On Feb 4, 1:11=A0pm, IsaacKuo <mech...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 1:18=A0pm, Phillip Thorne <petho...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > If we were actually interested in building maintenance-free structures
> > that last a long, long time, and cost was no object, what would we
> > use? =A0Stainless steel? =A0Diamond slabs?
>
> There are stones which can take weathering okay; it seems to me
> the big issue is how to avoid getting covered up by sand or
> vegitation.
> If cost is no object, I'd say build a huge "structure" on the moon.
> Maybe some sort of huge lettering legible from Earth, made of
> huge piles of boulders.
>
> Isaac Kuo
I think the Pyramids and Mount Rushmore have a shelf life on the order
of a million years or so, but someone will want to fact-check that.
Even if cost were no object, I'm thinking a big lump of rock beats the
stainless steel, diamond, and other high-tech solutions over the
really long haul. (Especially since you presumably don't want your
artifact to be looted by space pirates, post-apocalyptic gangs, damn
dirty apes, etc., for precious materials.)
|
