New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#1501 Re: Human missions » Funding space - How much do Americans pay for sneakers? » 2004-10-15 03:19:21
First of all, why would the United States have to default on the loan?
The United State is the one that generating the credit and then they are the borrowing from United States on the credit note they created. The United States is both the creditor and borrower. They can do what ever they want with that credit note. After that credit note has served it purpose, since there both the creditor and borrower, they could just choose to wade that credit note and throw it away and generate some new credit within certain boundaries of course. It doesn't make any difference if anything been paid or not on that credit note.
Under the U.S. Constitution only the U.S. Government has the right to generate credit or print money. In other words the U.S. Treasury or government bank only has the right to be the bank of last resort or having the power to generate new money or credit. I'm suggesting that we put the Federal Reserve system through bankrupsy and reorganization.
Larry,
Well it is like this, Money or credit has to be based on something in FDR's time it was the gold standard, Nowadays it is the apparent fiscal and economic strength of your country. This value is not done by the US goverment or any goverment as such but is done on the international Monetary trading boards which trade finances about each day. For a country to start printing money it means more is in circulation (even if sitting in a federal bank) and this devalues the rest of that currency. The first things these investors in the US currency are going to do is get rid of there less valuable currency. Currently the United States is in a defecit situation where does it get the money it uses, not from taxes but from loans. If the US makes its dollars worth less than they where when it took the loan out it must pay back more of other currencies to pay the loan back. If it does not or cannot pay this loan back then it has defaulted with the dire economic situation that occurs. This has occured before an example was Argentina that had its currency devalued by 70% 2 years ago. This means savings in that country and its capacity to purchase abroad are much reduced. It also means companies inside that country are cheaper to be snapped up by the international multi state companies.
FDR's economic plan worked because the second world war happened. The United States found its factories and buisnesses in full production making armaments which where lend/leased to the allied beligerents in that war. What did that mean it meant countries like Britain, Canada, Australia paid for its weapons and ships they got from the United States. This meant that the even though the United States did not get money immediately it was still going to get paid and so had economic value. The money that FDR had spent was recouped not from the taxpayer as would have been needed but from the payments for the lend/lease materials. It was Nixon who was bolstered by the money lowing into his country was able to release the USA from the gold standard to become what it is now. As an aside Britain finally paid for its lend lease materials in the Early 70s.
#1502 Re: Human missions » Funding space - How much do Americans pay for sneakers? » 2004-10-14 18:00:30
...Don't forget that it was this process that rebuilt America that had gone into a depression and brought us out of that depression an industrial power second to none in the world.
In conjunction with World War II and its aftermath, making the US the major industrial power on Earth because everyone else was in ruins. That's the balance to FDR's schemes, which on their own would not have ended the Depression. Nothing is free, eventually everything has to be paid for, even if indirectly.
I'm not arguing that government can't use some financial shenanigans, merely that that's what they are. Government generated credit isn't creating something for nothing, it isn't just free money to do good things. Mars colonisation will cost billions upon billions of dollars, there's no way around that. It has to come from somewhere.
Look we want to build some physical item like a dam or a space station or a city on the Moon or a super train system or what ever else we want to build.
You basically have only two ways to finance it by one being private funding and the other public funding.
You go through private financing which is more concerned with making money and the infrastructure take second place even if it needed to make society function. It takes twenty years to build these infrastructural projects and it has a usefull life of another thirty or forty years after that. Now within this private funding we have two ways to fund it and both ways require a return on investment or they won't choose to invest in the venture. These are the bankers and the investers and they play a part in society, but there interest are primarally self-interest. No banker nor private investor will volintarally cancel debt or wright stuff off loans on a continual bases. They just won't do it. Here what they will demand:
Banker will want the money loaned and maybe 5% interest on the loan. Let say we need the money for thirty years to build what ever we are building in space to build and start recieving a pay back on it. Let say we have to borrow ten billion dollars to build what ever we are going to build. The rule of 72 give us the pay back price in thirty years. We divide the interest by 72 and it will tell what it will be with simple interest. So 72 divided by 5% interest is 14.5 years that we would have to pay twenty billion dollars or just over thirty billion dollars in thirty billion dollars in thirty years.
Most investor want between 7% to 15% interest per year to invest. Now there might be a few small investors like you and me who might take less or even make a donation, but we are the exception. Or maybe there might be a benifactore who has million of dollars like the one that came along for the space ship one developement project, but those are exception and not the rule. But, to get the big serious investor in on a consistant bases and get them to put there money down or invest, there going to have to be a consistant posible return on his investment of 7% to 15% interest. Beside the ten billion dollars that they are going to invest, they will be expection between $40 to $70 billion dollars.
Now let go to government generated credit that the government is creating. This credit is not being generated for the purpose of making someone whealth, but for the purpose of building needed infrastructure and generating business activity in the physical economy. Since the Federal Government generated it, they make rules on how it going to be use and what happens to it. They choose to charge 0% or up to 2% interest if they choose to. They can deffer interest payments for thirty years and have absolutly interest paid on the amount that was borrowed and then charge 2% interest after that. Or they could sell it off to private bank and let them collect the 2% or 3% interest that going to be charged or off load it to lunar bank that was setup over the last thirty years as a result of U.S. Federal investment in the moon project. Or the U.S. Government could do what Alexader Hamilton did meny times and creat self-exstinguinshing debt. Beside, by this time, the U.S. Government has already got there money several times over. When the U.S. Government does this type of investing, they get an emidiate return to the U.S. Economy of three to four times, because that how meny times the new money rolls over after it been generated. If the Apollo mission is any example, it could roll over another 14 times in technological spin off and new business activities of invention and such. Oh, yes after only thirty years, we could still only owe 10 billion dollars and not that thirty or forty or seventy billion dollars if we had choosen to go through a private institution. It beat having to pay 20 to 60 billion more in interest charges.
Because of these kinds of benifits to the U.S. Economy, the United States should engage in such massive infrastructural building project both down here and in space.
Larry,
It sounds like it would be a total fiscal nightmare leading to hyper inflation and the eventual devaluation of the United States currency. This is because a country is only as powerful as its apparent worth as no country has the gold standard to be able to actually to pay the holders of its currency. Another problem is that the United States will have to eventually default on loans that are generated and this will mean no more credit will be given. A country is only as strong as its financial status is and in these times if the USA was to go and do for what is a better term a soviet block 5 year plan then it would suffer a major reduction in its financial power. The first thing to go would most certainly be that barrels of oil are measured in dollars with the major prestige loss that goes with that.
#1503 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Russia wants assembly stations - To build Lunar and Mars ships » 2004-10-14 16:48:34
Interesting point to add that the ISS as originally planned was supposed to be a Hanger and assembly station for the return to the Moon and missions to Mars. It was only dumbed down after cost overuns. The orbit it is in reduces its capability to do this function and this was done only to allow the Russians to contribute. It is very ironic that the ISS is useless for a mission to the Moon and Mars assembly and suffers problems as its architecture was supposed to have the assembly dock in the center. And this was done at the request of the Russians and now they plan there own Assembly station.
If I was of a cynical mind I would say was this done deliberatly ???
#1504 Re: Human missions » Funding space - How much do Americans pay for sneakers? » 2004-10-14 16:36:24
The United States like most western countries has an aging population (so called baby boomers) which has a poor personal pension situation and will need goverment to supply finances to combat poverty as they hit retirement. What the United States also has is a federal budget that has no ability to meet its real ends and is spiralling into a major defecit situation. No political party can afford the fallout of doing what has to be done to sort this by the raiseing of taxes by substantial amounts like a dollar a gallon of fuel etc that would provide finances to sort this problem.
Frankly for us to expect the sustained spending from goverment that is needed to do the Bush plan is ridiculous under the current political climate. Unless we can prove that it is in the United States financial interest the current Bush plan will go the way of the 90 day report, branded a financial impossible. With the pressure on all goverment spending that NASA will be under then it is likely that NASA will be a much reduced entity in the future unless it can make the American people believe it is an essential program.
#1505 Re: Human missions » Funding space - How much do Americans pay for sneakers? » 2004-10-14 09:26:17
NASA is an organisation dedicated to the advancement of science it only considers utilisation of space as an afterthought. It will only be when we can demonstrate that there is a need to go further than Earth orbit that there will ever be enough funds to do that activity.
We allways see that it is funds that are needed to push Humanity into space but we never have enough or are waiting for some discovery to give cheaper flights so that the funds we do have can be stretched. What we have forgotten is that the funds can be found that would allow us to do what is needed if we had support from goverment etc. And the only way to get goverment funds is to have the public supporting you in the first place. The problem with space advocacy groups is that they tend to preach to the converted in that the small minority of a countries population which understand and wish to push for space is too small for any politician to really have to bother about. If there was a general movement to push for space which means general public open support then it would be a different matter. At the moment though you could ask the general public what they think of space and you will probably get the answers expensive, nothing I can do, pretty pictures, dangerous etc.
And what space advocacy groups and the Mars society in particular is that there is opposition to the further advancement into space of mankind. As long as people think the money should be better spent on Earth there will be opposition. And there are groups who would really oppose any form of increased utilisation of space and these groups are pretty powerful. And there are calls to have all space programs stopped with the money put to what these groups call better uses. And unless we can prove them wrong then there will remain the state as we are hoping that something might change or until the chinese get there first.
#1506 Re: Human missions » Kerry's position on space *2* - ...continue discussion here (for now) » 2004-10-11 11:38:10
I really dont think either of the two candidates have a particular interest in the future of space. Frankly for one of the two candidates to call for a mission to Mars and the Moon and then provide no support in real terms or for another to go to the center of the space Industry in the USA and not mention space once is well, disapointing.
If there will be no goverment funds coming there will be no real push for space. NASA is handicapped by its having to support the Shuttle and ISS and will still be for many years to come. I really do not expect much progress on the manned space front for many years to come coming from NASA and unless private enterprise or the military succeed I doubt ill still be alive to see the first man on Mars.
#1507 Re: Not So Free Chat » Kenneth Bigley beheaded... » 2004-10-10 12:55:28
And another thing ... !
I've noticed Josh putting inverted commas around the word "insurgents" and Stu has gone to some lengths to point out the kinds of words used by Western journalists to describe Islamic extremists.
I would like to add my two cents worth here as well.
The papers and press can only go with what the political leadership calls them and Donald Rumsfield calls them "insurgents"
The only way to treat them with the contempt they deserve is to call them what they truly are terrorists not insurgents not rebels terrorists. Cindy if Blair is chucked out and the main reason is the Iraq crisis it wont be that British citizens are being kidnapped and murdered or our soldiers killed it will be that the British public are put off about the spin that occured in the lead up to the war. But we are in Iraq now and we have to stay the course and win this thing. If we succeed we will have a free democratic country surrounded by countries that are the complete opposite and this will give the people of those countries hope and a way to go.
#1508 Re: Not So Free Chat » Kenneth Bigley beheaded... » 2004-10-09 12:06:01
What people must realise that these thugs (thugs being quite relevant as the term comes from thugees a small minority who murdered in the name of religion but really just for profit) ARE A MINORITY TRYING TO STIR TROUBLE SO THEY CAN PROFIT.
They want a holy war and know the only way they can get it is to stir the vast majority of Muslims to there twisted side. What they want is to cause a western backlash and to get it they murder westerners using western media to push there ideals and expect our press to point the blame not on them but at our elected politicians. What they want is for the people of the west to retaliate and give credence to there propaganda that the west wishes to destroy there religion. These groups are funded by supporters and by criminal means. How do we stop them.
To get at these criminals requires a many pronged attack to work. The first thing that must be done is to go after there funding and people who pay money to these groups be named and shamed and hopefully prosecuted. This is hard but it can destroy these organisations. The second thing is to ensure that these criminals can never feel safe and to that we need to know what they are doing we need to actually be inside the organisations with our own sleepers and to have a very good intelligence on there operations. Thirdly the actual combat cells must be stopped, Hard. This means hunting them down and killing them and the leaders in whatever country they are. In this the example is Israel who does just this and seems to be having the some success. Britain was using the same tactics on the IRA which eventually lead to the IRA sueing for peace.
Finally the only sure way to destroy these organisations is to destroy the enviroment that breeds them. The west has no choice at the moment but to deal with the middle east as it is there where the oil that runs our economy comes from. Until oil came the majority of the Middle east including there leaders where poor very backward regions. Now they are a rich society in the case of the oil states but the majority of the people are still backward peasants. They are brought up on stories of the crusades against islam and of the great jihads. One way is to improve the conditions of these people and to bring there standards of living up to the standards we enjoy. We are trying to do that now and these extremists are trying to stop us.
Of course if we moved away from an oil based economy these countries would have no power over us and with that and no income coming in they become the minor states they should be and looking to the rich west for a handout.
#1509 Re: Civilization and Culture » Reproductive rights - Society vs. Individual » 2004-10-08 18:17:49
Until the the 1960s it was common practice for certain countries to force unmarried mothers Criminals and children with learning difficulties to have sterilisation operations. And the worst part is it is actually countries we believe to be the epitome of human rights and for freedom. These countries
Norway
Sweden
United States of America
And others
How far will we fall if we go back down the road that lead to those eugenic laws especially now that we can actually see if what genome a person has will POSSIBLY cause that illness to be passed down the generations. What do we call an illness. Is to be born epileptic, colour blind, blonde? an illness to be stamped out all personal choice destroyed.
When we decide that we want to create a super human then it automatically means those not born "perfect" are second class citizens and therefore to be despised. This idea had one great champion but many faces, The champion Adolf Hitler but his ideas came from many sources and his liebensfran project an attempt at what his idea of a master race would be. Do you think it did not happen, Ask the spartans who would kill there children if they where slightly imperfect, that is what any plan to create cloned children in a vat would ultimatly lead us to.
I have rarely read a thread that has angered me as much as this one did, It is the potential we face with our ability to clone that leads us to a very very dark path. The worst thing is that the actual technology to clone children is getting easier.
#1510 Re: Human missions » Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized » 2004-10-08 17:46:54
The Alvin is a research submarine par excellence but it is quite old as these things go and has been passed by a lot more modern designs though they all appear to be of roughly similar shape. In this case a reinforced ball to hold the crew with motors and other systems bolted on or located in the equipment section. The woodshole institute is a wonder for marine science but it is a public center and is totally interested in all sea sciences and not what the Japanese and Chinese have in mind for the Ocean. Both the Japanese and Chinese new submarines are being pushed by commercial and strategic concerns. The concerns are the new consumer fuel of the 21st century gas hydrates and they are found usually deep deep underwater. It is for this reason alone that the submarines and super ROVs are being constructed and the reason Japan is doing major research into autonomous ROVs that will allow the automated collection of this fuel source.
The technology for deep underwater colonisation is not above our capacity it is though above the limit we would fund for a manned prescence in the depths for the actual returned product. We have permanently manned habitats at the moment but they are tourist orientated. I have to ask if a nuclear submarine can maintain permanent under the surface operations at 200 feet for 6 months, Why is there no permanent station at that depth. My only answer is at the moment there is no reason to do so.
#1511 Re: Human missions » Long duration Human space missions - Can we survive them? » 2004-10-06 08:52:56
Tether ware can be better tested on Earth than in space as it does not take anything more than a centrifuge and weight which can be simulated on earth reasonably easy.
Testing artificial created centrifugal forces to see if they work on Humans can though only be done in the prescence of zero g. If we plan to have Humans in long term habitation of such a structure it requires to be of a reasonable size so as to allow them the chance to move and do useful science related tasks. Incidentally it would be the perfect way to test a Mars semi or direct mission Hub and any improvements put in place for the actual mission vessels.
It would also allow the space advocates who wish for O'Neill type stations to be made to try out in real experimentation a real such station. And Bigelow has always wanted to create such a station made of inflated modules attached to a frame so as to allow his space tourists to have a decent sleep at nights before playing in zero g again
#1512 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here. » 2004-10-06 08:42:17
Chandrayan-1 is a decent first attempt for India and it is especially telling considering the reasons the probe is going. Its a mineral survey probe.
Both India and China know for them to increase there populations quality of living to the degree that the west has they must either be in conflict for the same resources as the west and as such either a bidding war or have to find new resources. India like China wants to be the next superpower and they do not exactly like each other too well after the the war in the 1970s and the occasional artillery exchanges.
So India which we in the west have a tendency to discount wants to go the Moon and mine, interesting that they must have the will and determination that we lack.
It will come down to a new space race soon enough with the winner the new solar superpower and the use of the minerals in the heavens.
#1513 Re: Human missions » Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized » 2004-10-06 08:32:42
At the moment the study of the deepest parts of the sea are best done by telerobotic rovers which can stay on station for as long as the surface crew can hold out. The experts at this are the Japanese but they have some up and coming competition from the Chinese who need this technology for there plans for the Spratly islands.
Study of hydrothermal vents by this means are in terms of exploration reasonably cheap you just have to pay wages and the cost of the vessel the dives are based upon.
Its when we need these vessels to remain on station for extended periods of time that it becomes cheaper to create a more stable and less long term expense of a rig. But if we want to do this away from the continental shelf we do not have a means to remain on station permanently. We are completely at the disposal of the weather then.
Usually near the Hydrothermal vents are quite high raised areas called seamounts which are the extinct reamains of the vocanoes themselves moving on. These subsurface or sometimes higher mountains are possible to station rigs on to do long term study but they would be at the constant risk of severe weather damage and this leads to the possibility of creating subsurface habitats for study of the sea. Frankly though the cost is prohibitive but with the recent advances in technology in creating underwater reinforced concrete structures this may not remain so. Some of the best such places are located in the Atlantic and the seamounts are in themselves one of the most importantplaces to study wildlife left to explore. The reason they are the home of the most commen coral reef. The cold coral reefs are at extreme risk of being destroyed and with it the home and breeding zones of some of the most important species of fish in the ocean
#1514 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Antimatter Bomb - Air Force working Antimatter develoment » 2004-10-06 06:46:01
I have always wondered what it would take to create an Anti-matter rocket. Could we use the extreme heat created in the annihalation of matter to heat up a water or similar source and the pressure ejected give us enough thrust or could something else be done.
#1515 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Universal Health Care on Mars? - How best to take care of Martians? » 2004-10-06 06:29:19
There will be universal health service at first. Certainly there will be doctors whose only job will be to provide medical health care to the people on Mars.
1) In Britain our National Health Service is showing some signs of age its getting a bit creaky as it was built in the 1940s and the increases in costs to maintain it and other social welfare has increased and increased. Certainly knowing that if I break my leg I will immediately be taken to hospital and will be seen is a great worry I dont have. The problem comes for health services is that modern medicine is not cheap. Some of the most effective medicines are incredibly expensive and more and more of these appear each year with people expecting the right to have the best medical care. And then you have what should be classed as needed on a health service. Should plastic surgery be on it? Should sex change operations be on it?. Then the universal health care system needs to have a degree of people putting money into it from wages earned but if the base of earners decreases due to a more older and older population then the health service is in trouble.
#1516 Re: Human missions » Long duration Human space missions - Can we survive them? » 2004-10-06 06:12:30
If we want to go to space we must show a real need to do so otherwise when it comes down to it we will never get anything really done that we want. Appollo was a showboat and as such when it accomplished its mostly propoganda mission it was closed down. When we return to space we have to do something that really can benefit the people of earth and we mean financially as at the moment we do not as a collection of space advocacy groups have enough public or political clout to be able to push through an agenda to get space back into the public life as it was in the 1960's.
Mars will remain a dream as long as we have the budget we are dealing with each day and it is a smaller budget comparitive each year. To colonize mars we will need a means to get there and currently with or technology this will cost too much. Battlestar Galactica class of colonisation ships will remain a dream if they are launched from Earth and will still be horribly expensive if made from lunar/asteroid materials. We are limited to doing small steps and going back to the Moon is a good one but it will be better if we can return material to Earth that is in short supply here and is a material that we need to be able to develop new technologies that support or increase our quality of life. Currently the two such materials we see are Helium3 and platinum group materials. It is all to do with energy you see. As our dependance on fossil fuels increases and our supplies thin out then the prices of these resources increases and the alternatives which require an expensive degree of change become more and more interesting to commercial exploitation.
Helium 3 is a mainstay of fusion as it allows a type of fusion that we think can be a) the most efficient for energy production b) easier to maintain and start as we do not need incredible magnetic fields to actually try to keep the reaction focused c) its cleaner radioactivally
Platinum group metals are rare on Earth as the resources we mostly get them from in South Africa is an Old meteorite impact crater and as such we are already tapping space resources. We need platinum group metals to be able to create a new form of economy other than the oil based one we have this being the hydrogen based economy, But we need platinum for a lot of other things as well it is the material we need to make the expensive filters to reduce greenhouse emissions and the supply of these metals is drastically running short as the mines are played out.
So if we can show to the American buisness and political community that getting to space and sending these back will benefit the good old USA then we will get the will to go back to space and allow the infrastructure creation that will allow further advances into space. These further advances will be simple spin offs of our new industrial capacity in space.
And yes im Scottish but my own country cannot do it but the USA can and should.
#1517 Re: Human missions » Long duration Human space missions - Can we survive them? » 2004-10-06 05:50:08
If we want to see if artificialy spinning a ship on a tether will create gravity in which a Human will feel reasonably comfortable then we should try it. But using Soyuz or progress modules is a no go for a start they are not designed for having gravity in the first place. You can hardly stand up in one and that is the point we need to see if normal human movement will work and also that prolonged human occupation is a go'er in that enviroment. So we need an alternative and in this new enviroment of allowing small industry to access space we should give this job to. Bigelow.
Yeah I know, but his habs can inflate and as such we can fit both habs needed into a smaller rocket and simply installing ion engines should provide the motive force to accelerate and slow down. It would also give a chance to actually see how effective these inflatable structures are and as his cost estimates to get habs working is cheaper than the "heavy" alternative and this era of shrinking space budgets it has to be done as cheap as we can get it.
#1518 Re: Not So Free Chat » Musicians & musical instruments » 2004-10-05 15:15:39
I have to admit I have tried the bagpipes but I did not practice enough to get the coordination right but I was half decent with the chanter 
#1519 Re: Human missions » "Mission to Mars" - Michael Collins » 2004-10-05 04:25:53
Mr Collins came from a time when in sitru resources where not considered and the alternative was the heavy battlestar Galactica missions. Mr Collins would also have had no access to a nuclear engine/power source though he would have been wishing for its capacity.
But like most people who planned Mars missions it really comes down to the financial cost versus science gain. And at the moment the cost to send people to Mars is not worth doing it. We must bring the price down.
#1520 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Transparent Alumina - When Science fiction meet Science fact! » 2004-10-04 16:40:19
Well if they can do that get them working on warp drives
#1521 Re: Human missions » Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized » 2004-10-04 16:34:23
One of the few advocacy groups for exploration of the sea is the Cousteau society. Since the Death of Jacque the Cousteau society is becoming more and more involved in the conservation of the oceans and is developing a couple of new vessels. (the original Calypso was involved in a collision a few years ago and sank though refloated it is now a museum)
Like everything the 50s and 60s everyone thought we where going to live in a bright new world the jetson age. But the dream died somewhere and we are in a world where no one seems to want to invest in creating this dream again. The oil industry is the only force that has pushed as out from the coast. But this has reached its limits the oil can only be found in much deeper water than the use of oil rigs allows or it is in places where it is impossible to erect rigs. You may yet see underwater oil extraction plants coming as it may be the only way to get to some of these sources. But again only if it makes economic sense.
#1522 Re: Life support systems » Eat Like a Martian » 2004-10-04 09:52:29
But they don't produce oxy
Oh well scrub the air another way.
Ah but carbon dioxide rich enviroments are perfect for the growth of many plants and using mushrooms will allow us to create a cycle where we can ensure that the enviroment of an agriculture dome is at its optimum.
We will likely be growing more plants than are needed to turn the carbon dioxide into oxygen anyway so we can use mushrooms as a quick growing artificial means to keep the air balanced.
#1523 Re: Human missions » Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized » 2004-10-04 09:42:41
And I have to ask who would live in a rather dark undersea base or a gleaming modern surface town. (apart from me)
I think you hit it with regards to colonizing other worlds. Living in a bubble not able to go out side of it. Makes wanting to do it not so atractive for many. So those that are not die hard fans of space say why bother investing all that money for it, if it has no practical purpose other than to do science.
Ah but we have already seen that we can create communities if they have an economic reason for existence. These communities will eventually become a real permanent place to live. Places that supply these modern mining camps also have a tendency to become more civilised and less boom town over the duration. Why will we build communities well the reason is simple if you are going to a posting that will be for 12 months or more then you will want to take your family. Having families means schools and other support infrastructure like stores, libraries, real major hospitals etc. Mining camps just want for bars and other forms of entertainment but if families are involved then they get civilised.
We do not have this on oil rigs as they are usually so close to shore that they can get a quick helicopter ride to land and as they are close they can have 2 weeks on and 2 weeks off.
#1524 Re: Human missions » Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized » 2004-10-04 09:22:02
Grypd,
That comes down to design and new forms of technology, remember that europa is a liquid planet and what we can develop on earth will add the development in space bodies with liquid surfaces. Also the development of outer shell pressures and inner shell pressures need to be examined and new technologies are required. To maintain ground pressure at 5000 feet below the ocean without effecting the crew within, that will help space vessel design for venus probes, help with jupiter and saturn missions and europa missions as well.
We just don't look at the science and technological developments and also the new biological information we could examine and understand that would help humanity.
Frankly for 5000 feet below the sea we have very few vessels that can accomplish the task of going that deep. Man has been that deep but we where at the mercy of the current and there is life down there, stuff of nightmares some of it but life. Recently with the advent of improved ROV's places like the mariannas trench have had more visitors.
We rarely go deeper than 300 feet this being the range that nuclear submarines cruise around and we have frankly trouble finding them. To explore a planet like Europa will be the stuff of generations of explorers using all our best techniques like sonar and side scan sonars. Certain recent developments allow us to really look at images under the sea like lasers that work under the water but range is limited. So it will take a long long time and remember seas are not really static places, large sand banks are moved in a tide and deposited elsewhere by another.
To design the new forms of technology needed to colonise the Sea there must be a need to do so and the will to want to. At the moment there is no such need, so the advances in undersea technology will not happen. And I have to ask who would live in a rather dark undersea base or a gleaming modern surface town. (apart from me)
#1525 Re: Human missions » Long duration Human space missions - Can we survive them? » 2004-10-04 09:05:31
The problem is long term exposure to zero gravity and does this mean that regular exposure to normal gravity or increased gravity ward of these health problems. And we have yet to experiment at what level of gravity is needed does it have to be 1G or can it be less.
So does a Mars vessel need to be as big as a hundred metres in diameter maybe not. As zubrin points out we can use tethers to create the same effect as a vessel much larger. In the future we will probably have cyclers based on the wheel shapes with inflated habitats to provide accomodation