Doc O'Leary wrote on Tue, 12 Jun
2018 15:20:22 -0000 (UTC):

For your reference, records indicate that
Jeff Findley wrote:

I have an engineering degree. When developing new things, engineers
work with what they have today because they've got schedules and
deadlines to meet. You're talking about technologies not yet invented.
That's research, not development. The two are not the same.


I never claimed they were.


Actually you are, but you're too thick to recognize the implications
of your position.


The topic of the thread is *not* “what can
I build today”, it’s “Towards routine, reusable space launch.” That
has nothing to do with today’s technology, and nobody has made the
case that continued use of rockets (even reusable ones) can make it
happen.


You're not going to move "towards routine, reusable space launch" with
technologies that you CANNOT build today and that you cannot even
describe a scientific theoretical basis for. It has EVERYTHING to do
with today's technology and if you think there's something other than
rockets, either trot it out or STFU.



Two different sets of requirements lead to two completely different
vehicles. That's how engineering optimization works.


Indeed. Which is why I argue that rockets alone are unlikely to be the
only path to space. And they *definitely* are not the path to deep
space.


Right now there IS no path to 'deep space'. It's sad, but get over
it.



What you are trying to get me to admit is that eventually, some day,
there may be something better. Sure, there might. Also, monkeys might
fly out of my butt.


Really? You think new technologies are butt-monkeys unlikely? Then
let’s get you retired, man, because you are *not* allowing your field
to innovate nearly as much as it needs to.


He thinks that your 'magic' technology that breaks the laws of physics
is "butt-monkeys unlikely". I agree with him. So does anyone sane
with any knowledge of science and engineering.



I'm not waiting for sci-fi to become reality. I'm
working with what I've got today. Again, that's what engineers do.


Then you should be looking in engineering newsgroups for that kind of
discussion. Science is about more than just using your current tools.


I don't think you know what science is. What it is NOT is airy
speculation about 'new magic' in the sweet by and by.


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