From: Michael Lorrey (retroman@tpk.net)
Date: Sun Jan 19 1997 - 12:39:56 MST
Mark Grant wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Michael Lorrey wrote:
>
> > The time from luna to earth is 1-3 days, depending on trajectory
> > taken and excess velocity when crossing the L1 point.
>
> BTW, if your mass-driver is set up for construction in space you'll
> probably be sending your rocks to L2, behind the moon (this was, AFAIR,
> the original 'High Frontier' plan). So you'll have another problem with
> getting them towards Earth.
Not at all. You really aren't thinking this through. using 10% more
energy puts the object through the L1 point and into earth's gavity
well. Also, considering the value of the L1 point, it would be silly to
not build the capability to send materials there. Also, say the lunar
govt as a prerevolutionary corporate cabal decides to build a launcher
on the FAR side, ostensibly to be able to send materials to L1 for a
station being built there. The far side launcher is immune to direct
attack by earth, except by slow trajecotries that are detectable (less
than 100 miles above the surface) on the near side, so the energy
applied is much less, and building in a big crater that has a good rim
is a fortress setup.
>
> > Since luna does not NEED to attack earth, the onus will be on earth to
> > attack first. This puts earth gov't in a poor PR position, where they
> > will have to fabricate some terrorist bombing or something to rouse up
> > public sentiment to support their inhumane actions.
>
> If the lunies threaten to attack Earth, then you can guarantee that the
> Earth governments will react. Anyway, we all know that a short war is good
> for your ratings; Bush proved that in the Gulf and Margaret Thatcher
> improved her position substantially after the Falklands War, which
> resulted in a much larger loss of men and machinery.
So what is your point? Like I said, in order for earthgov to publicly
justify and get good PR for support of an attack on luna, the lunies
would HAVE to attack first, so as long as they don't the earthgov would
look tyrranical to do so or must fabricate evidence (Gulf of Tonkin
Incident).
Now here's an additional argument why earthgov would WANT luna to be
independent: Forcible exile of prisoners or welfarees would constitute a
violation of human rights under the UN charter, so any earthgov doing so
would have to be able to keep Luna free of the legal restrictions of the
WOrld COurt (if its only the "World" court, then they can't do anything
about what happens on Luna.) SO once people are on the moon, they can't
do anything about it.
>
> > You were projecting the use of a propulsin system so efficient that it
> > could accelerate constantly at above one G from the earth to the moon?
>
> No, he's assuming 11km/s from Earth orbit, AFAIR. That's not terribly
> realistic, but possible in a future where you can afford to run a lunar
> colony.
>
> > And an easily detectable military mobilization in orbit will be seen to
> > be as much of a threat by any non allied nations on earth,
>
> Like the UN-sponsored buildup in the Gulf? Yes, the locals didn't like it,
> but they put up with it for long enough to retake Kuwait.
And in the meantime, they are outside earth jurisdiction, so lunies can
cause all sorts of havoc. Additionally, Kuwait is a different situation.
There you had a sovreign state invaded from the outside. On Luna you
have the people exercising their UN recognised right of self
determination. Can't hardly bitch about that, can you?
>
> > In addition, the logistical
> > costs of putting earth resources in orbit (since they won't be able to
> > get them from the moon) add additional expense to such an endeavor.
>
> Even today, putting a few nukes and boosters in orbit will only cost you a
> billion or two. In a future where you can support a million people on the
> moon that will probably be more like millions.
Oh you are so casual about it. The corporate way of doing it for a
profit are MARKEDLY different from the government way or the military
way. NASA takes 100,000 people to launch one rocket, while independent
launch companies use less than 100 to do the same job.
Also, the company that develops cost effective propulsion for such a
colony is NOT going to share it with NASA or any ohter competitor, so
the cost factors are completely different.
>
> > You don't really understand the magnitude of what you are saying. It
> > took $60 billion in equipment losses and expenses operating a trillion
> > dollars in equipment with the cooperation of over a dozen nations to
> > mount a successful 8 day campaign here ON EARTH to recover 100 square
> > miles of desert wasteland.
>
> Note *recover*... we don't care about recovering your colony, we just
> disable or destroy it and tidy up afterwards. Also, of course, a few nukes
> dropped on Iraq and Kuwait would have ended the war quickly, probably for
> less than a billion dollars (unless you lost some stealth bombers in the
> process). The US chose to do things the expensive way for PR purposes.
And how do you think things will change in a luna scenario? rather
hypocritical. I think that your claims are rather specious given
people's aversion to using nukes. You really have NO IDEA of the ruckus
such a strategy will raise on earth. Additionally, people on earth and
in the US will have relatives on Luna and wont be happy at all with
abandonment of their families. You really are rather blinkered.
>
> > There is a HUGE differential in the costs that a defender must incur vs
> > the attacker to win a confrontation. Here on earth the differential can
> > be as much as 1 to 100.
>
> We don't care, because all the attacks on the moon are by machines, and
> we can move people out of the cities if you begin to retaliate. You'll
> suffer much larger casualties because you can't move.
Now you are being insane. You don't know shit about war. The machines
COST MONEY. People pay taxes to build those machines, and don't like
them being wasted. You dont care because you don't know anything and are
just too stubborn to admit you are wrong.
--
TANSTAAFL!!!
Michael Lorrey
------------------------------------------------------------
President retroman@tpk.net
Northstar Technologies Agent Lorrey@ThePentagon.com
Inventor of the Lorrey Drive Silo_1013@ThePentagon.com
Website: http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/
Now Featuring:
Mikey's Animatronic Factory
http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/animations.htm
My Own Nuclear Espionage Agency (MONEA)
MIKEYMAS(tm): The New Internet Holiday
Transhumans of New Hampshire (>HNH)
------------------------------------------------------------
Transhumanist, Inventor, Webmaster, Ski Guide, Entrepreneur,
Artist, Outdoorsman, Libertarian, Arms Exporter-see below.
------------------------------------------------------------
#!/usr/local/bin/perl-0777---export-a-crypto-system-sig-RC4-3-lines-PERL
@k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_
]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256;
&S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:01 MST