Why Colonize Space?

In sci.physics z wrote:
On Aug 12, 11:00Â*am, wrote:
In sci.physics 23vl wrote:





On Aug 12, 6:21Â*am, David Johnston wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:16:37 -0700 (PDT), gabydewilde

wrote:
exactly. we can't exploit the ocean bottoms, the polar regions, lots
of places on earth. mars can't possibly be more economically feasible

There are many rocks up there made of 'exotic' materials.

We have no real reason to think that is true. Â*The table of elements
is the same no matter where you go. Â*

Yeah,but the quantities are different,and once we have some
infrastructure up there mining asteroids becomes a hell of a lot
easier and faster Â*than operating a regular mine.
There is also space manufacturing.

What makes you think the quantities are different?

How is it easier and faster to drive a space ship millions of miles in
and out of a gravity well than it is to drive a diesel truck a few miles
on a dirt road?

We don't mine the ocean floor because it it too expensive and we won't
mine space for the same reason.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

ironically, i suspect that developing the technology to exploit other
parts off the solar system would be more of a benefit than actually
exploiting them. like the guy who says "i wish i had enough money to
buy an elephant" "why would you want an elephant?" "I don't, i just
want enough money to buy one"

I highly doubt that no matter how much technology one develops one will
be able to beat the Earth based price of nickle in ingots at $5/lb with
space based nickle or anything else.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:12:16 -0700 (PDT), gabydewilde wrote:

Today I was reading some opinions of people who believe that there is
no reason for humans to post on usenet. Are all arguments for sharing
thoughts and other postings on usenet really that weak and irrelevant?

On Jul 20, 11:47 pm, Immortalista wrote:
Today I was reading some opinions of people who believe that there is
no reason for humans to leave earth. Are all arguments for moving into
space and onto other bodies in space really that weak and irrelevant?

For some, Usenet, is about as close to immortality as they will come.
Everything posted goes into several archives, to be available, forever.
Web pages don't get that immortality treatment. People, not yet.
So, there you go, into the future, in print, on Usenet.

On Aug 13, 11:16*pm, z wrote:
On Aug 12, 6:02*am, 23vl wrote:





On Aug 12, 12:09*pm, "Rod Speed" wrote:

23vl wrote:
On Aug 12, 4:36 am, z wrote:
On Jul 23, 3:11 pm, ericthetolle wrote:

On Jul 23, 6:20 am, "Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
end)

wrote:
"William December Starr" wrote in
...

In article ,
"Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
said:

That to me would just the adequate life. Space could potentially
give us the resources for everyone to have their own planet!

I'm not sure that I have ever in my life seen more of a load
placed
on a single word than what you just hung on that "potentially."

-- wds

) (true) but that is what its all about for me. Its all there
just waiting
for us, shame to just settle for just one planet.

You haven't even bothered to colonize all of this one planet!

COME! COLONIZE THE ANTARCTIC OCEAN! COLONIZE THE OCEAN BOTTOM! THE
RICHES OF THE ATLANTIC TRENCH ARE WAITING FOR YOU! POTENTIALLY WE
CAN MAKE EVERY COLONIST RICH ENOUGH TO HAVE HIS OWN ISLAND!

Show me you have enough gumption to do THAT, and then I'll believe
your babble about being a big, daring colonist with foresight. But
if you aren't even willing to colonize a floating platform south of
the Cape of Good Hope, then all your rhetoric is just so much
bull****.

Eric Tolle- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

exactly. we can't exploit the ocean bottoms, the polar regions, lots
of places on earth. mars can't possibly be more economically feasible
As *Heinlein said-it is not a good idea to keep all our eggs in one basket.

Pity about the immense cost of anything else.

There is also the fact that the Earth can't sustain human growth indefinitely,

Its obviously a hell of a lot cheaper to do something about that growth than to colonise space.

and we *can find more resources

We've got plenty of those here on earth, much more cheaply too.

and room for growth

We've got plenty of those here on earth, much more cheaply too.

in space,and the possibilities for scientific exploration.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to use robots to do that.

Sooner or later this planet will die-and then what of mankind,I
certainly don't want all that humanity has achieved to be wiped out by
some extinction event.And as for growth-the more people there are-the
more talent and therefore potential discoveries we have.Why should we
throw resources to limit our options for future development by chasing
after stupid ideas like sustainability-in space we will have access to
an abundance of energy thanks to solar power.And what about metals-
sooner or later the easily available deposits will run out.Your
options call for contraction and eventually death.Mine call for
expansion,the ability of mankind to finally free itself from its birth
environment and spread as far as possible.Just as nature intended.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

we had a guy like that in our lab. rather than just clean up his damn
bench once in a while, he just kept moving his work area down leaving
the mess behind him.- Hide quoted text -

Well, the people in most labs haven't caught on yet that
the people with 21st Century afvanced technology invented
electronic books,
multiplexed fiber optics, distributed processing software, atomic
clock wris****ches,
gps, holograms, hdtv, blue ray, home broadband, self-replicating
machines,
self-assembling robots, on-line publishing, cyber batteries, UAVs,
AAVs,
digital terrain mapping, data fusion, usb, and plexiglass rather
than labs.
Since all the labs in the idiot US R&D System were actually
designed by Bell Labs,
so long long long ago, that the only people who even knows what in
most of them
anymore are cranks with citca 1950 Ford Station Wagons.








- Show quoted text -

"Rod Speed" wrote:

Greg Goss wrote
Rod Speed wrote

That there was plenty of trade outside 'local geographical areas' in even
the early middle ages, most obviously with the vikings and normans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Medieval_age

I don't think that wildly successful pirates is a great example of "trade".

But the Silk Road clearly is just that. That continued right thru the early middle ages.

Yeah. I deleted that because I wasn't disagreeing with it. Byzantium
was still as civilized as ever through the period we're discussing.
I'm not sure how much the silk road relates to Western Europe prior to
Marco Polo.

--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

Greg Goss wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Greg Goss wrote
Rod Speed wrote

That there was plenty of trade outside 'local geographical areas'
in even the early middle ages, most obviously with the vikings and
normans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Medieval_age

I don't think that wildly successful pirates is a great example of "trade".

But the Silk Road clearly is just that. That continued right thru the early middle ages.

Yeah. I deleted that because I wasn't disagreeing with it. Byzantium
was still as civilized as ever through the period we're discussing.

I'm not sure how much the silk road relates to Western Europe prior to Marco Polo.

It did anyway.

And there was a lot of traffic of 'pilgrims' from western europe to the middle east
too, so Jim's original outside 'local geographical areas' is clearly just plain wrong.

And the Normans werent pirates either.

wrote:

I highly doubt that no matter how much technology one develops one will
be able to beat the Earth based price of nickle in ingots at $5/lb with
space based nickle or anything else.

Of course, we're already mining an asteroid for nickel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudbury_Basin

--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

Rod Speed wrote:
Greg Goss wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Greg Goss wrote
Rod Speed wrote

That there was plenty of trade outside 'local geographical areas'
in even the early middle ages, most obviously with the vikings and
normans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Medieval_age

I don't think that wildly successful pirates is a great example of "trade".

But the Silk Road clearly is just that. That continued right thru the early middle ages.

Yeah. I deleted that because I wasn't disagreeing with it. Byzantium
was still as civilized as ever through the period we're discussing.

I'm not sure how much the silk road relates to Western Europe prior to Marco Polo.

It did anyway.

And there was a lot of traffic of 'pilgrims' from western europe to the middle east
too, so Jim's

It wasn't Jim who stated that.

original outside 'local geographical areas' is clearly just plain wrong.


You have no idea what I'm talking about. To go outside those local
areas, you needed to hire protection. In today's terms, that means
that you had to hire a platoon to go with you when you wanted to
shop. This is not efficient trade.


And the Normans werent pirates either.

Did they swap goods when they visited an area
where they didn't live?

/BAH

In rec.arts.sf.written Sir Frederick wrote:
For some, Usenet, is about as close to immortality as they will come.
Everything posted goes into several archives, to be available, forever.
Web pages don't get that immortality treatment. People, not yet.
So, there you go, into the future, in print, on Usenet.

Usenet's immortality is not absolute. Using whatever search engine
you wish, try to find the Usenet posts from the summer of 1995. Go ahead,
try. They've been lost; the original archive, DejaNews, had a crash back
then that wiped out several months of posts in many newsgroups.

Could that happen today? Possibly. Might be more difficult. Or,
considering the added complexity of today's archives, we might be making
it easier to lose everything at once.

In any case, it's best that we all realize these words are ephemeral --
go achieve immortality through actions, somewhere else.

.... ...
Remus Shepherd
Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/remus_shepherd/

On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:30:19 +0000 (UTC), Remus Shepherd
wrote:

In rec.arts.sf.written Sir Frederick wrote:
For some, Usenet, is about as close to immortality as they will come.
Everything posted goes into several archives, to be available, forever.
Web pages don't get that immortality treatment. People, not yet.
So, there you go, into the future, in print, on Usenet.

Usenet's immortality is not absolute. Using whatever search engine
you wish, try to find the Usenet posts from the summer of 1995. Go ahead,
try. They've been lost; the original archive, DejaNews, had a crash back
then that wiped out several months of posts in many newsgroups.

Could that happen today? Possibly. Might be more difficult. Or,
considering the added complexity of today's archives, we might be making
it easier to lose everything at once.

In any case, it's best that we all realize these words are ephemeral --
go achieve immortality through actions, somewhere else.

"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to
achieve it through not dying."

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]

On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:30:19 +0000 (UTC), Remus Shepherd wrote:

In rec.arts.sf.written Sir Frederick wrote:
For some, Usenet, is about as close to immortality as they will come.
Everything posted goes into several archives, to be available, forever.
Web pages don't get that immortality treatment. People, not yet.
So, there you go, into the future, in print, on Usenet.

Usenet's immortality is not absolute. Using whatever search engine
you wish, try to find the Usenet posts from the summer of 1995. Go ahead,
try. They've been lost; the original archive, DejaNews, had a crash back
then that wiped out several months of posts in many newsgroups.

Could that happen today? Possibly. Might be more difficult. Or,
considering the added complexity of today's archives, we might be making
it easier to lose everything at once.

In any case, it's best that we all realize these words are ephemeral --
go achieve immortality through actions, somewhere else.

... ...
Remus Shepherd
Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/remus_shepherd/

Accidents, like ****, happen. The immortality treatment applied to people
won't stop death by accident.