Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Robotic Lifeforms To Go To Moon 14

Posted by Hemos from the going-through-and-commercializing dept.
HarmlessScenery writes "A space.com story gives details about a commercial company that is planning its own moon mission. The idea is to send two robots to collect moon rock for sale here on Earth. The company hopes to make a profit from the rock, and selling access to live Web-cams and from toys / merchandising based on the robots.
Mark W. Tilden at Los Alamos National Lab, is lined up to design the robots. His personal objective is to get a whole robotic ecosystem up there, to prepare the way for human colonisation. The first batch will clear dust from a large area (after completing their rock gathering) - which might hamper future missions. Subsequent robotic generations could build solar farms and lay cable networks to provide a usable power grid."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robotic Lifeforms To Go To Moon More

Robotic Lifeforms To Go To Moon

Comments Filter:
  • I want moon rocks, to put in my socks Moon rocks, moon rocks, I put them in my jock (strap) moon rocks are blocks, but not like George Kox, moon rocks, moon rocks, s lets hok some moon rocks.

    I thank you from the bottom of my rectum. Which is inflamed. I'd rather not talk about it.

  • Please, Robotic Lifeforms?

    Until they are quite definitely shown to be alive I think we should refrain from calling them lifeforms.

    Slashdot Extra : Washing Machine Lifeforms abused by society and used as slaves.
  • So is this where the finals of BattleBots/Robot Soccer league thing are going to be held?

    (OT) This is a good step, even if NASA is not going to do it. With our current technology, going much past Mars is going to be difficult using basically remote control. So, as most of the Slashdrones have been screaming for, autonomous bots get a lot of the work out of our hands. It's also good to read that they are reusing ICBMS to keep costs down (and get a launch in the next 5 years or so). Question: do these guys then win the XPrize [xprize.org] too?

    Information just wants to be left alone. I asked it.
  • the prices are going to be sky high, who the hell's gonna buy them? i mean, robot goes up there, collects rocks. mad money spent right there, then shipping them back, vehicles to transport them are gonna be a bitch, well, at least the postage won't be bad since they're weightless.
  • I would be interested to know if the primary mission and the secondary mission are both programmed before the robots leave Earth, or if they are re-programmed once they are done with the first mission. In the article it is stated that the first mission is for the company (to collect rocks to ship back) and the second is up to the individual designing the robots (he wants them to clear an area for 'future development').

    Another thought, will this be something that actually leads to permanent human residents on the moon? Or will this just be the equivalent of that lot down the street that got cleared for the big mall and then got left? I mean, it's exciting, and having someone other than the government (through NASA) be in charge of it seems a lot more promising than what we normally hear, but doesn't it sound like the roboticist (I think that's what their called) is a little optimistic?

    If this gets much publicity, I look for the freaks to start coming out of the woodwork and screaming bloody murder that we are 'ruining the moon's habitat' or some such nonsense. Personally, I think that's the first logical step to getting off of this rock and out onto some other ones. We need to do this. Never mind the people that say we need to solve our problems here first. That won't ever happen. Not that we should ignore our problems here. But we can do more good (in the long run) for humanity by getting ourselves some diversity. Diversity of places to live, diversity of culture (instead of the homogenized mess that is happening right now) and the diversity of life that seems missing from our 'modern world'. Yes, I know we have some diversity now, but it's nothing compared to having humans live on different worlds, in different star systems, or even different galaxies (real long term).

    Anything that moves us forward seems to me to be a good thing. We need to think about what we are doing and why, but we shouldn't hold ourselves back like we have up to this point. Hopefully this concept will get driven home somehow. And the idea this company has of turning a profit on 'moon rocks' is probably the best idea that I've heard of yet. The only thing that would be better is to get a habitat built and sell 'vacations' in it (on the moon or anwhere 'out there').

    Make space profitable and I garauntee you we will see some serious shit start to happen. (A sad reflection on society at the moment, but an honest one.)

  • Mark Tilden (Score:3)

    by dstanfor ( 175527 ) on Wednesday September 20, 2000 @11:05AM (#766032)
    I don't know about anyone else out there, but I'm really fascinated by Mark Tilden's work. This just adds to the fascination. Mark is piggy-backing on this companies desire to get these moon-rocks so that he can get his robots up to the moon. His robots will cost $100 dollars, which is probably 6 orders of magnitude cheaper than any other robots sent out in space. Granted, the robots won't be much smarter then the moon rocks and dust that they'll be pushing around, but it's still cool.

    Mark's robots are mostly analog, which is completely opposite of most robotocists (sp?) designs. It's crazy, but they end up working, and performing the desired task. They end up doing it because they are light seeking, and their task becomes a side-effect of the robots movement, like his lawnmower that cuts grass that cover's it solar panel, or his window washer that cleans the glass so it has more sunlight. Of course they aren't living, but there as close as any other robots out there now.

  • Given this http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/09/18/165524 6&mode=thread, how feasible would it be to sustain any kind of colony on the moon? How often do meteorites impact the moon?
  • From what I understand about how Mark Tilden makes most of his robots, there isn't really very much programming involved. Like I said in my post, Mark's robots are mostly analog. He builds nervous nets (not neural) out of a series of transistors and uses that as the brain for the walking part of the robot. From there, additional sensors inputs can be added into the stream, and a digital head can be added to the walker to input different things into the stream. His walkers can be very similar to dinosaurs, in that they have multiple brains, 1 for motion and 1 for everything else.

    My guess is that the gathering of rocks and the clearing of the space will be done in exactly the same way. Mark's robots tend to be very simple creatures.

    I'd agree that Mark does sound very optomistic about the whole process, especially when the company only has plans for one shipment of his robots to the moon, and not for all the other steps that he envisions. However, there does need to be that first step sometime, and since the moon will stayed clear for about a million years, I don't think clearing the space will go to waste.

    Check out http://www.solarbotics.com/gallery.asp to see a bunch of different robots, mostly based off of designs by Tilden, or the BEAM (Biology, Electronics, Aesthetics, Mechanics) concept of his. The Smithsonian magazine recently had an article about different robots. It talked about robots and there progress in various labs around the world. In most places, they haven't gotten much farther then walking on 4 or 6 legs. They also listed the prices. For the featured (analog)robot of Mark Tilden : $2.50 . For all the other (digital) robots: over $100,000 . Something to think about there.

    Dave

  • For the featured (analog)robot of Mark Tilden : $2.50 . For all the other (digital) robots: over $100,000 . Something to think about there.

    I can't say I've ever heard that, because it's kinda wrong. I'm a BEAM roboticist, and I happen to know how much they cost to make. I'm currently working on a 4-legged walker. Basically everything is custom, and so you'd think I did it cheap. In fact, so far the main parts of the bot have only been around $15. But then you get to the motors. I happened across a good deal to buy them for $5 a piece, but normally you can figure $20+. $150 being the motor you need. $20 being a horible compromise.

    Granted, they aren't $100,000. But they're defninitely not $2.50.


    _______________
    you may quote me
  • I no longer have the article, but I believe the robot that the smithsonian showed was Walkman (I don't know what version.) If you scavange your parts from old electronics, and don't count the original cost, or the cost of labor, then it does get pretty cheap.

    Dave


  • First reply to first-post reply.


    ....er....something like that....
  • there's nothing you can't do with those bad boys.
    --
    Peace,
    Lord Omlette
    ICQ# 77863057
  • Can you say Software? Sounds like the beginnings of Rudy Rucker's ideas.

  • Ah, the age-old question; "sure it moves by itself, but is it alive?"

    I do not think that Tilden's machines are alive. However, I think that they are just about as close to artificial life as we have ever seen. It all comes down to a question of how one defines life.

    Personally, I use the unpredictability of living creatures as part of my definition. Now, Tilden's machines do things that not even he can explain. For example, once they solve a problem (getting over a hill, finding a target, etc), if you return them to the problem situation, they solve it much more quickly then they did the first time. This is certainly not a behavior seen in digital robots, and even rarely seen in learning machines. Tilden thinks that some sort of residual waveform in the robot's "brain" allows it to solve the problem again, but not even he can explain it completely.

    Sounds pretty unpredictable to me.

Slashdot Top Deals

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Close