In that case, why bother with the orbiting station?
Because of all the reason I've already laid out?
You can dig much more easily than you can smelt metal, assemble airtight chambers, and add air, and you don't need other worlds to ship you stuff to dig.
You never addressed terrestrial/lunar centrifuges, nor the myriad ways you can control your environment even on Earth.
What were your other ideas?
Look this argument is getting contentious which means that I really dont want to continue it. If you have any questions because you are actually interested in the idea of space habitats I'd be happy to answer them. But these questions are kind of silly and you keep ignoring stuff that I've already explained.
No, you're ignoring my counterarguments. Plenty of them. If I was at a computer, I'd list all the ignored counterarguments with quotes and stuff.
It's an interesting idea, and I'm not against it, but it won't replace surface living.
Thing is, sunlight doesn't produce that much heat, other sources of heat would cost a lot to get into space, too, and no radiation is damned hard. impossible.
Still got the problem of the ore weighing more than the finished product, too.
Even if you account for the radiation lost prematurely the point is that you can radiate in more heat then radiate heat out for a while. This is just a fairly trivial engineering problem.
Again, ORE IS HEAVIER THAN THE METAL.
Oh, and engineering can't solve everything.
Thing is, sunlight doesn't produce that much heat, other sources of heat would cost a lot to get into space, too, and no radiation is damned hard. impossible.
Still got the problem of the ore weighing more than the finished product, too.
Direct sunlight on Earth's surface will get you to about 100 degrees in six hours. Over half of that light has been filtered out by the atmosphere. If there is no atmosphere...
And then you can use the lunar surface to soak up the excess heat.
