space tourism

I'm unclear on the rationale for space tourism (at least in the near to mid
term). When you're in orbit, all you are looking at is a window, aka a display
surface. In fact, you will probably not even be looking at a window in the
sense of a transparent body at all, but a pixelated screen just like the one in
your rec room at home. No doubt in a few years you will be able to watch
as many feeds from space as you like from your EZBoy. Why spend all that money
just to look at the same image? The only objective differences will be
weightlessness and risk. I understand that risk is often a positive, but
several hundred thousand dollars worth of positive? And will weightlessness
be such a draw? Of course there is the subjective sense of 'being there,'
but the kinds of dollar estimates that being thrown around in discussions
of this sector seem like a lot of money to pay for something that isn't real.

Nothing I'm going to be investing in, for sure.




http://www.pobox.com/~hapgood

In article ,
Fred Hapgood wrote:

I'm unclear on the rationale for space tourism (at least in the near to mid
term). When you're in orbit, all you are looking at is a window, aka a
display surface.

A window is not a display surface.

In fact, you will probably not even be looking at a window in the
sense of a transparent body at all, but a pixelated screen just like the one
in your rec room at home.

What makes you think that? Spacecraft windows are real windows,
transparent bodies through which you can see far more, in far more
detail, than any display screen.

No doubt in a few years you will be able to watch as many feeds from
space as you like from your EZBoy. Why spend all that money
just to look at the same image?

Because in space you're not looking at an image; you're looking at the
real thing. Also, you are weightless, which is more or less impossible
to achieve on Earth for more than a few seconds. Finally, you have the
satisfaction of knowing that, in your own small way, you are
participating in the transformation of humankind from a planetbound
civilization to a space-faring one. None of that is available in your
EZBoy.

The only objective differences will be weightlessness and risk.

No, the view is also objectively different. Somewhere you've gotten the
incorrect idea that spacecraft don't have windows.

And will weightlessness be such a draw?

Absolutely.

Of course there is the subjective sense of 'being there,'
but the kinds of dollar estimates that being thrown around in discussions
of this sector seem like a lot of money to pay for something that isn't real.

Then don't go. Those who do want to go think it's a good deal (and
there are good studies to back that up).

Nothing I'm going to be investing in, for sure.

Suit yourself. You probably wouldn't have invested in computers in the
1950s either, but again, that's your business. Makes no difference to
me.

Best,
- Joe

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'

I think you need to spend more time doing things than watching TV.

I climb mountains, and the photos from the top are always totaly
disapointing as to seeing it with your own eyes.

I skydive and i love to fly small aircracft. Motorcycles are cool *fun*
too. Watching them on the best "pixel" or film system is boring.

I love to watch F1 motorracing. But seeing it live is something else (i
got to see F1 in France, well worth 2/3 of my disposable income at the
time)!

Space tourism, IMHO is the best reason for humans to go to space. Given
the huge costs involved with maned space flight compared to unmaned,
probes and robots make more sense for everything else.

But doing things and being there is *everything*. And there is a lot of
ppl like me.

We find it very difficult to understand why people wounld want to be
there?

What is fun about watching from a EZBoy?

Fred Hapgood wrote:
And will weightlessness be such a draw?
With sufficient imagination, definitely. The wife and I have some ideas
for fun in weightlessness that would be well worth paying large amounts
of money for, would require more than the 2-3 minutes you get in the
'vomit comet' and would be, well, let's just say further description
would be more suited to certain less reputable sections of the alt.
hierarchy than a highly respectable sci. group like this one. *waggles
eyebrows lewdly*

Of course there is the subjective sense of 'being there,'
Yes, as you so rightly put it, of course there is. That's the draw. Why
do you think people spend months' worth of wages on two week holidays
abroad when they could stay at home and read about all those exotic
places?

For that matter, why do you think there have already *been* space
tourists?

Space tourism makes sense because there is just no other way in which
space can be profitable with current technology, knowledge and
infrastructure. The bottom line is, very little will ever get done if
there's no (monetary) profit involved. =-/

wrote:
Space tourism makes sense because there is just no other way in which
space can be profitable with current technology, knowledge and
infrastructure.

As I understand, communication satellites are profitable and have been
for decades.

I also think smaller revenues are being generated by Earth observation
satellites, and private "spy" satellites like Ikonos, but don't quote
me on that.

Mike Miller

wrote:
wrote:
Space tourism makes sense because there is just no other way in which
space can be profitable with current technology, knowledge and
infrastructure.

As I understand, communication satellites are profitable and have been
for decades.

I also think smaller revenues are being generated by Earth observation
satellites, and private "spy" satellites like Ikonos, but don't quote
me on that.

OK, true enough. What I *should* have said was "Space tourism makes
sense because there is just no other way in which *manned space flight*
can be profitable with current technology, knowledge and
infrastructure."

In my own opinion, there are two types of people, explorers and settlers.

The explorer type personality is the type to push the bounds of human and
personal experience. History is filled with the exploits of the great
explorers. From sea captains such as Cook, to people like Lewis and Clark,
right up to those astronauts who have left their footprints on the moon.

The settler type personality are, well just that. They wait someplace safe,
and won't venture out until it is safe to do so. History is not filled with
their names, but they make up the vast percentage of humankind.

Lacking much exploring to be done today, todays explorer type people push
their own bounds of experience like 'delt0r' does, taking part in extreme
sports, and most definately making their life a wonderful experience.

We need space tourism in it's current form, albeit in it's infancy, to get
the start on our outward spread off this planet. Right now, it's just an "up
and down trip", but much more than that is possible.

I am sure there were those who asked similar questions during the
exploration of the Americas, questions like why the explorers risked their
lives and the lives of their crews to visit that hostile place.

The risk of exploration pays off in time with new places to settle.


wrote in message
oups.com...

Fred Hapgood wrote:
And will weightlessness be such a draw?
With sufficient imagination, definitely. The wife and I have some ideas
for fun in weightlessness that would be well worth paying large amounts
of money for, would require more than the 2-3 minutes you get in the
'vomit comet' and would be, well, let's just say further description
would be more suited to certain less reputable sections of the alt.
hierarchy than a highly respectable sci. group like this one. *waggles
eyebrows lewdly*

Of course there is the subjective sense of 'being there,'
Yes, as you so rightly put it, of course there is. That's the draw. Why
do you think people spend months' worth of wages on two week holidays
abroad when they could stay at home and read about all those exotic
places?

For that matter, why do you think there have already *been* space
tourists?

Space tourism makes sense because there is just no other way in which
space can be profitable with current technology, knowledge and
infrastructure. The bottom line is, very little will ever get done if
there's no (monetary) profit involved. =-/