Re: On the Nature of Exploration
From: Greg Kuperberg (greg_at_conifold.math.ucdavis.edu)
Date: 07/22/04
- Next message: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Previous message: Paul Blay: "Re: TRMM : Suspiciously large number?"
- In reply to: Dave O'Neill: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Next in thread: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Reply: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:47:43 +0000 (UTC)
In article <381574c2.0407220143.ab4addf@posting.google.com>,
Dave O'Neill <dave@atomicrazor.com> wrote:
>SS1 has shown that we can fly a low Mach numbers at high altitude.
>Something we already knew how to do (we being humans)
Or rather, it's something that government humans already knew how to do.
Libertarian humans never did it before. Some people think of these two
groups as separate subspecies :-).
>They have not demonstrated that this is a step into orbital or a
>dramatic reduction in cost to LEO.
Actually they haven't demonstrated any reduction in cost to LEO.
-- /\ Greg Kuperberg (UC Davis) / \ \ / Visit the Math ArXiv Front at http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/ \/ * All the math that's fit to e-print *
- Next message: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Previous message: Paul Blay: "Re: TRMM : Suspiciously large number?"
- In reply to: Dave O'Neill: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Next in thread: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Reply: Rand Simberg: "Re: On the Nature of Exploration"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]