Opening the High Frontier of Space

Mark R. Whittington wrote:
Many years ago, the Astronomer Royal of Great Britain Richard vander
Riet Woolley famously declared, "Space travel is utter bilge."

What he actually said (in 1956) was
"All this writing about space travel is utter bilge. To go to the
moon would cost as much as a major war."
I think the context of the next sentence somewhat changes the
interpretation...

ciao,

--
-- Jonathan Thornburg (remove -animal to reply)
School of Mathematics, U of Southampton, England
"I have encountered a few Creationists and they were usually nice,
intelligent people, so I have never been able to decide whether they
were really crazy or only pretending to be mad. -- Arthur C. Clarke

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 23 Feb, 23:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 22 Feb, 14:18, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 17 Feb, 15:24, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : Ian Parker wrote:
: : :
: : : :
: : : :If asteroids became an economic source of
: : : latinoids to take an example, there would be no question about
: : : olitical cuts. The whole thing would be self sustaining with pure
: : : :capitalism.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Nothing like a tautological statement. *What's funny is that he
: : : doesn't even realize he's doing it.
: : :
: : : If cows could fly, we'd all carry umbrellas when we went outside.
: : :
: : :
: : :It is indeed tautological, but it is still worth pointing out.
: : :
: :
: : Not really, no. *Boiled down to its essence, what you've said is "If I
: : find gold in my back yard it's a gold mine".
: :
: : Meaningless noise.
: :
: : --
: : "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: : *territory."
: : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
: :
: :What I have said is you need Gold, Platinum or something which would
: :make a profit for private enterprise to be interested.
: :
:
: No, that's not what you said at all.
:
: :
: :You get private
: :space by demonstrating there is money to be made, not simly by pouring
: :in massive government subsisies.
: :
: :Ceres Platinum might just work. It is at least worth debating. You
: :need a requirement for Pt. You need electric cars.
: :
:
: Yes, Ceres platinum might just work IF there is platinum and Ceres and
: IF the price for platinum is enough to make going there, getting it,
: and bringing it back profitable.
:
: In other words, it will be profitable if it is profitable.
:
: See what I mean?
:
: --
: "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: *territory."
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
:
:You are right when you say it depends on :-
:
:1) The price of Platinum.
:2) Whether Ceres contains Platinum.
:

It depends on more than that. It depends on whether it is easier to
get more platinum here at any given price point than it is to go to
Ceres to get it (including the development costs of all the new
equipment and techniques that would be required). It depends on
substitution effects. It's not the airy fairy wave of the hands that
so much of your 'logic' seems to be.

:
:On "1" I feel that we have not fully worked out the consequences of a
:"green" world. We have to look at 9 billion people driving electric
:cars.
:

Why? We don't have the entire population of the world (including tiny
babies) driving cars now. Why do you think that will change?

:
:Each fuel cell has a requirement for precious metal. Is there
:enough to go round?
:

Each car in the US CURRENTLY requires said metal for the catalytic
converter.

:
:Now if you have a Capitalist system what is the consequence of not
:being enough to go round - the price goes up.
:

True, perhaps. Or you substitute other things.

snip irrelevancy

:
:On "2" does Ceres contain platinum. I think it is fairly clear that it
:does. Whether there is any differentiation of materials or not, I
:don't know. If there is the core will be particularly rich. We do not
:in fact know very much about Ceres. We don't know how it is made up,
:what is needed is a mission to land geophones at various points on the
:surface, and then to deliberately crash a few smart pebbles onto the
:surface. This would give us a map of the interior. There is ice
resent, there is rock present. Is it a layer of ice and a rocky/
:metallic core, or is it a mixture all the way to the centre.
:

That won't tell you enough and it's probably cheaper to find more here
on Earth than develop Ceres.

:
:As I said at first it is Hillary not Barack who is suffering. This
:leads me to the conclusion that no one really cares, it is the economy
:followed by Iraq. No one seems to really care. This of course implies
:that any future ventures must either be low cost or commercial.
:

Space isn't an important enough issue to most folks to sway a vote.

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

On 24 Feb, 22:18, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 23 Feb, 23:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 22 Feb, 14:18, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 17 Feb, 15:24, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : Ian Parker wrote:
: : :
: : : :
: : : :If asteroids became an economic source of
: : : latinoids to take an example, there would be no question about
: : : olitical cuts. The whole thing would be self sustaining with pure
: : : :capitalism.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Nothing like a tautological statement. *What's funny is that he
: : : doesn't even realize he's doing it.
: : :
: : : If cows could fly, we'd all carry umbrellas when we went outside.
: : :
: : :
: : :It is indeed tautological, but it is still worth pointing out.
: : :
: :
: : Not really, no. *Boiled down to its essence, what you've said is "If I
: : find gold in my back yard it's a gold mine".
: :
: : Meaningless noise.
: :
: : --
: : "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: : *territory."
: : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
: :
: :What I have said is you need Gold, Platinum or something which would
: :make a profit for private enterprise to be interested.
: :
:
: No, that's not what you said at all.
:
: :
: :You get private
: :space by demonstrating there is money to be made, not simly by pouring
: :in massive government subsisies.
: :
: :Ceres Platinum might just work. It is at least worth debating. You
: :need a requirement for Pt. You need electric cars.
: :
:
: Yes, Ceres platinum might just work IF there is platinum and Ceres and
: IF the price for platinum is enough to make going there, getting it,
: and bringing it back profitable.
:
: In other words, it will be profitable if it is profitable.
:
: See what I mean?
:
: --
: "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: *territory."
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
:
:You are right when you say it depends on :-
:
:1) The price of Platinum.
:2) Whether Ceres contains Platinum.
:

It depends on more than that. *It depends on whether it is easier to
get more platinum here at any given price point than it is to go to
Ceres to get it (including the development costs of all the new
equipment and techniques that would be required). *It depends on
substitution effects. *It's not the airy fairy wave of the hands that
so much of your 'logic' seems to be.

:
:On "1" I feel that we have not fully worked out the consequences of a
:"green" world. We have to look at 9 billion people driving electric
:cars.
:

Why? *We don't have the entire population of the world (including tiny
babies) driving cars now. *Why do you think that will change?

:
:Each fuel cell has a requirement for precious metal. Is there
:enough to go round?
:

Each car in the US CURRENTLY requires said metal for the catalytic
converter.

:
:Now if you have a Capitalist system what is the consequence of not
:being enough to go round - the price goes up.
:

True, perhaps. *Or you substitute other things.

snip irrelevancy

:
:On "2" does Ceres contain platinum. I think it is fairly clear that it
:does. Whether there is any differentiation of materials or not, I
:don't know. If there is the core will be particularly rich. We do not
:in fact know very much about Ceres. We don't know how it is made up,
:what is needed is a mission to land geophones at various points on the
:surface, and then to deliberately crash a few smart pebbles onto the
:surface. This would give us a map of the interior. There is ice
resent, there is rock present. Is it a layer of ice and a rocky/
:metallic core, or is it a mixture all the way to the centre.
:

That won't tell you enough and it's probably cheaper to find more here
on Earth than develop Ceres.

:
:As I said at first it is Hillary not Barack who is suffering. This
:leads me to the conclusion that no one really cares, it is the economy
:followed by Iraq. No one seems to really care. This of course implies
:that any future ventures must either be low cost or commercial.
:

Space isn't an important enough issue to most folks to sway a vote.

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

Yes of course it depends on that. Fundamental research is, of course,
abour acquiring knowledge. That is why I advocate landing geophones on
Ceres.

If Ceres was once molten, I think there is a good chance that Earth
based production could be undercut. Particularly if we are forced to
open up Platinum mines where there is little Platinum per tonne of raw
rock.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 24 Feb, 22:18, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 23 Feb, 23:02, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Ian Parker wrote:
: :
: : :On 22 Feb, 14:18, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : Ian Parker wrote:
: : :
: : : :On 17 Feb, 15:24, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : Ian Parker wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :If asteroids became an economic source of
: : : : latinoids to take an example, there would be no question about
: : : : olitical cuts. The whole thing would be self sustaining with pure
: : : : :capitalism.
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : Nothing like a tautological statement. *What's funny is that he
: : : : doesn't even realize he's doing it.
: : : :
: : : : If cows could fly, we'd all carry umbrellas when we went outside.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : :It is indeed tautological, but it is still worth pointing out.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Not really, no. *Boiled down to its essence, what you've said is "If I
: : : find gold in my back yard it's a gold mine".
: : :
: : : Meaningless noise.
: : :
: : : --
: : : "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: : : *territory."
: : : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
: : :
: : :What I have said is you need Gold, Platinum or something which would
: : :make a profit for private enterprise to be interested.
: : :
: :
: : No, that's not what you said at all.
: :
: : :
: : :You get private
: : :space by demonstrating there is money to be made, not simly by pouring
: : :in massive government subsisies.
: : :
: : :Ceres Platinum might just work. It is at least worth debating. You
: : :need a requirement for Pt. You need electric cars.
: : :
: :
: : Yes, Ceres platinum might just work IF there is platinum and Ceres and
: : IF the price for platinum is enough to make going there, getting it,
: : and bringing it back profitable.
: :
: : In other words, it will be profitable if it is profitable.
: :
: : See what I mean?
: :
: : --
: : "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: : *territory."
: : * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
: :
: :You are right when you say it depends on :-
: :
: :1) The price of Platinum.
: :2) Whether Ceres contains Platinum.
: :
:
: It depends on more than that. *It depends on whether it is easier to
: get more platinum here at any given price point than it is to go to
: Ceres to get it (including the development costs of all the new
: equipment and techniques that would be required). *It depends on
: substitution effects. *It's not the airy fairy wave of the hands that
: so much of your 'logic' seems to be.
:
: :
: :On "1" I feel that we have not fully worked out the consequences of a
: :"green" world. We have to look at 9 billion people driving electric
: :cars.
: :
:
: Why? *We don't have the entire population of the world (including tiny
: babies) driving cars now. *Why do you think that will change?
:
: :
: :Each fuel cell has a requirement for precious metal. Is there
: :enough to go round?
: :
:
: Each car in the US CURRENTLY requires said metal for the catalytic
: converter.
:
: :
: :Now if you have a Capitalist system what is the consequence of not
: :being enough to go round - the price goes up.
: :
:
: True, perhaps. *Or you substitute other things.
:
: snip irrelevancy
:
: :
: :On "2" does Ceres contain platinum. I think it is fairly clear that it
: :does. Whether there is any differentiation of materials or not, I
: :don't know. If there is the core will be particularly rich. We do not
: :in fact know very much about Ceres. We don't know how it is made up,
: :what is needed is a mission to land geophones at various points on the
: :surface, and then to deliberately crash a few smart pebbles onto the
: :surface. This would give us a map of the interior. There is ice
: resent, there is rock present. Is it a layer of ice and a rocky/
: :metallic core, or is it a mixture all the way to the centre.
: :
:
: That won't tell you enough and it's probably cheaper to find more here
: on Earth than develop Ceres.
:
: :
: :As I said at first it is Hillary not Barack who is suffering. This
: :leads me to the conclusion that no one really cares, it is the economy
: :followed by Iraq. No one seems to really care. This of course implies
: :that any future ventures must either be low cost or commercial.
: :
:
: Space isn't an important enough issue to most folks to sway a vote.
:
: --
: "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: *territory."
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn
:
:Yes of course it depends on that. Fundamental research is, of course,
:abour acquiring knowledge. That is why I advocate landing geophones on
:Ceres.
:
:If Ceres was once molten, I think there is a good chance that Earth
:based production could be undercut. Particularly if we are forced to
pen up Platinum mines where there is little Platinum per tonne of raw
:rock.
:

Let's see your business case.

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

On 25 Feb, 14:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:


Let's see your business case.

A business case can only refer to 5 years or less in the future.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 25 Feb, 14:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: Let's see your business case.
:
:
:A business case can only refer to 5 years or less in the future.
:

False. Please provide an authoritative cite for this contention.

Weren't you the one who was pillorying others because they expressed
opinions and didn't produce a business case?

Just an A.S.S., I tell you...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

On 26 Feb, 06:22, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 25 Feb, 14:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: Let's see your business case.
:
:
:A business case can only refer to 5 years or less in the future.
:

False. *Please provide an authoritative cite for this contention.

Weren't you the one who was pillorying others because they expressed
opinions and didn't produce a business case?

Just an A.S.S., I tell you...

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

OK a 2STO would be built within 5 years and comes well within the
criteria. I would expect the mining of Ceres to be done by private
enterprise. All public funding to be shut off after the 5 year
deadline.

We can look at a 2STO and get a design now. A "low cost" 2STO could be
built in 5 years if it is buildable.

Let's look at Ceres. We need to know how much platinum there is and
what technology would be used to extract it. With present technology
involving humans would cost (probably) some £200 billion. This is why
we would need to devise automation. With automation the entry into the
galleries could be quite small (10cm or so tubes). I feel it would be
necessary to do an exploratiory drilling into the core. This would be
done by a nuclear powered mole, similar to the sort of moles envisaged
for Europa, but able to go though rock as well as ice.

Initially geophones should be landed on Ceres, this will give us an
idea of the structure and a mole could be designed after that. I would
reckon on a cost broadly in line with what is generally accepted as
the cost of an unmanned probe. Probably £2 billion for the initial
exploration. There would in fact be some commonality with Europa. BTW
- life produces optically active compounds. If our main objective is
to find life on Europa, I feel this might be done by measuring the
change in polarization of a laser, without the need to drill.

The other side of the equation is how long before itr is needed? We
have reached "peak oil" and so we need to think in terms of electric
vehicles. When - Well futurologists talk about the "S" curve. This
looks like an integral sign and describes the take up of a new
technology. At present installed solar power is increasing at 50% per
year. This is an approximate doubling in just under 2 years. Solar
power in fact (at the moment) gives a very similar growth figure to
Moore's law in computers. So in answer to the question "When will we
need it", the answer comes out at 15-20 years if we assume a basic
Moore growth. This may be incorrect but I feel it is the most
realistic assumption. Of course politics may influence the decisions
taken.

How much will it cost then? Tis depends on the level of automation. On
the assumption that some sort of nanotech will spot grains of platinum
and extract them, and that automation will give us the ability to use
the iron/aluminium on Ceres, if we assume that the only thing that
need by transported from Earth is chips, the total cot could be
confined to 10 billion or so.

This makes it a viable proposition. I am assuming major advances in
nanotechnology and some advances in AI. I am not assuming any dramatic
advance in rocketry. Of course thermonuclear propulsion would
deasically affect the manned/unmanned balance


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 26 Feb, 06:22, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 25 Feb, 14:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: :
: : Let's see your business case.
: :
: :
: :A business case can only refer to 5 years or less in the future.
: :
:
: False. *Please provide an authoritative cite for this contention.
:
: Weren't you the one who was pillorying others because they expressed
: opinions and didn't produce a business case?
:
: Just an A.S.S., I tell you...
:
:
:OK a 2STO would be built within 5 years and comes well within the
:criteria. I would expect the mining of Ceres to be done by private
:enterprise. All public funding to be shut off after the 5 year
:deadline.
:

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:We can look at a 2STO and get a design now. A "low cost" 2STO could be
:built in 5 years if it is buildable.
:

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:Let's look at Ceres. We need to know how much platinum there is and
:what technology would be used to extract it. With present technology
:involving humans would cost (probably) some £200 billion.
:

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This is why
:we would need to devise automation. With automation the entry into the
:galleries could be quite small (10cm or so tubes). I feel it would be
:necessary to do an exploratiory drilling into the core. This would be
:done by a nuclear powered mole, similar to the sort of moles envisaged
:for Europa, but able to go though rock as well as ice.
:

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:Initially geophones should be landed on Ceres, this will give us an
:idea of the structure and a mole could be designed after that. I would
:reckon on a cost broadly in line with what is generally accepted as
:the cost of an unmanned probe. Probably £2 billion for the initial
:exploration.
:

Which will mostly tell you you need another £2 billion probe for a
better look. And another. And another.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:There would in fact be some commonality with Europa. BTW
:- life produces optically active compounds. If our main objective is
:to find life on Europa, I feel this might be done by measuring the
:change in polarization of a laser, without the need to drill.
:

'Feel' is a lousy way to make decisions, particularly when you don't
know enough about the subject to have a clue. If it's so easy, why
are we still unsure about things like life on Mars, etc?

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:The other side of the equation is how long before itr is needed? We
:have reached "peak oil" ...
:

Have we? Prove it.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:... and so we need to think in terms of electric
:vehicles.
:

Do we? Why? Even if oil is all downhill from here, there are
numerous ways to propel a vehicle.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:When - Well futurologists talk about the "S" curve. This
:looks like an integral sign and describes the take up of a new
:technology. At present installed solar power is increasing at 50% per
:year. This is an approximate doubling in just under 2 years. Solar
ower in fact (at the moment) gives a very similar growth figure to
:Moore's law in computers. So in answer to the question "When will we
:need it", the answer comes out at 15-20 years if we assume a basic
:Moore growth.
:

Preposterous statement.

Define 'solar power' as applied to your above statements.

Explain why you would assume 'Moore growth' (which is a meaningless
term - look up what Moore's Law really is)?

Fixed solar (active or passive) has nothing to do with electric
vehicles.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This may be incorrect but I feel it is the most
:realistic assumption.
:

Again, 'feel' is a pretty poor way to decide what is 'most realistic',
particularly when, like yours, ignorance knows no bounds.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:How much will it cost then? Tis depends on the level of automation. On
:the assumption that some sort of nanotech will spot grains of platinum
:and extract them, and that automation will give us the ability to use
:the iron/aluminium on Ceres, if we assume that the only thing that
:need by transported from Earth is chips, the total cot could be
:confined to 10 billion or so.
:

The total cost COULD be $1.98, but there's no reason to believe it
will be. And so it is with the number you pulled out of your ass.

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This makes it a viable proposition. I am assuming major advances in
:nanotechnology and some advances in AI. I am not assuming any dramatic
:advance in rocketry. Of course thermonuclear propulsion would
:deasically affect the manned/unmanned balance
:

In other words, you are assuming various fantasies with regard to cost
of many things and then saying, "See, it's viable".

Not a 'business plan'. Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

Are you getting the point yet, Ian?

Just an A.S.S....

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

On 4 Mar, 15:55, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:On 26 Feb, 06:22, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :On 25 Feb, 14:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: :
: : Let's see your business case.
: :
: :
: :A business case can only refer to 5 years or less in the future.
: :
:
: False. *Please provide an authoritative cite for this contention.
:
: Weren't you the one who was pillorying others because they expressed
: opinions and didn't produce a business case?
:
: Just an A.S.S., I tell you...
:
:
:OK a 2STO would be built within 5 years and comes well within the
:criteria. I would expect the mining of Ceres to be done by private
:enterprise. All public funding to be shut off after the 5 year
:deadline.
:

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:We can look at a 2STO and get a design now. A "low cost" 2STO could be
:built in 5 years if it is buildable.
:

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:Let's look at Ceres. We need to know how much platinum there is and
:what technology would be used to extract it. With present technology
:involving humans would cost (probably) some £200 billion.
:

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This is why
:we would need to devise automation. With automation the entry into the
:galleries could be quite small (10cm or so tubes). I feel it would be
:necessary to do an exploratiory drilling into the core. This would be
:done by a nuclear powered mole, similar to the sort of moles envisaged
:for Europa, but able to go though rock as well as ice.
:

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:Initially geophones should be landed on Ceres, this will give us an
:idea of the structure and a mole could be designed after that. I would
:reckon on a cost broadly in line with what is generally accepted as
:the cost of an unmanned probe. Probably £2 billion for the initial
:exploration.
:

Which will mostly tell you you need another £2 billion probe for a
better look. *And another. *And another.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:There would in fact be some commonality with Europa. BTW
:- life produces optically active compounds. If our main objective is
:to find life on Europa, I feel this might be done by measuring the
:change in polarization of a laser, without the need to drill.
:

'Feel' is a lousy way to make decisions, particularly when you don't
know enough about the subject to have a clue. *If it's so easy, why
are we still unsure about things like life on Mars, etc?

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:The other side of the equation is how long before itr is needed? We
:have reached "peak oil" ...
:

Have we? *Prove it.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:... and so we need to think in terms of electric
:vehicles.
:

Do we? *Why? *Even if oil is all downhill from here, there are
numerous ways to propel a vehicle.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:When - Well futurologists talk about the "S" curve. This
:looks like an integral sign and describes the take up of a new
:technology. At present installed solar power is increasing at 50% per
:year. This is an approximate doubling in just under 2 years. Solar
ower in fact (at the moment) gives a very similar growth figure to
:Moore's law in computers. So in answer to the question "When will we
:need it", the answer comes out at 15-20 years if we assume a basic
:Moore growth.
:

Preposterous statement.

Define 'solar power' as applied to your above statements.

Explain why you would assume 'Moore growth' (which is a meaningless
term - look up what Moore's Law really is)?

Fixed solar (active or passive) has nothing to do with electric
vehicles.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This may be incorrect but I feel it is the most
:realistic assumption.
:

Again, 'feel' is a pretty poor way to decide what is 'most realistic',
particularly when, like yours, ignorance knows no bounds.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:How much will it cost then? Tis depends on the level of automation. On
:the assumption that some sort of nanotech will spot grains of platinum
:and extract them, and that automation will give us the ability to use
:the iron/aluminium on Ceres, if we assume that the only thing that
:need by transported from Earth is chips, the total cot could be
:confined to 10 billion or so.
:

The total cost COULD be $1.98, but there's no reason to believe it
will be. *And so it is with the number you pulled out of your ass.

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

:
:This makes it a viable proposition. I am assuming major advances in
:nanotechnology and some advances in AI. I am not assuming any dramatic
:advance in rocketry. Of course thermonuclear propulsion would
:deasically affect the manned/unmanned balance
:

In other words, you are assuming various fantasies with regard to cost
of many things and then saying, "See, it's viable".

Not a 'business plan'. *Mere assertion with no support and no logic.

Are you getting the point yet, Ian?

Just an A.S.S....

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

I said a business must be = 5yr. Blue sky research is normally
suported by governments and is normally 5yr. This is what MOST mixed
economies work to.

Notice I did not citicise Syvia Else as her proposal (hypersonic
flight) is ~ 20 yr.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:
:
:snip unnecessarily long quote
:
:I said a business must be = 5yr.
:

Yes, you did, but so what? What you say doesn't usually seem to
constrain our current reality.

Cite a reliable source that says that a business plan must be for a
period of not more than 5 years.

You make statements with no business plan. You insist other
technologies are non-viable because they haven't cited a business
plan.

Hypocrite.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates