Cost of Space Travel (and communication)

William Mook wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:34 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
David Spain said, "Problem is that in the most affluent areas that
would actually subscribe, "

William Mook replies;

The world is rich enough to subscribe generally. Average global
income is $10,350 per person per year.

RANK INCOME PEOPLE SERVICE PACKAGE

Low income: $1,407 1.5 billion $1/year - 2 MHz - $20
handset
Middle income: $6,157 3.8 billion $1/month - 10 MHz - $200
netbook
High income: $37,141 1.5 billion $12/month - 60 MHz - $2000
laptop

You've got to be kidding. You expect someone to spend $2000/year for
your connectivity?

No - I expect someone to spend about $144 per yer for connectivity in
Europe, Japan, Australia, North America.

Remind me for what bandwidth?





With 33% market penetration $85 billion per year is earned.

And with 100% market penetration you earn $255 B per year.

Yes. Put that's the entire population, so it is very unlikely that
figure will be reached quickly.

Umm, try at all. Show me a single vendor that has achieved even 33% market
penetration of the ENTIRE population.



And with 0% you earn nothing.

That is unlikely with the system available at $12 per month for
unlimited bandwidth for the highest paying customer and $1 per month
for most customers and $1 per year for lowest paying customer.

Unlimited bandwidth? Now I know you're really smoking dope. So if I want
100Gig of bandwidth for $12/month, you can provide it? Excuse me while I
stop to laugh my ass off.


My costs are substantially lower, my product is substantially
superior.

Right, which is why so many people out there are building it. Oh wait, NO
ONE is. Hell, Sirius and XM can't make a profit on a cheaper idea.


Anyone in a competitive market with a superior product offering and
lower costs would not be laughed at by any serious investor.

Right. Unfortunately you're offering neither.


After pointing out you have confused "market" with population.

No I have not you have with your remarks above.

Umm, yes, you did. You assumed a market penetration of 33% into a
population of 6.8 billion. Unless you're somehow saying the population of
the planet is NOT 6.8 billion but is substantially higher.

Again, show me a single vendor that has achieved market penetration of 33%
of a 6.8 billion person market.

You don't understand
what I'm saying and don't know enough to know you don't know. haha -
and blame me. That is the very quintessence of idiocy.

Umm. When you keep repeating your mistakes, I'd be careful who is calling
who an idiot.

You continue making observations founded upon illogical argument.
This one is listed under 'false choice'


No, I continue to make observations based on facts. You keep dreaming up
pie in the sky schemes. If your ideas are so great, prove it. Go line up
the investors. If your ideas are so great, you should have investors
beating down your doors. The fact that you apparently don't I think says
more about your ideas than anything I can say here.

Trust me Mr. Mook, I would LOVE to be proven wrong. 100 to 1 says that you
can't make a profit off this idea within the next 10 years. Hell 100:1 you
can't get serious money from an investor in the next 10 years, let alone
build any hardware.


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Feb 24, 11:46*am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:34 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
David Spain said, "Problem is that in the most affluent areas that
would actually subscribe, "

William Mook replies;

The world is rich enough to subscribe generally. Average global
income is $10,350 per person per year.

RANK INCOME PEOPLE SERVICE PACKAGE

Low income: $1,407 1.5 billion $1/year - 2 MHz - $20
handset
Middle income: $6,157 3.8 billion $1/month - 10 MHz - $200
netbook
High income: $37,141 1.5 billion $12/month - 60 MHz - $2000
laptop

You've got to be kidding. You expect someone to spend $2000/year for
your connectivity?

No - I expect someone to spend about $144 per yer for connectivity in
Europe, Japan, Australia, North America.

Remind me for what bandwidth?



With 33% market penetration $85 billion per year is earned.

And with 100% market penetration you earn $255 B per year.

Yes. *Put that's the entire population, so it is very unlikely that
figure will be reached quickly.

Umm, try at all. *Show me a single vendor that has achieved even 33% market
penetration of the ENTIRE population.

The world ALREADY has over 60% penetration by cell phones, the USA has
nearly 90% while places like Italy, Germany and Russia have over 100%.
(see table below - provided by ITU) This suggests that a very low
cost very capable system would provide universal coverage and the
wealthier folks would have multiple channel capabilities, while poorer
folks would have fewer channels.

REGION CELL PHONES PEOPLE %USE

- World 4,100,000,000 6,797,100,000 60.6%

1 China..... 747,380,000 1,335,330,000 55.97%
2 India....... 525,147,922 1,174,040,000 44.73%
3 USA....... 276,610,580 ....308,505,000 89.0%
4 Russia.... 207,900,000 ....141,915,979 143.2%
5 Brazil...... 173,960,000 ....191,480,630 90.84%

6 Indonesia 140,200,000 ....231,369,500 60.53%
7 Japan..... 107,490,000 ....127,530,000 84.11%
8 Germany........ 107,000,000 ......81,882,342 130.15%
9 Pakistan.... 97,579,940 ....168,500,500 59.60%
10 Italy.......... 88,580,000 ......60,090,400 147.41%




And with 0% you earn nothing.

That is unlikely with the system available at $12 per month for
unlimited bandwidth for the highest paying customer and $1 per month
for most customers and $1 per year for lowest paying customer.

Unlimited bandwidth? *

Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.

Now I know you're really smoking dope. *

You know nothing of the sort.

So if I want
100Gig of bandwidth for $12/month, you can provide it? *

You can have 10,000x that if you like for $12 per month. See below.

Excuse me while I
stop to laugh my ass off.


shrug I am not responsible for your illogical and emotional
conclusions. You should really read up on a thing before making
unfortunate statements about it.

Unlimited will have fine print - as another poster pointed out to
you. The bandwidth issue is worth going into to see just how capable
this my system is.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...te-white-light

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/lo...hDecision=-203

Supercontinuum lasers have been operated in the lab at 1.8 peta-bit
per second. An open optical data link through vacuum -satellite to
satellite- nearest neighbor - provides six connections per point and
864 points on orbit - using a variant of this approach provides a
throughput sufficient to provide 50 billion 55 Mbit/sec channels.

Since there are 2.6 million seconds per month, and the system provides
7.35 channels per person on the planet, then everyone everywhere is
provided 1 quadrillion bits per month. The mean is configured at 500
tera-bits per month. The poorer users would consume at 100 tera-bits
per month. The wealthier users would consume at 2.5 Q-bits per month
- to support the disparity of cash flows from the global system - and
maximize revenues. The logic behind this is the same as a movie
provider offering senior and student discounts to maximize revenues.

Having addressed the bandwidth of the backbone, the two remaining
issues are router design on orbit - which is the subject of patent
activity for me right now - so I will post on that later. Basically,
I use nonlinear optical systems with synthetic holograms to implement
logical and signal processing capabilties in support of petabit
signalling.

Another issue is uplink downlink in support of these rates.

I mentioned briefly in an earlier post that I use a large format
phased array antenna that is capable of painting virtual cells -
stationary and doppler correct - across the surface of the Earth.
Due to clouds direct signalling with open optical lasers at petabit
rates isn't practical. Microwaves will have to do.

http://www.radartutorial.eu/06.antennas/an14.en.html

A phased array antenna has a large number of individual radiating
elements. Each element controls the phase of the signal radiating
from it. In this way, beams may be formed and steered. Phased array
antenna are capable of far more than this. they are capable of
forming many beams simultaneously from the same antenna.

These antenna elements can also operate as receivers and create an
interferometer to pick up very weak signals from very tiny regions of
the field of view of the antenna.

Operating simultaneously as a reciever/transmitter a phased array
antenna can sense signals from very weak sources and form beams
directed to very precise locations from orbit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferometry

The ITU designates GSM frequency bands for use with cellular
frequencies. There are 14 bands designated by 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP) TS 45.005, which succeeded 3GPP TS 05.05

These 14 bands are;

System Band Uplink (MHz) Downlink (MHz) Channel number

T-GSM-380 380 380.2–389.8 390.2–399.8 dynamic
T-GSM-410 410 410.2–419.8 420.2–429.8 dynamic
GSM-450 450 450.4–457.6 460.4–467.6 259–293
GSM-480 480 478.8–486.0 488.8–496.0 306–340
GSM-710 710 698.0–716.0 728.0–746.0 dynamic
GSM-750 750 747.0–762.0 777.0–792.0 438–511
T-GSM-810 810 806.0–821.0 851.0–866.0 dynamic
GSM-850 850 824.0–849.0 869.0–894.0 128–251
P-GSM-900 900 890.2–914.8 935.2–959.8 1–124
E-GSM-900 900 880.0–914.8 925.0–959.8 975–1023, 0-124
R-GSM-900 900 876.0–914.8 921.0–959.8 955–1023, 0-124
T-GSM-900 900 870.4–876.0 915.4–921.0 dynamic
DCS-1800 1800 1710.2–1784.8 1805.2–1879.8 512–885
PCS-1900 1900 1850.0–1910.0 1930.0–1990.0 512–810

In September 2008, IEEE 802.11y-2008 is an amendment to the IEEE
802.11-2007 standard that enables high powered Wi-Fi equipment to
operate in the 3700 MHz band in the United States.

My uplink system uses a variant of this 3,700 MHz system to provide
uplink downlink capabilities from my optical routers that tap into
multiple petabit per second optical links per router.

With a wavelength of 81 millimeters and a phased array antenna 100 m
in diameter in an orbit 1,000 km altitude, allows each phased array
antenna to paint a 'spot size' or 'cell size' of 1 km. This is
1/100th the area permitted to be covered by 802.11y (at 20 watts).

The phased array limits the 'range' of cell to 1/2 km so each cell is
1 km across.




*My costs are substantially lower, my product is substantially
superior.

Right, which is why so many people out there are building it. *

Why do you insist on making statements without first checking to see
if they're right?

Oh wait, NO
ONE is.

Cite?

*Hell, Sirius and XM can't make a profit on a cheaper idea.

What are the fundamentals driving the market? Again, you make
conclusions based on emotion without reference to fundamentals
involved. This is a recipe for disaster.



Anyone in a competitive market with a superior product offering and
lower costs would not be laughed at by any serious investor.

Right.

I'm glad you agree with something rational.

*Unfortunately you're offering neither.

Prove it.



After pointing out you have confused "market" with population.

No I have not you have with your remarks above.

Umm, yes, you did. *You assumed a market penetration of 33% into a
population of 6.8 billion. *

Right, with cell phones today providing 60% penetration and pentration
exceeding 100% in some locales, a substantially superior product at a
substantially reduced cost, with substantially improved capabilities
built around fundamental improvements in core technology, would easily
achiev 35% market share.

Unless you're somehow saying the population of
the planet is NOT 6.8 billion but is substantially higher.

I said the population was 6.8 billion. How can you conclude I said
something that I obviously did not say? It just goes to show how
illogic and emotion can warp your thinking.

Again, show me a single vendor that has achieved market penetration of 33%
of a 6.8 billion person market.

GSM has achieved 60% market pentration arond the planet today. A new
fundamentally improved system based on sound design fundamentals will
easily achieve 35% market acceptance and likely exceed it.

*You don't understand
what I'm saying and don't know enough to know you don't know. *haha -
and blame me. *That is the very quintessence of idiocy.

Umm. *When you keep repeating your mistakes, I'd be careful who is calling
who an idiot.

That would be you bozo.



You continue making observations founded upon illogical argument.
This one is listed under 'false choice'

No,

Yes, you haven't said one right thing -For example, in response to me
stating there are 6.8 billion people you replied I said there were
more than 6.8 billion people. You really are stark raving mad.

I continue to make observations based on facts. *

No you don't.

You keep dreaming up
pie in the sky schemes. *

No I don't.

If your ideas are so great, prove it. *

I have.

Go line up
the investors.

You keep making assumptions - for example, that I need investors at
this point. haha.

*If your ideas are so great, you should have investors
beating down your doors. *

So?

The fact that you apparently don't

The word here is apparently - you are making idiotic statements based
on what things apparently look like to you. You don't know **** about
me or about what I'm describing - yet that doesn't stop you from
making very hurtful harmful and bullheaded statements that are in the
end WRONG! haha - I suppose it derives from your need to feel better
about yourself by speaking evil of those who are clearly better than
you.

I think says
more about your ideas than anything I can say here.

What you think doesn't matter unless and until you actually trouble
yourself to put some thought into your thoughts - and stop operating
out of your gut instinct.

Trust me Mr. Mook,

Why?

I would LOVE to be proven wrong. *

? Why?

100 to 1 says that you
can't make a profit off this idea within the next 10 years.

Prove it.

*Hell 100:1 you
can't get serious money from an investor in the next 10 years, let alone
build any hardware.

Again, you really should be careful making statements about things
before you know anything at all about them.


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.