From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Jul 13 2002 - 22:21:20 MDT
Adrian Tymes wrote:
> Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>
>> Can our resident rocket scientists point out some concrete reason that
>> we could not go to the moon using combined U.S. and Russian resources
>> within a couple of years?
>
>
>
> Money, and behind that, motivation. Why do we wish to return to Luna?
> Despite their overtures to big buisness, the administration is deaf to
> even the wildest possibilities of profit ('cause, keep in mind, it's
> profit *to them* that they're worried about, and there's no guarantee
> that any corporation formed with government money would become a big
> donator to that which created them - and there does not seem to be the
> same kind of political capital to win re-election, as there is with,
> say, environmentalism or security).
>
I think the motivation will occur when China proves it is
serious about building a base on the moon. We are not so asleep
that we will allow the "high ground" to slip out of our grasp.
Of course first we will perform the sickening maneuver of
attempting to forbid anyone from acheiving such bases forever.
It has already begun.
> Now, if you could get enough private money invested, you could do it
> on private resources...but, again, why would those who can contribute
> the $millions necessary for such an effort want to donate such a large
> chunk of their fortune? Again, they do not seem to see much profit
> opportunity, and most of those who got lots of money got it by caring
> first and foremost about getting lots of money.
>
How much money will the first group to successfully exploit a
metal rich reasonably sized near-earth asteroid pull in? Yeah,
its a big gamble. But the payoff is HUGE.
> That said...some people are trying. People without *lots* of money, but
> just enough to get some results by being frugal. If one could direct
> lots of money to the right such effort, one could quite possibly buy
> (and have fulfilled) a ticket to the Moon within a few years.
>
I don't want a ticket to the moon. I want a ticket to
exploiting space resources in a way that is as quickly as
possible highly profitable and capable of sustainable growth.
Just going to the moon doesn't look to me like the best way to
do that right now.
>> Hard to say. I suspect the people would rise to the
challenge if
>> one had the leadership. In any case its going to get interesting
>> later in this decade since it looks like the Chinese seem pretty
>> serious about going there.
>
>
>
> Again, motivation. For all the rhetoric, there is far less perceived
> danger of war with China among the voting public than there was with the
> USSR. Sure, China makes all kinds of bolsterous public threats - but
That isn't the point is it? If there is massive wealth to be
had, much less large strategic advantages, the US and Europe
cannot be caught napping while China gets first dibs. As long
as no country or organization is making a credible bid on space
we have little pressure to ante up.
> then they turn around and try to get special trade status, and try to
> compete economically instead of militarily. That kind of thing gets
> noticed. And with *that* as the Big Enemy, who cares if they get a moon
> base? From this point of view, that might even be a good thing, because
> at least our ally will have done it even if we didn't.
>
They are *not* our ally. It is a real mistake to think they
are. To them, we are temporarily more powerful barbarians. They
would be more than happy to rectify that situation.
>>> The old system doesn't work and won't be repeated or revived.
>>
>>
>> That is hard to predict Harvey. If the Chinese are successful
>> in establishing a lunar colony it is difficult to predict how
>> American, Russian, Japanese, or Indian "pride" would respond.
>
We would have a major space race. Hurrah!
>
>
> Japanese, India: they don't have a self-launched manned space program
> yet. Kinda hard to effectively respond without one.
>
That won't take long. Not when the basics are all known and we
have so little in heavy lift abilities also.
>> The way to go to the moon again is to use space based materials
>> to the greatest extent possible. So one needs to foster (a)
>> the Near-Earth-Observation (NEO) program so we can identify
>> much smaller bodies than are identified currently; and (b)
>> micro-sat based material harvesting and manufacturing which
>> eliminates the costs of lifting materials out of the Earth's
>> gravity well.
>
The above completely misses mining and making use of NEAs. Why?
Use that wealth and the resources gained to build space
infrastructure, largely by telepresence and robotics, before you
can attract and support larger numbers of humans off-planet.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:25 MST