Re: Retooling the Vision for Space Exploration

On 24 Feb, 20:45, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
The choice is simple.

Are we a culture in decline?
Or are we a growing culture?

A culture in decline is past its prime and is more interested in
making the center more efficient rather than wonder what new resources
and capabilities lie beyond the frontier.

A culture that is growing worries little about efficiencies in the
center because they know that over-abundant resources and skills and
talen, lie just beyond the frontier.

Which describes us today?

Clearly, we are a culture in decline.  We see the costs and risks
involved in developing or even relying on our frontier more than the
benefits and gains.

Some will argue that treating the space frontier like any other
frontier in the past is naive and doomed to failure.

This is defeat talking.  ALL cultures in decline thought they were
being smart reigning in those naive explorers that wanted to waste
resources.  Just ask Admiral Zhang of the Ming Dynasty!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_exploration

He sailed across the Western Sea (we call it the Indian Ocean) around
Africa up into the Mediterranean Sea to Morocco - until he was called
back.  The Chinese people at that time were content with their
overland trade routes, and saw the Pacific and Western Oceans as vast
wastelands offering nothing of substance to Ming.  So,the ships were
recalled in the 1420s - to rot in the Yang Tze river.

Something to think about as you look at the new Saturn V exhibit.

I have posted here and elsewhere about my visionary plans to remake
the world a far richer and more exciting place using off-the-shelf
aerospace technique.  This requires;

 1) revamp the nuclear and missile proliferation treaties to allow
commerce in nuclear and missile technology that supports space travel
and commercial space transport;

 2) revamp the outer space treaty to permit the ownership of property
off-world and its commercial development;

 3) give substantial tax credits to investments made in off-world
assets

 4) revamp NASA and all other national space agencies as support
centers for commercial space development - in the mold of NACA at the
start of the 20th century

These four steps cost nothing.  They affect no programs, but they
release the $40 trillion in private capital on this planet to develop
space based assets and infrastructure.

What can we expect to happen once these changes take place?

Plenty,

 1) a steady reduction in the cost of momentum over time.  The cost of
momentum is the fundamental enabling factor for rocket business - just
as the cost per feature is the fundamental enabling factor in consumer
computing business.

 2) development of planetary charter companies.  these companies are
very similar to the land charter companies that developed the IUnited
States west of the original 13 colonies.  investors in England iput
money down for explorers to develop resources in Kentucky and Ohio
before those lands were fully mapped.  In the same way, investors on
Earth put money into companies of explorers that develop off-world
resources and assets.

 3) Greater use of off-world resources to reduce the impact of
industry on our fragile biosphere, while increasing living standards
throughout the world.  This will develop as follows;

    a) communications/information - satellites -
              one to one - telstar
              one to many.- Sirius/XM/DirecTV
              many to many - Teledesic
    b) space toursim
               sub-orbital
               earth orbit
               cislunar
               lunar surface
               mars
                multi-planetary
    c) solar power
                terrestrial
                earth orbiting solar power satellite
                sun orbiting solar power satellite
    d) asteroidal capture
                deflection - avoidance
                capture
                   terrestrial collision
                   earth orbit
                        factories
                        farms
                        forests
                        homes
      e) transport
              ballistic transport - earth
              earth orbit
              cislunar
              mars
              multi-planetary

Improved communication means not only wireless broadband nearly freely
available everywhere - new uses will be created.  Telerobotics using
Asimo type humanform robots and telepresence - to allow people
anywhere to naturally drive humaniform robots anywhere - and
therefore, work anywehere - reliably.  So, people rather than leaving
their remote village for the big city to send money back to their
parents - can stay in the village and use data-suits to drive robots
anywhere.  they can also use broadband and computer models to train to
do a wide range of jobs in demand - and keep more money in the village
- despite paying for the communications and hardware.  Just as doctors
got together back in the day to buy X-ray machines and so forth -
villages will get together to buy communications and data capacity to
bring jobs to their village from every-where - this makes the
satellite network extremely valuable when used in this way.

Solar power is more than panels on your roof.  When the cost of solar
energy drops to less than 20 cents per peak watt,its competitive with
major energy.  As costs decline, usage increases, and we're back on
the ascendant curve we were on prior to 1970.   From 1860 to 1960 the
cost of energy decreased at a steady 4.9% per year.  This created vast
increases in demand, as well as huge increases in productivity over
the same period.  From 1970 to 2008 - the average cost of energy has
increased 8% per year in real terms - and is accelerating.  This has
caused a stagnation in major economies, and slowed economic expansion
despite rapid improvements in automation and computerization.  The US
per capita income is around $42,000 per year today - had we benefitted
from a continuing decline of 4.9% per annum in energy costs over the
period from 1970 to 2008 - we would have a percapita income of
$250,000 per year today.  Pushing the cost of solar panels below $0.20
per peak watt- makes solar competitive with oil and nuclear power.
Once we're reliant on solar - we will have again unlimited
opportunities for economic growth, and unlimited opportunities for
declining energy costs - with rising living standards - even without
massive increases in produxtivity.  Once operating on earth,
terrestrial systems will be replaced with far more efficient earth
orbiting systems.  Once those are operational, they will be replaced
with yet even more efficient sun orbiting systems - costs will drop
well below 1 penny per kilowatt- which will support economic growth
for the next 200 years.

With low-cost solar power beamed from orbit, we also have the capacity
to beam power to where its needed anywhere in the solar system - also
at low cost.  This means that we can drive spacecraft with laser and
maser energy - as well as power industrial centers across the solar
system.  this will allow us to capture and mine asteroids and dispatch
industrial stations to where they can do the most good.  So, having
ended joblessness with telerobotics, energy shortages and economic
downturns with solar power, we will provide seemingly endless supply
of raw materials to feed our industry, from the small bodies of the
solar system.

As our capacity to build large pressure vessels in space increases,
their cost decline.  When those costs drop low enough, farms will be a
paying proposition.  This will add unlimited food at nearly zero cost
to our list of things we get from space. ,

Continued growth in our efficiency at building large structures in
space - power sats - factory sats - farm sats - will lead naturally to
growing forests in space efficiently - and providing the 1 ton of
hardwoods and softwoods each person will consume - which will grow to
20 tons per year - as incomes rise.

Continuing toward very low cost pressure vessels in space- leads
naturally to space homes - especially when combined with lower
momentum costs.  the large pressure vessels imagined by ONeill and
Bernal will be built in large numbers - and owned by individuals.

Continuing declines in momentum cost and energy costs mean that these
large privately owned pressure vessels are some day equipped with
propulsive elements that move them beyond Earth orbit - to span the
solar system - and beyond.

This will all happen within the next 200 years - and some of us alive
today - will be alive then to see it happen.

You are raising some very deep questions here. There are in fact other
symtoms of lack of self confidence other than space. Barack Obama as
well as saying he would spend the money on manned spaceflight on
education is also a protectionist. Hillary, or rather her husband set
up NAFTA. This is unpopular amoung blue collar workers as jobs are
being transferred to Mexico. I believe that a country that becomes
protectionist in already on the slippery slope.

If you are confident you say "Well we will earn our money inventing
high tech solutions, this is what we do well. Manufacturing cars in
Mexico lowers costs and is strongly anti inflationary. I do not really
want to stoke up manned vs unmanned but a self confident nation would
say "we will produce cars using automation, we will do all the tasks
an astronaut can do automatically, and we will undercut Mexico
precisely because we will not need anyone to make cars."

You mention 200 years. History moves a lot faster now than it did in
1421. Protectionism will mean that American industry is going to be
paying higher prices for goods and services than its competitors.
Hence protectionism will breed yet more protectionism very quickly.
Indeed if Obama gets in and he carries out the policies he is
advocating now America will visibly decline within one term. He is a
slippery character and might not do what he is muttering about.

The paradox is that America used to be championing free trade and
globalization and this call for protectionism is very recent.

I believe :-

1) We need to explore space, but

2) This needs to be done in collaboration with other countries.

On this second question I believe it would be far cheaper to get a
Proton license, rather than go on developing Ares.

I think one useful thing to discuss (another deep question) is how far
should NASA, ESA etc. be involved in the development of robotics, and
how far should it await developments? I personally believe that the
government should be responsible for funding "blue skies" research and
industry should be responsible for anything developable in the next 5
years. Most mixed economies have a similar criterion.

One comment that I have on the global warming debate. OK global
warming is real, and IF NOTHING HAPPENS sea levels will rise 5m or so
in 100 years. My point is this. There seems to be a lack of confidence
in our ability to develop technology in that period. OK deserts are
getting larger. What about desalinastion using solar power whether
terrestrial or space based? What about mirrors in space controlling
the Earth's climate anyway?

We seem to lack any imagination in ANY direction. We don'e even seem
to appreciate that heath care in cheaper in Mexico. I think I will
have a motto for this. There is in fact an answer to high costs.


- Ian Parker

!Seguro barador por halantes espagnols!
.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast