Thomas Koenig wrote on Tue, 12 Jun 2018
19:43:04 -0000 (UTC):

Jeff Findley schrieb:
In article , droleary@
2017usenet1.subsume.com says...

For your reference, records indicate that
Jeff Findley wrote:

Balloon launch isn't worth the trades which have to be made, IMHO.

Certainly not today, no, or people would be doing it. But as I keep
saying, new technologies keep popping up all the time that might make
it viable in the future, at least for a few use cases.

I have an engineering degree.


So do I (PhD in chemical engineering).


That's nice. What would be your reaction if I speculated about a
chemical with 'magic' properties that could be used to build a space
tether here on Earth (I say 'magic' because it requires more strength
in tension than is theoretically possible)?



When developing new things, engineers
work with what they have today because they've got schedules and
deadlines to meet.


The world would be a poorer place if that was the case.


That IS the case. You're a chemical engineer. When you need to
design a new industrial process to produce some chemical, do you run
off and try to pull something out of your ass or do you start with
known reaction pathways and mechanisms?



You're talking about technologies not yet invented.
That's research, not development. The two are not the same.


How would you classify chemical process development? Seems that,
according to your defiinition, I am doing more research than I
thought :-)


You're certainly doing SOME research, but I assume what you're doing
is trying to come up with ways to optimize known reaction pathways so
that the one you want 'wins'. In other words, you're starting with
what you know today rather than postulating some undiscovered chemical
reaction.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn