New Mars Forums

GCNRevenger, so an ion drive working over say 10 years would have no effect on something a million tons?

Ok, last night I had a really weird dream. I know what brought it on, I had just watched the movie 2010 again. But the dream raised some interesting questions that I need some answers for if you guys would be so kind.

Alright, in my dream I was standing on the surface of Europa. I was on some kind of tour because there was another man in a spacesuit standing next to me explaining some of the things I was seeing. For instance, the sky was [itch black and filled with stars and a few clouds. In the sky were 5 very bright stars. the guide explained that they were actually the same star, our sun, and that I was seeing 5 of them because 4 large mirriors were in orbit to increase the amount of solar energy the moon recieved.

I walked around for a bit on Europa, though it looked more like Antartica near dark. Then, out of nowhere, this huge blinding light zoomed past me. The guide grabbed me and pulled me back warning me not to venture anymore in that direction because a giant laser made of concentrated sunlight was orbiting the moon and melting the ice. On retrospect, I thought this was odd because the moon is tidal locked isn't it?

Anyways, the guide explained to me that the laser had two main benefits. One is to kick water vapor into the 'atmosphere' and make the most of the additional sunlight to create a greenhouse effect. He also said that most of the water vapor is broken down quickly because theres no protection from high energy particles like cosmic rays. The interesting thing was in my dream the water vapor was in effect being used to create a breathable atmosphere because the hydrogen drifts off into space easily due to low gravity but the oxygen remains.

Now I see obvious problems with this, it was afterall a dream, but could something like this be done? In my dream the guide said that the clouds of water vapor create clouds which create their own lightning and help split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. Now, an atmosphere of mostly oxygen would burn itself out right? We'd need some kind of inert gas like nitrogen to keep the oxygen from burning itself out right?

Well, it was an awesome and terrifing dream. I wish I could have saved it and watched it several times.

Hehe, that brought back some memories. I used to write the Mars Cooperation (think candy bars) and pitch the idea of selling mars for Mars, you know, school drives. Oh, well.

Excellent point about lotterys Clark. A space lottery held by our pioneering space enthusiasts is an excellent way to raise money from people who don't have enough to make major contributions but would still like to travel to space themselves.

People used to dream of flying like birds, now we have a thriving airline industry. Now people dream of traveling to space. The demand is there. Soon these dreams will be realized too.

Bill- Judging from public support of NEO tracking and funding, I don't think the public takes asteroids as too big a threat. This would work to our advantage concerning parking an asteroid in near earth orbit. And no I'm not talking about a civilization destoyer but rather a typical earth crosser of 100-500m in diameter. Even asteroids of this small size have millions of tons of mass and could 'fuel' our SE with electricity and mass for decades at a high rate.

I believe what we are seeing now is a practicle plan for deploying a SE. It is going to take a combination of micro and macro to get the job done. No need for complicated nanomachine walking up and down the elevator, just an on-site factory producing 10cm or longer strands and a conveyor belt stlye atomic sized 'connector' to bond our CNT together. God, it almost sounds too easy, ok tell me why it is.

And highlift has been talking about doing it for 5 billion not 20. So assuming it goes over budget, these things always do, by twice as much we are still talking about 10 billion. Money can be made doing this.

Also Bill, profit need not be generated initially. Your figuring is quite sound, I'm not arguing that. But companies often generate more funding even when their current project is just breaking even.

I think the future is very bright if reuseable launch vechicles and a space elevator are competing for the market. One will drive the other to be more efficent. 

Even if China can't make significant contributions to the ISS, and I'm not saying they can't, we need to include them. Why? Because if we don't, they are going to be aboard the ISS anyway courtesy of Russia or the ESA when they have their manned spaceflight program up and running. The sad truth is we don't own the ISS. Are we going to repeat the embarassing situtation before when Russia wanted to bring a tourist to the ISS and our position was 'don't cross this line'?

And GCNRevenger, while I agree that China isn't ready to enter a space race with us today, I'm not sure about the next ten years. All signs point to growing cooperation between China, Russia, and the ESA. If we don't play ball, we are going to be left behind very quickly. China has the funding to mount a better spaceflight program than Russia. their biggest drawback is we have been rather secretive with our technology. Russia has virtually brought them to their level, and in some ways China is doing better. The ESA can bring them pretty much current in a lot of areas.

The next ten years are going to be very intresting for China's space program. If we don't get on the stick quickly, I see them catching us in ten years and then passing us in 15.

Easy, double the efficency of White Knight and SpaceShip One.

And this isn't possible why? Sorry, I'm not as smart as you Bill, I missed something. Please put it in layman's terms.

As far as all non-SE activities go, our funder of the space elevator doesn't have to do that. Private companies already follow the tourists so I don't see that being a problem.

The space elevator could even double as a power plant for transporting of passengers to and from orbit by employing counterweights to each voyage up. Sending more cargo down, than what is going up, equals extra electricity.

I still think that an asteroid is the way to go. LEO is more dangerous every year due to leftover rocket and satellite debris. An asteroid sheilds you and your inflatable structures from nearly all debris. It is also a good source for construction material since the elevator is going to be so busy as you've stated. The cost to our SE owners could be $0 per pound when you are getting free electricity plus free metal ore.

Free is good.

Thanks Clark! I knew I was good for something....

Bill- You're on! What shall the wage be?

Folks, let's not be so pessimestic about the future. We keep assuming that there won't be another space race (Hello China), that there won't be a market even for low-cost space access (on your left you can see the Great Pyramids), and that reaching Mars is 40 years away (run russia run).

Colonizing Mars will happen. Why? Because transportation speed will improve to the point where a hop to Mars is easy. It's just a matter of when. I'd like to see Mars settled before it becomes too easy to get there so we don't end up with a colony of typical americans. If we go while it's still a challenge, then the greatest benefit is technology developed to conquer a hostile domain.

The majority of people on this forum are in favor of space development, but most wouldn't leave their comfortable lives for a life of hardship. The US wasn't settled by people that LOVED this country, but rather by people who wanted to get away from their native country.

Space isn't going to be developed by people you find on this forum. It's going to be done by people who want to get away, people like me. I am very odd as most of you have no doubt guessed. I'm agnostic, vegetarian and self-centered. I don't like capitalism. I loathe organized religions. I don't want to pay for a military like ours. I don't want this lifestyle that everyone seems to love shoved down my throat because I happened to be born here. In short, I want to escape.

If costs to reach space could be brought low by something like a space elevator, then the rich would go. With them goes a lot of labor to keep their toilets clean, backs massaged and hair cut. The wealthy would go just to be able to say they have. And where the wealthy go, the servants follow.

With toilet brush in hand......I am happy.

GCN- If we don't use an asteroid, what is going to keep the cable from being pulled down by Earth's gravity? A suspended cable in geosync orbit is going to encounter a lot of drag once it starts entering our atmosphere. I was under the impression that the cable would have to be kept taunt.

Images of suspension bridges swaying to their descrution come to mind.

Ok, lets assume for a moment that there is a SE and it can lift a pound for $100. I weigh 200 pounds so it would cost $20,000 to lift me to orbit. Now let's also assume that there is hotel at the end of the SE (asteroid or no). If they charge me $80,000 to stay a week in orbit then I'm still looking at only $100,000. There are hundreds of millions potential cusomers at this price range. Let's assume that 1 percent of the potential customers actually follow up with going through with it. We are still looking at about 2 million customers! With or without mining, solar panel power-plants, or satillite launch industry, there is still the tourism market.

Not to sound like 'Field of Dreams', but if we build it, them will come. A space elevator would be a lot less risky than riding a controlled explosion to orbit. As it stand now, only the wealthiest of corporations can afford telecommunications satellites, what about the little guys? There has to be ten times the amount of potential customers out there that would love to have their pet project in space, but can't afford it.

This is kind of off the subject, but space burials is an unexploited industry for the most part. Look how many thousands people spend in burial/cremation expenses. This is a huge potential market for our dream SE.