About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 8:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
...

Post 1

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 2:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
They would have been a bit cuter if MIR were still in orbit.  We denigrate the Soviet space program on the basis of "The Monument Builders" and we glorify the American program as an embodiment of Objectivist virtues.  Actually, both shoes fit everyone. 

Everything comes down to design constraints.  The Russians have a workable launch and delivery system.  The Americans are struggling now.  The Soviets (Russians) figured out a lot of programs with their Salyut and Mir programs, which is why they got the project management responsibilities for operating the ISS.   

The deal was that they would run the Space Station and America's shuttles would be the ferries.  Now that that has turned out differently, NASA found an excuse to avoid paying the piper.  The U.S. government in Washington is arguing with the Russian government in Moscow over projects with the Iranian government in Teheran. 

All things considered, the Roscosmos, the Russian Space Agency, has probably been forced into a more market mode than NASA operates within.  NASA can actually get money from its goverment. Roscosmos is more likely to have to fend for itself.

The situation -- not accidentally -- is somewhat analogous to the private explorers and privateers of the 16th and 17th centuries.  Drake, Hudson, Cabot, Morgan,...  how do you sort them out? Who was acting on behalf of the crown... and when? 


Post 2

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 3:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I think the private sector should take over manned space exploration, and leave NASA to its unmanned missions (deep-space probes, comet followers, orbital and earth-based telescopes, et cetera).

Manned exploration is too important to leave in the hands of government bureaucracies.  Of course, there's the problem of funding;  how would a private firm turn a profit from such ventures.  I'm sure there's a way, but in my caffeine-deprived, glucose-challenged state, I can't think of one.

;o)



Post 3

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 4:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Look up Virgin Galactic.com ...you might find it interesting...

Post 4

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 4:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yep, know all about Virgin Galactic and the efforts of Rutan & Co.  Pretty neat stuff!

Post 5

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 4:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah - makes me think is possible I'll be up there after all, even at my age...

Post 6

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 5:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Yes, very possible.  I'd go in a heartbeat, even if it was just a sub-orbital flight (although a few laps around the equator would be nice!) ;o)


Post 7

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 6:26pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Another possibility in the near future:

A Hoist to the Heavens

Some excerpts from the article:

It all boils down to dollars and cents, of course. It now costs about US $20 000 per kilogram to put objects into orbit. Contrast that rate with the results of a study I recently performed for NASA, which concluded that a single space elevator could reduce the cost of orbiting payloads to a remarkably low $200 a kilogram and that multiple elevators could ultimately push costs down below $10 a kilogram. With space elevators we could eventually make putting people and cargo into space as cheap, kilogram for kilogram, as airlifting them across the Pacific.



With the huge cost penalty of traveling between Earth and orbit drastically reduced, it would actually be possible to quarry mineral-rich asteroids and return the materials to Earth for less than what it now costs, in some cases, to rip metal ores out of Earth's crust and then refine them. Tourism, too, could finally arrive on the high frontier: a zero-gravity vacation in geostationary orbit, with the globe spread out in a ceaselessly changing panoply below, could finally become something that an average person could experience. And for the more adventurous, the moon and Mars could become the next frontier.


Post 8

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 7:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The only problem with the skyhook is present day lack of substance strong enough to make it, at least according to Charles Sheffield, one of those astrophysicists who understands this... [and who wrote on the subject - The Web Between the Worlds...]

Post 9

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 8:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When I was at high school, I wrote a short story set in the 22nd century (less than a hundred years away now). The story was about a huge lattice-work structure mankind had built to surround the planet. Imagine a ball (Earth) enclosed within a larger mesh sphere & anchored at hundreds of points to the ball. Thus, we were permanently connected to space & could access it with ease.

The space elevator is a good place to begin :-)

Ross

Post 10

Thursday, October 6, 2005 - 9:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Too bad it's been in the near future since my old fart professors were students.

Sarah

Post 11

Friday, October 7, 2005 - 4:09amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ryan,

Yes, I've read about the space elevator thingy.  Neat concept, I s'pose, but rather boring, don't you think?  I'd  much rather ride a rocket.  I guess I'm just an old-fashioned girl!

SmS

;o)

Here's a question:  Will the space elevator have musak?

(Edited by Summer Serravillo on 10/07, 4:09am)


Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.