发射量将产生大量的太空垃圾，最终我们会因为碰撞风险而被困在地球上。即使现在使用了许多可重复使用的火箭模块，这也可能是个问题。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@robertpearce7795
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.
作为唯一一家完整登陆月球的上市公司（尽管是倒挂着陆），我希望听到更多关于Intuitive Machines的信息。他们的市盈率仅为4.4，但2023年至2024年收入增长了187%。虽然他们的财务状况很不稳定，但偶尔也有盈利。而且他们已经在计划与SpaceX进行下一次发射，凭借获得的政府合同，我认为他们未来有巨大潜力。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
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.
作为唯一一家完整登陆月球的上市公司（尽管是倒挂着陆），我希望听到更多关于Intuitive Machines的信息。他们的市盈率仅为4.4，但2023年至2024年收入增长了187%。虽然他们的财务状况很不稳定，但偶尔也有盈利。而且他们已经在计划与SpaceX进行下一次发射，凭借获得的政府合同，我认为他们未来有巨大潜力。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@aniebovirginiamary3979
Providing homes for the homeless here on earth is more beneficial to humanity than disturbing the peaceful Moon.
为地球上的无家可归者提供住房而不是扰乱平静的月球对人类更有益。
Providing homes for the homeless here on earth is more beneficial to humanity than disturbing the peaceful Moon.
为地球上的无家可归者提供住房而不是扰乱平静的月球对人类更有益。
@havenmist2216
If only we didn't lose the technology to go to the moon.
如果我们没有失去去月球的技术就好了。
If only we didn't lose the technology to go to the moon.
如果我们没有失去去月球的技术就好了。
@notgreg123
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.
我们没有失去技术，我们失去了那个时代的机器和工艺。我们不仅失去了制造土星五号的机器，还停止了制造那些机器的机器。我们可以重新进行所有研发，从头开始生产，但这不仅会贵得离谱，而且产品也会比用现代技术做出来的差。
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.
我们没有失去技术，我们失去了那个时代的机器和工艺。我们不仅失去了制造土星五号的机器，还停止了制造那些机器的机器。我们可以重新进行所有研发，从头开始生产，但这不仅会贵得离谱，而且产品也会比用现代技术做出来的差。
@havenmist2216
@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、俄罗斯、印度和中国说他们在本世纪登陆了月球探测器，但没有载人。我们失去了氧气、温度控制和辐射屏蔽的技术吗？为什么他们不能送一个人绕月球一圈再回来？有趣的问题。
@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、俄罗斯、印度和中国说他们在本世纪登陆了月球探测器，但没有载人。我们失去了氧气、温度控制和辐射屏蔽的技术吗？为什么他们不能送一个人绕月球一圈再回来？有趣的问题。
@notgreg123
@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 我的意思是当然可以。你可以把一个人绑在那些着陆器上，把他们的宇航服接入一个能维持足够长时间的生命支持系统，然后送他们上路。这可能会奏效。但为什么你要在明知没有返回的方法的情况下还送人去月球？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@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 我的意思是当然可以。你可以把一个人绑在那些着陆器上，把他们的宇航服接入一个能维持足够长时间的生命支持系统，然后送他们上路。这可能会奏效。但为什么你要在明知没有返回的方法的情况下还送人去月球？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@havenmist2216
@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 也许有人可以，我不知道，在飞船里放足够的氧气罐和燃料来回程。我在这里只是随便说说。除非我们不仅失去了去月球的技术，还失去了常识。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@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 也许有人可以，我不知道，在飞船里放足够的氧气罐和燃料来回程。我在这里只是随便说说。除非我们不仅失去了去月球的技术，还失去了常识。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@notgreg123
@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 可惜现实生活不像《坎巴拉太空计划》那么简单，那些着陆器从设计上就完全不具备载人能力，它们和阿波罗登月舱比起来小得多。增加生命支持系统的问题在于会增加质量，因此需要更多燃料来携带它，但随后你还需要更多燃料来携带刚刚增加的额外燃料的重量。如果想让它能返回月球轨道，你需要更多燃料，还要更多燃料来携带那些燃料，很快开发就变得极其困难和昂贵。除非你有非常大的火箭，否则一开始就很难把这些东西送到月球。你还需要一艘完全独立的飞船来实现从月球轨道把宇航员带回地球，这会使开发时间和努力翻倍。所以，不，这不是简单地扔几个氧气罐和额外燃料的问题。发射时油箱已经装满，仍然只能勉强完成任务，因为它们就是为此设计的。
@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 可惜现实生活不像《坎巴拉太空计划》那么简单，那些着陆器从设计上就完全不具备载人能力，它们和阿波罗登月舱比起来小得多。增加生命支持系统的问题在于会增加质量，因此需要更多燃料来携带它，但随后你还需要更多燃料来携带刚刚增加的额外燃料的重量。如果想让它能返回月球轨道，你需要更多燃料，还要更多燃料来携带那些燃料，很快开发就变得极其困难和昂贵。除非你有非常大的火箭，否则一开始就很难把这些东西送到月球。你还需要一艘完全独立的飞船来实现从月球轨道把宇航员带回地球，这会使开发时间和努力翻倍。所以，不，这不是简单地扔几个氧气罐和额外燃料的问题。发射时油箱已经装满，仍然只能勉强完成任务，因为它们就是为此设计的。
@poodleinadoodle3270
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，人类的一大步。那时美国是为了人类文明。今天，在特朗普领导下，阿姆斯特朗得说：美国人的一小步，美国的一大步！
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，人类的一大步。那时美国是为了人类文明。今天，在特朗普领导下，阿姆斯特朗得说：美国人的一小步，美国的一大步！
@regolith1350
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.
去月球只有两个理由：1）地缘政治——声望、国家安全、国际软实力等；2）人类冒险——为了伟大而做伟大的事。从来没有经济上可行的商业理由。没错，虽然有很多很多PPT和CGI渲染，但投资提案的数学计算从未说得通。
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.
去月球只有两个理由：1）地缘政治——声望、国家安全、国际软实力等；2）人类冒险——为了伟大而做伟大的事。从来没有经济上可行的商业理由。没错，虽然有很多很多PPT和CGI渲染，但投资提案的数学计算从未说得通。
很赞 4
收藏