 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Space Forum » Will we someday....... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Matt Casey... |
 Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Orval Fairbairn... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article
<e95d693d-bcb3-455b-8bfb-2b6fcf548365 at (no spam) y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Matt Casey <mattcaseymatt at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars?
[/quote]
Not until we achieve some major breakthroughs in propulsion -- exotic
stuff like antigravity, free energy, etc.
OTW, the expenses of supporting colonies on the Moon and Mars would be
prohibitive.
Think of Antarctic research times 100.
--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider)... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Orval Fairbairn" <o_r_fairbairn at (no spam) earth_link.net> wrote in message
news:o_r_fairbairn-5E6337.23464520102009 at (no spam) 70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...
[quote]In article
e95d693d-bcb3-455b-8bfb-2b6fcf548365 at (no spam) y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Matt Casey <mattcaseymatt at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars?
Not until we achieve some major breakthroughs in propulsion -- exotic
stuff like antigravity, free energy, etc.
[/quote]
Funny enough I had a dream last night that I was arguing with someone about
the amount of information in a shuttle SRB vs. an oak tree the same size.
We determined an oak tree had similar energy content and could be grown for
like a $1.00. The problem was trying to release the energy that quickly.
:-)
So there's a breakthrough waiting to happen. :-)
Seriously, I don't think we quite need that level of breakthrough, I think
we can do it with less exotic propulsion methods. But it's not happening
anytime soon.
[quote]OTW, the expenses of supporting colonies on the Moon and Mars would be
prohibitive.
Think of Antarctic research times 100.
[/quote]
And that's a LOW end estimate.
[quote]
--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.
[/quote]
--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Doug Freyburger... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
[quote]
Funny enough I had a dream last night that I was arguing with someone about
the amount of information in a shuttle SRB vs. an oak tree the same size.
We determined an oak tree had similar energy content and could be grown for
like a $1.00. The problem was trying to release the energy that quickly.
:-)
So there's a breakthrough waiting to happen. 
[/quote]
Larry Niven beat you to that SF story line.
[quote]Seriously, I don't think we quite need that level of breakthrough, I think
we can do it with less exotic propulsion methods. But it's not happening
anytime soon.
[/quote]
I was thinking about fusion drives, background radiation,
stellar wind, distances, speeds, the Kuiper belt and the Ooort cloud,
how far into interstellar space the Oort cloud might extend and if it
might permeate much of the galaxy at thin levels.
What added up to me is if you get out to the Oort cloud with very
efficient fusion power there are probably comets throughout interstellar
space at a density that could make them mineable without getting close
to the high radiation environments near stars. Sufficiently advanced
civilizations might end up colonizing the comets of interstellar space
rather than rushing through insterstellar space going star to star.
Very different from the typical SF story.
The problem with my theory - If interstellar space were colonized by
some species they would gradually spread throughout the galaxy. In a
few tens of millions of years they would be everywhere. And then we
would be able to see occasional flashes from their fusion drives.
Maybe the X-ray bursts that folks think are novas in other galaxies are
the output of space drives much closer. A bit too much to hope for I
think. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Glen Overby... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Matt Casey <mattcaseymatt at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars?
[/quote]
No. We (the human race collectively) are too selfish, lazy and short-sighted
to do so. There will be dreamers who will get short spurts of attention from
governments who will use them for short-term agendas (e.g. Apollo as part of
the cold war with the USSR) but as we have seen, there is no long-term
interest in space exploration. Today the only interest in the space program
is self-interest: the contractors (and their employees) who get the NASA
contracts and the employees who make up the standing armies. Those who hold
the strings to purses large enough to pay for space exploration, typicly
governments, are preoccupied by spending that money on other things.
We will have dreamers like Musk and Bigelow who can spend their own money, but
I doubt that they have the financing to colonize. If some material is found
on the moon or an asteroid that they can sell at a profit, it will help bring
in either money or interest. But, ultimately, there has to be something to
exploit back here on Earth.
Not long ago I read a commentary saying that the "star trek generation" was
supposed to grow up and get elected to congress where they would support NASA.
But that didn't happen.
The only way that we (humans) can travel to the stars is by sending our DNA.
The conditions are too hostile and the trips too long for us to go there as
whole beings.
Cynicly,
Glen Overby |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Eric Chomko... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 21, 6:18 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
<mooregr_delet3t... at (no spam) greenms.com> wrote:
[quote]"Orval Fairbairn" <o_r_fairbairn at (no spam) earth_link.net> wrote in message
news:o_r_fairbairn-5E6337.23464520102009 at (no spam) 70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net....
In article
e95d693d-bcb3-455b-8bfb-2b6fcf548... at (no spam) y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
Matt Casey <mattcaseym... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars?
Not until we achieve some major breakthroughs in propulsion -- exotic
stuff like antigravity, free energy, etc.
Funny enough I had a dream last night that I was arguing with someone about
the amount of information in a shuttle SRB vs. an oak tree the same size.
We determined an oak tree had similar energy content and could be grown for
like a $1.00. The problem was trying to release the energy that quickly.
[/quote]
"I think that I shall never see
A poem lovely as a Solid Rocket Booster!!!!!"
Somehow I think something is lost in that. Also, too bad SRBs can't
replace themselves. The damn things require lots of TLC to fly again.
[quote]So there's a breakthrough waiting to happen.
[/quote]
Better to have all the trees back in exchange for the lousy newspapers
we gotten from them.
[quote]Seriously, I don't think we quite need that level of breakthrough, I think
we can do it with less exotic propulsion methods. But it's not happening
anytime soon.
OTW, the expenses of supporting colonies on the Moon and Mars would be
prohibitive.
Think of Antarctic research times 100.
And that's a LOW end estimate.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| bklooste at (no spam) gmail.com... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
no pain no gain , bring back Atomic bomb-lets and shunt plates and
you can put 4million tons on the moon or Mars with less impact than a
H bomb test and a relatively low cost of $10,000/ton. Or
alternatively put a refueling station in orbit with 6 million tons .
You can donate 1 Billion to medical treatments in poor countries which
will save 100's of lives and your radiation will kill a statistical
average of 1.
Doubt any pollies are good enough to sell that one unless there is a
big rock coming our way. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jonathan... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 10:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Matt Casey" <mattcaseymatt at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e95d693d-bcb3-455b-8bfb-2b6fcf548365 at (no spam) y28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
[quote]Return to the Moon and colonize it, go to Mars, colonize it, go
to the other planets in the Solar System, and go to the stars?
[/quote]
Our remote toys will have to do for now.
It's just too expensive, and too long term to justify
an effort with only scientific returns. With few
timely and tangible benefits for greater society.
But look at it this way, rovers like this put each and
every one of us right there on the surface
Mars Science Lab
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/
Videos
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/videos/index.cfm?v=2&a=2 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 1:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
[quote]Funny enough I had a dream last night that I was arguing with someone about
the amount of information in a shuttle SRB vs. an oak tree the same size.
We determined an oak tree had similar energy content and could be grown for
like a $1.00. The problem was trying to release the energy that quickly.
[/quote]
Piece of cake...throughly dry it, immerse in it nitric acid for a few
days, soak it in fresh water, and let it re-dry.
Your oak tree is now a giant piece of nitrocellulose (gun cotton).
The problem will then be to get it to burn slow enough, not fast enough.
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Glen Overby wrote:
[quote]
The only way that we (humans) can travel to the stars is by sending our DNA.
The conditions are too hostile and the trips too long for us to go there as
whole beings.
[/quote]
http://www.pierretristam.com/Bobst/07/wf041307.htm
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pat Flannery... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Doug Freyburger wrote:
[quote]Greg D. Moore (Strider
So there's a breakthrough waiting to happen. :-)
Larry Niven beat you to that SF story line.
[/quote]
If you were actually going to try something like that, an oak is the
wrong tree to use; its shape is wrong, and the wood is way too dense to
let the nitric acid soak through easily.
A coniferous tree would be a lot better as far as shape goes, and if you
want one with porous wood structure (not all the much heaver than dense
balsa wood) then a redwood would allow you to make one mighty big SRB. :-)
Pat |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:18 am
|
|