Re: The Economic Development of the Moon

Len wrote:

One reason SpaceX may not think our
approach is viable is because they do
not know anything about it--and, apparently,
don't wnat to know.

What makes you think that? Surely they would be interested if for
no other reason than to keep pace with potential competitive
schemes?

I presume Elon has good people. And
they have made a commitment to their
approach that conforms to the conventional
wisdom. I wouldn't expect them to
abandon it for our currently "paper"
design, which does not conform to the
conventional wisdom.

This is very strange. You seem to be saying that SpaceX is funding
a $3000/kg solution even though a $500/kg solution is available for
no other reason than an irrational desire to conform to the
"conventional wisdom".

I only know Musk by reputation. This is not his reputation.

As for our people,
we have a world-class team...

Len, please don't take this the wrong way, but is this the world's
opinion or just your opinion?

I think you have to get into specifics when you describe Musk's
people as merely "good" and your own as "world-class".

...that we
shall put to work if, as, and when our
currently promised funding materializes.

"Currently promised"? That sounds interesting!

Our approach is patent pending and not
necessarily obvious to anyone who
hasn't looked at in in detail.

Where would one go if one wanted to look at it in detail?

Even though
our design is theoretical at the present
time, it has been through enough iterations
that it might qualify as a 3.0 version, when
we get to the hardware stage.

Of course, if there are flawed assumptions buried in your design
the number of iterations is irrelevant.

I do not claim
that our design is the ultimate approach.
What I do claim is that the approach that
we have been locked into for 45 years or
more is a real loser (and not hard to beat).

Len, you do recognize the contradiction here, don't you? An
approach which has held off all comers for 45 years is the very
definition of "hard to beat".

Jim Davis


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: M$ fixes 26 Security Holes
    ... chose to bless us with the following ... different design, one that doesn't allow for security issues Windows/DOS ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: About starting by creating a domain model, and elaborating it to a design
    ... >> Interleave analysis, test, code, and design issues together. ... > process you are using (parallelism & iterations you are referring to)? ... next highest priority requirements -> ... productivity, right now) to help understand the problem space. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: ILC2003: ARC
    ... > traditional wisdom on software design"? ... First of all, from a language designer standpoint, I would think the ... conventional wisdom would be to come up with a strong fundamental ... the current wisdom of software design. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Antici pation
    ... bodies are accessories to our reproductive organs. ... So a better design would be for us to drop dead healthy ... Except that there is a use for older people to pass wisdom. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: "Non-dissipative Source Resistance"
    ... I conform to Mendenhall to the specific statement I responded to. ... Mendenhall's explicit statement. ... The design is quite spartan. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)