Re: NASA "LSAM" and where's sci.space.xx gone?

On 29 May, 16:21, Ian Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 29 May, 14:11, Alex Terrell <alexterr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

No they don't but they do drive excavators. If robots were to drive
excavators on the Moon they would need to be equiped with a similar
amount of AI.

Or a driver sitting in a "drive" centre in Bangalore working shifts,
giving 24/7 operation.

This raises another very fundamental question the question of time
delay. Some management doctrine speaks about the grade of employee
being determined by how long it took brefore their absense was noted.
If you have an MD planning the strategic direction of the company, his
strategic decisions are extremely important to the company but they
will take years (possibly even a return signal to Alpha Centuri) to
bring to fruittion. A journey to the Moon and back is 2.5 sec approx,
ignoring server delays. This means, let us say, that if you are
repairing something on the Moon you can plan out what you want to do,
but you will not have the actual manual feel.

So what we need is a remote controlled back-hoe digger, with a built
in 2.5 second time delay, somewhere in the Antarctic desert,
controlled from Silicon Valley. Lets see what and how they can dig.
Offer $1 million to the team that shifts the most dirt in 7 days.

You would add in some intelligence - mainly to stop the controller
doing silly things. Modern planes already have this feature.

Same for repair. I think a lot of nonsense is talked
about repair. You can ask yourself one simple question. Is it better
to send humans to the Moon, or doo you simply send a bigger inventory
of spares? If spares are not available humans will not be able to
repair the machines anyway.

Who puts the spares into the machine? Or do you mean entire redundant
systems?

Well Andrew Ng at Stanford is developing a flatpack assembler. Put
that on the Moon and any maintainance task can be performed, always
assuming you have the parts to begin with. To my mind any flatpack
assembler knocks stone dead the notion of the value of Man in Space.

Who fixes the flat pack assembler?

Humans are not necessary in the moon.

Are humans necessary?

The criterion is can human manual dexterity (I am not talking here
about general AI which is a much more complex matter) be completely
reproduced by a robot? I think that anyone who says "no" should be
prepared to justify that statement.

I meant in the broader sense. Are humans necessary at all? This sounds
like a silly question, but if you ask are humans necessary in space?
the answer can be that they're not really necessary anywhere, but its
good to have them around.

Man is in fact a tool making animal. We make tools for ourselves. Are
you saying that going to the Moon (as a human) has intrinsic value in
its own right? Are you saying that sporting reasons, such as perhaps
the ability to dive into a swimming pool from 60m is a valid reason?
If it were not so damn expensive (and dangerous) I might have some
sympathy with you.

NASA is I believe asking the wrong questions and putting the cart
before the horse. The question to ask is this. Suppose you have an
objective - suppose you need so much Helium 3 for example, how do you
get it? What is the cheapest method? If I have a mining station on the
Moon what is the cheapest way of maintaining it? Is sending
astronauts? or developing suitable robots? I would be surpised if
astronauts proved the cheapest solution. They are certainly not the
cheapest solution for anything scientific.

What's the cheapest approach to have a manned base on the moon?

That is a TAUTOLOGOUS argument!

So is "because its there". Settling space can't be done remotely.

Is learning how to live in Space, complete with low gravity effects,
not something scientific?- Hide quoted text -

Not really. It would be interesting to play a game of Quiddich (I have
indeed been reading too much sci fi - Harry Potter) would be
interesting to play. I am quite serious about this. If it were not so
expensive I would indeed be interesting.

Quiddich would be much faster if the brooms were piloted remotely. An
automated snitch hunter? However, its mentioned in Book 5 that human
electronics don't work around Hogwarts.

I think if you want to go the the Moon (or Mars) and you can raise the
money by public subscription, sponsorship etc. If you can get
broadcasting rights for a 60m board championship, or Quiddich no one
should stop you. What is wrong - very wrong, is that public money
should be used.

I am inclined to believe that perhaps (eventually) an emphasis on
robotics might indeed reduce the cost.

Congress is far more likely to fund a manned lunar base than an
unmanned lunar outpost. Putting humans on the moon is the objective,
and you can't do that robotically. Though of course, the more robots,
the easier it is.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Barack Obama Publishes His Space Policy
    ... Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go ... Humans can't do that job because they can't survive in the moon for weeks or months until the good cave is found! ... Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, enough to provoke cancers and blindness in astronauts if they live unprotected for weeks in a high radiation environment. ... Only once the good protected environments are found and prepared can humans live for longer times. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Space exploration for the rest of us
    ... :>>After 1 to 1.5 years in space, humans start decaying quickly. ... :2) The need of artificial gravity + thick shielding to sustain ... :3) Even a small "moon base" project requires an enormous expense. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: NASA "LSAM" and wheres sci.space.xx gone?
    ... :on the Moon. ... small robots that can repair/manipulate machines in the moon. ... Can you build a robot to fix a car? ... Humans won't walk about unprotected on the moon during solar flares. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Barack Obama Publishes His Space Policy
    ... :>:Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using ... :> Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go ... :Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, ... you have to construct a whole environment for humans ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: The moon, and Mars (or not?)
    ... > for human missions beyond the Moon, beginning with Mars." ... The head of NASA declares that the spaceships are too risky ... He just forgot to mention that the humans will not be ...
    (sci.space.policy)