Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children


"Quadibloc" <jsavard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:b5bc10c0-2bb2-4af4-835b-f5fe5f4da761@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Dec 3, 9:42 am, Ian Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think I have dealt with that in another thread. I think personally
They may increase the risk to Earth slightly, but the overall risk to
humanity as a whole, once the colonies are independent of Earth, is
clearly lowered. But my expectation is, instead, that once the enemies
of freedom are faced with the reality that the total destruction of
freedom is beyond their power, they will be demoralized, rather than
redoubling their efforts. And because all our eggs are not in one
basket, the West's leaders can take a calmer and more determined
approach to threats.


It's pretty clear the military will lead the way into space.
The risk to earth from colonies are numerous. For one
their immense expense could drain our national budget.
Their military uses mean society would get little in return
aside from geopolitical advantages. And the notion
that colonies are somehow more sustainable, more
civilized and stable than an earthbound community is silly.

Just because they're designed by scientists only means
trouble, not a paradise. With the rigid military like
environments too small for democratic or market forces
to play out. And the emotional and psychological stress
of isolation, and I bet long tours of duty. I would think that
colonies would be rife with conflict and difficult as
possible to sustain.

I'm picturing a job somewhat like ..oh.. spending all day
underwater welding, for the military. So there's no
money, no fun and no place to go except back to work.
Great view, but otherwise a living hell.

Why do people seem to fantasize so much about
colonies?




Since I see al-Qaeda, Sudan, China, and so on as being *all* the
problem, and George W. Bush as part of the solution, not the problem,
naturally I don't find that sort of option as likely to be helpful.


Is it the people that's the problem? Or the system?

Democracy and freedom are always the correct answers.
Doesn't really matter what the question is either.

Nature shows us a system that can produce human
intelligence, the greatest creation in the known
universe. How can we possible find a more
desirable or better method of creating???

We must simply mimic nature in our societal systems
so that nations constantly evolve to ever higher
levels of prosperity and justice.

And nature comes in threes. Our founding fathers
must have known this.

An evolutionary system begins with two primary
driving forces, the static and chaotic. And when
those two are in an unstable equilibrium with
each other, the third dynamic attractor
spontaneously emerges.

With Darwin, the static attractor is filled by that which
follows deterministic rules, or classical mechanics.
Genetics fills the static attractor.
The chaotic is filled by that which behaves chaotically
as in a gas, where statistical or quantum like
methods work. In the case of Darwin, mutation fills
the static attractor.

The way to allow those two opposite forces to interact
and find equilibrium with each other is called natural
selection.

WIth society laws fills the static attractor, and freedom
the chaotic. Where those two interact and find
their equililbrium is of course the executive branch.


Static Dynamic Chaotic

genetics....>natural selection<.....mutation

judicial.....>executive<.....legislative

No different really from any other complex adaptive system

static....>dynamic<....chaotic
solid.....>liquid<....gas

Newtonian motion.....> thermodynamics<.....Quantum motion

science....> art <....philosophy

truth....> beauty <......love

buyer....> market <....seller

gravity...> space <....cosmic expansion

water....> cloud<.....vapor


The forces which seek to coalesce or prevent change
....vs...the forces which seek to dissipate or create change.
When in balance with each other.

This is the single abstract source of our creation
/and/ that of the universe.

Try it and see for yourself, define any system at all.
And see if the paradigms above define the ideal
state.

Complexity science inverses the classical scientific
method rigorously. And inverses the results.

What was the hardest, is now the easiest.

Complexity science gives us the ideal system
structure.....the correct answer....in advance.
It's simply a matter of changing the actual
into the ideal.

And that's nothing more than grunt work now.





John Savard

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
    ... They may increase the risk to Earth slightly, ... The risk to earth from colonies are numerous. ... ideological axe to grind. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Large Space Colonies and Large Disasters
    ... > Earth by enemies equipped with nuclear and biological weaopns. ... > observation and changing orbits of threatening asteroids will mitigate ... families and small groups will own large space colonies. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: ...Nasa/Griffin LYING about Public Support for Moon/Mars Missions!
    ... we have an existence proof: the Earth. ... self-sufficient, so if we built a colony with the ... But of course I recognize that this says little about space colonies we ... I am not making the argument that space colonization is not ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Large Space Colonies and Large Disasters
    ... >> Earth by enemies equipped with nuclear and biological weaopns. ... space colonies when they're mature will be far safer than ... >> Earth orbit for processing ... >> vessels will be housed inside stationary sheilding materials to ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Why Colonize Space? Because We Are Dealing In Absolutes
    ... Let's see, we have the Earth, a two dimensional sphere, with a primary productivity depth measured in meters, inhabited by 6.5 billion idiots. ... A natural or manmade disaster strikes and the lucky survivors vow to start a new life on the moon where life holds fewer surprises. ... What is space if not a wilderness, ... I see you have a more realistic concept of what space colonies will be like than Mr. Bradford. ...
    (sci.space.policy)