New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
Pages: 1
#1 Re: Not So Free Chat » $74 Billion - What would you do? » 2003-04-13 17:19:18
Hombre:
You need to take off six months (say) and live like a "bum" before you have any right to be judgemental, kiddo. You don't mind my calling you kiddo, do you? Because that's what you sound like--still wet behind the ears.
Space elevator? Fusion research? Drop in the bucket. But Mars Direct--now, $74 billion could make all the difference!
Freeing people, even for space exploration addicts like us, takes precedence because we're all there is, see?--situated in a universe that couldn't care less about our freedom to live and enjoy all-too-short lives, on an absolutely unique and beautiful planet that we've been so lucky to have evolved upon. We're all one family, and we who are free to do so need to nurture those of us who are victims, if only to prevent us from becoming victimized ourselves.
Meanwhile, it won't cost all that much to plan and test the initial Mars Direct options here on Earth--and while we're at it, let's see if some of the newly-freed Iraqis would like to become involved as well....
Take six months off to be a bum? You mean be lazy and stop working? Sure homeless people have a hell of a rough time but most of the time it's their own fault. There are some people that do need help though. The ones that actually can't help themselves like the ones with mental disabilities. But I can guarantee you that that doesn't make up the majority of the homeless population.
And actually I don't really need to take 6 months off to experience what it's like to know extreme poverty. My family was pretty poor the first few years of my life. Granted we weren't living on the streets but it was pretty close. My father would rather spend money on alcohol than food and clothes for my siblings. Luckily I went to live with my mother when I was 4.
Back to the topic:
Yes space elevators and fusion research. $74 billion is nowhere near a drop in the bucket for those two. I encourage you to read the Space Elevator Book by Brad Edwards. Sure it's probably a bit optimistic in the pricing but development and deployment aren't anywhere near $74 billion. Do you know how much we spend each year on fusion research? The US spends a whole $200 million a year on it. Even if you just put like $5 or 10 billion into it, it would be a hell of an increase. This would open up new means of propulsion to get to Mars. Add this in with a space elevator and the cost and complexity of a Mars mission is greatly reduced. An easy, cheap mission has greater chances of being funded by the government.
#2 Re: Not So Free Chat » $74 Billion - What would you do? » 2003-04-08 20:31:10
What would I do with that $74 billion? Well I sure wouldn't give it away to bums. Most of them are homeless because of lack of motivation and drug problems.
If I had to spend that $74 billion on something other than war I'd put it towards space elevator research, fusion research, and more space exploration. You could probably get those for that much.
But $74 billion isn't that high a price to pay for freeing 24 million people.
#3 Re: Not So Free Chat » Good books you've just read » 2003-02-17 02:49:34
I'm reading The Fountainhead.
#4 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator book » 2003-01-10 20:10:19
No problem. They also have a pretty nifty looking poster.
#5 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator book » 2003-01-09 23:44:44
For anybody who's interested in space elevator stuff:
#6 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » carbon nanotubes - applications » 2003-01-01 01:09:38
I would imagine it would make the Gibraltar Bridge easier to build.
#7 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator gets more funding » 2002-08-17 13:17:19
I was milling around at those websites and I began to wonder how often you'd have to replace the ribbon due to fatigue caused by wear and tear. Anyhow, I found it discouraging how NASA claimed space elevators won't be feasible until sometime around the year 2100. Personally, I think NASA is little pessimistic in their estimates. Considering the technological progress of the last 100 years I'm sure we'll have viable space elevator technology developed way before then!
The climbers can patch up the wear and tear when they go up. I can't say how often they would need to do it though. Maybe every month or so.
You can't really blame NASA for being pessimistic. Heck, space elevators might not become feasible at all. While I don't think it'll take 100 years to figure out if it's feasible, there's still a lot of work to be done.
#8 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator gets more funding » 2002-08-15 16:46:37
Do you have any links to sites with Edward's space elevator ideas? I really think this is the direction we should be striving to go in since it will drastically lower the price of getting into orbit and thus potentially open space to the masses. I wish NASA would take the radical step and do heavy research on space elevators as a substitute to building new launchers. It's hard to get enthusiastic about the new shuttle NASA is designing when it's probably going to end up being another $10,000 a pound to orbit wonder.
The link in my sig is the official website for it. It's got quite a bit of stuff under the Downloads section.
Forgive me for being the pessimist but what happens if it falls down? The elevator better be very light. We don't wish to drop an asteroid on our selves.
If it did fall down, most of the part that falls down would burn up in the atmosphere. It really depends on where it's severed. It's light by space elevator standards, coming in at 850 tons for the cable and something like a 600 ton counterweight.
#9 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator gets more funding » 2002-08-13 23:06:25
Honestly, I think Brad Edwards' space elevator is sort of like the Mars Direct of space elevators. Before his design, people basically only talked about huge elevators that would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. This design brings the price down to an affordable level. Now if we built one of these on Earth AND on Mars, Mars missions would really be in business.
#10 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Space Elevator gets more funding » 2002-08-13 10:50:00
Seattle-based HighLift Systems is hosting a conference this week to meet with investors and other parties potentially interested in a device that could open the final frontier to the masses within 15 years because of the space elevator's relatively low costs and extremely high traffic volume.
NASA has given HighLift a US$570,000 grant to continue research into the elevator and the company has received an indication of support from the European Space Agency, which has representatives attending the Seattle conference.
"With a system as inexpensive as ours, every nation could have a space program. Most universities could have a space program. And a few corporations could have their own space program," said Michael Laine, the company's president.
Source: National Post
#11 Re: Human missions » I give up.... - Manned mission to Mars. » 2002-08-09 20:48:38
please explain disadvantages of a lunar base.
There would be no real point to it. I think robotic missions are enough for the moon. A base would be pretty expensive and you wouldn't get much out of it.
#12 Re: Human missions » This might be a dumb question, but did Zubrin say - Mars Direct » 2002-08-05 14:41:34
OTOH, there's the example of the "Space Pen":
During the early days of manned spaceflight, they had to come up with a way to let astronauts take notes and mark checklists in space -in zero-G, ink won't flow down to the nib of a pen.
They spent $70 million, and developed the space pen. It's amazing: Writes upside down or in zero-G, writes under water or bleach or oil, writes on glass or anything else.
The russians used a pencil.
NASA didn't develop the space pen, the Fisher Pen Comapany did. It only cost $2 million for them to develop years before NASA was even started. NASA started using them in 1967 because using pencils in space capsules is pretty hazardous. The Russians also have been using the space pen for years.
Pages: 1