Jump to content

So if the universe is such a mess


12string

Recommended Posts

and earth is the one in a zillion to support life (as we know it), why all the talk about learning how to colonize Mars so we'll have a place to hang out after we screw up earth?

Mars is about -80F.  Wouldn't it be cheaper to figure out how to survive an earth that's a couple degrees warmer than try to get to Mars and make it liveable?

  • Heart 1
  • Awesome 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wilbur said:

What is the problem with the extinction of a species?  Why colonize anywhere? 

So now it's not enough to pretend Mars would have no value, you want to kill us off so we will have no value.

Civilisations need resources. We will tap the vast wealth in the Belt first. The tech we develop for that will make terraforming Mars possible. At that point, it will be the next obvious step.

That will be several centuries from now, assuming we don't devalue ourselves out of existence first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, late said:

So now it's not enough to pretend Mars would have no value, you want to kill us off so we will have no value.

Civilisations need resources. We will tap the vast wealth in the Belt first. The tech we develop for that will make terraforming Mars possible. At that point, it will be the next obvious step.

That will be several centuries from now, assuming we don't devalue ourselves out of existence first.

This planet and this solar system will end.   What does it matter who is at the helm when it does? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Homestead II seems like a cool adventure, and the trip pretty uneventful.

 

A craft like that, if it lost the ability to protect itself (with some sort of power shield) could erode into dust in seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, late said:

A craft like that, if it lost the ability to protect itself (with some sort of power shield) could erode into dust in seconds. 

For sure. That forward shield is powerful, but the guidance system made a mistake not avoiding that monster sized space rock. It was smart enough to "heal" and redirect resources back to the shield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

For sure. That forward shield is powerful, but the guidance system made a mistake not avoiding that monster sized space rock. It was smart enough to "heal" and redirect resources back to the shield.

They really had to stomp all over common sense to turn that into a love story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jsharr said:

Cordless power tools, Barbarella, Moonraker, Space Food Bars, Hookers from Mars

Back then, Maine had one or two computers. I am sure the big insurance company had one, and there might have been one elsewhere.

If you count computer devices at least as strong as the one that went to the Moon, we have millions, maybe more than 10 million. Just in Maine, a state with only about a million people..

That was the first small computer, by the way, the one that went to the Moon. Computer companies didn't want to make a small computer, NASA eventually resorted to bribery.

I don't imagine you have a computer. Or a bunch of chips in your car, or your cellphone, or...

Welcome to Earth.

Since this is your first time on my planet, I'd be glad to fill you in on all those details you need to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2019 at 11:37 AM, 12string said:

and earth is the one in a zillion to support life (as we know it), why all the talk about learning how to colonize Mars so we'll have a place to hang out after we screw up earth?

Mars is about -80F.  Wouldn't it be cheaper to figure out how to survive an earth that's a couple degrees warmer than try to get to Mars and make it liveable?

It would be even cheaper to do the things that will keep Earth from getting a couple degrees warmer, but humanity won't do it.

Consequently, we should be putting a lot of government research money into things like cheap desalination and transport of sea water, better irrigation systems - where most of our fresh water is used but 50% of it evaporates.  But we won't even do that - until there's a severe drought, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, late said:

Out tech is a lot more sophisticated, and you know that far better than most of us.

IOW, you have an entirely different reason...

As I've posted before I used to work next door to the remains of CANEL's hot lab.  If built in orbit or beyond and confined to deep space it would at least be dangerous only to the crew and passengers.

Your constant conspiracy's about my reasons are just bullshit from what appears to be a damaged imagination.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, maddmaxx said:

As I've posted before I used to work next door to the remains of CANEL's hot lab.  If built in orbit or beyond and confined to deep space it would at least be dangerous only to the crew and passengers.

Has to be developed down here.

Of course, if we had built a proper Space station at L5, things might be different.

But our nattering nabobs of negativity kept that from happening.

It's worth it, that drive could make mining the Belt possible, which would make the Gold Rush look like pocket change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The researchers have not yet demonstrated fusion with their device, but aim to do so by 2019 to 2020. Paluszek detailed his company's research June 3 at The Dawn of Private Space Science Symposium in New York.

https://www.space.com/37146-nuclear-fusion-rockets-interstellar-spaceflight.html

 

This might take another grant or 20.  The goal looks like it's still "producing more power out than fed in".

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maddmaxx said:

The researchers have not yet demonstrated fusion with their device, but aim to do so by 2019 to 2020. Paluszek detailed his company's research June 3 at The Dawn of Private Space Science Symposium in New York.

https://www.space.com/37146-nuclear-fusion-rockets-interstellar-spaceflight.html

 

This might take another grant or 20.  The goal looks like it's still "producing more power out than fed in".

These engines are going to require Helium 3, and we can mine it out of the Moon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, maddmaxx said:

That will certainly facilitate the 2028 launch date.  Now we're looking at about 40 more grants.  Researchers love those sorts of grants.

Actually, they quietly hate them.

Back in the old millennium, business in Space went over a billion/yr. We do more business in Space every year, and the sky is not the limit. It will keep going up to a trillion/yr and more. Although that will take a long time.

Civilisations need resources, and there are vast amounts of the things we will need in the Belt. Make the Gold Rush look like pocket change.

The first country to mine the Belt will be the top dog for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...