...NASA's Space Solar Power Program... Let's Make America Great Again!

Thanks in advance for reading.

President Obama is currently deciding on a new direction for NASA.
Right now is the time to make our opinions known.

Below is the NASA program President Bush canceled shortly after
taking office in favor of his "Vision for Space Exploration".
Which seeks to return men to the Moon to build a colony that
can support only...four...people, for only a...week..at a time.
What tangible returns would that provide to the taxpayers?

I strongly hope NASA returns 'back to the future' and embrace
Space Solar Power as a primary goal. This program has the potential
to transform the world for the better in more ways that can be listed.
Which a moon habital for four astronauts could never hope
to rival.

To contact your Representative:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Space Solar Power could.....

(1) Make American the next energy "Saudi Arabia"
Ensuring our future prosperity and national security.
Ending wars over oil.
(2) Provide a completely clean, endless supply of energy
which could replace fossil fuels and become the primary
solution to Global Warming.
(3) Provide a government payload which could jump start
the commercial space industry much like the US Air Mail
ushered in the age of commercial aviation.
(4) Provide energy to places around the world where conventional
power plants are unaffordable or not practical.
(5) Solve America's largest and most glaring weakness, our dependence
on oil. Eliminating the power the Middle Eastern nations have
over us.

Just to name a few of the potential benefits of Space Solar Power.
How do those compare to the current Bush plan of putting a
few people on the Moon?

To contact your Representative:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml


NASA's SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM

Executive Summary

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Space Solar Power
(SSP) Exploratory Research and Technology (SERT) program was
charged to develop technologies needed to provide cost-competitive
ground baseload electrical power from space-based solar energy converters.
In addition, during its 2-year tenure, the SERT program was also expected
to provide a roadmap of research and technology investment to enhance
other space, military, and commercial applications such as satellites operating
with improved power supplies, free-flying technology platforms, space
propulsion technology, and techniques for planetary surface exploration."
"Central to the SERT program was a series of five or six experimental flight
demonstrations of progressively larger power-generation capacity"
"For each of the major SSP subsystems, NASA managers developed
top-level cost targets in cents per kilowatt-hour (kW-hr) that they felt
would have to be met to deliver baseload power at a target of
5 cents/kW-hr."
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1


President Bush's Vision For Space Exploration
http://history.nasa.gov/Vision_For_S...xploration.pdf


Why in the world would a ..Texas oilman, President Bush, oppose
Solar Power as a solution to our future energy needs???

Please write your Congressmen and urge them to support
Space Solar Power as a new more sensible goal for NASA
and our future. The decision on a new goal for NASA is
being decided RIGHT NOW, your email can certainty
make a difference.

Thank you for reading.

To contact your Representative:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml



Jonathan

s

On Oct 14, 6:49*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
Thanks in advance for reading.

President Obama is currently deciding on a new direction for NASA.
Right now is the time to make our opinions known.

Below is the NASA program President Bush canceled shortly after
taking office in favor of his *"Vision for Space Exploration".
Which seeks to return men to the Moon to build a colony that
can support only...four...people, for only a...week..at a time.
What tangible returns would that provide to the taxpayers?

I strongly hope NASA *returns 'back to the future' and embrace
Space Solar Power as a primary goal. *This program has the potential
to transform the world for the better in more ways that can be listed.
Which a moon habital for four astronauts could never hope
to rival.

To contact your Representative:https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Space Solar Power could.....

(1) Make American the next energy "Saudi Arabia"
* * *Ensuring our future prosperity and national security.
* * *Ending wars over oil.
(2) Provide a completely clean, endless supply of energy
* * which could replace fossil fuels and become the primary
* * solution to Global Warming.
(3) Provide a government payload which could jump start
* * *the commercial space industry much like the US Air Mail
* * *ushered in the age of commercial aviation.
(4) Provide energy to places around the world where conventional
* * * power plants are unaffordable or not practical.
(5) Solve America's largest and most glaring weakness, our dependence
* * * on oil. Eliminating the power the Middle Eastern nations have
* * * *over us.

Just to name a few of the potential benefits of Space Solar Power.
How do those compare to the current Bush plan of putting a
few people on the Moon?

To contact your Representative:https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

NASA's SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM

Executive Summary

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Space Solar Power
(SSP) Exploratory Research and Technology (SERT) program was
charged to develop technologies needed to provide cost-competitive
ground baseload electrical power from space-based solar energy converters..
In addition, during its 2-year tenure, the SERT program was also expected
to provide a roadmap of research and technology investment to enhance
other space, military, and commercial applications such as satellites operating
with improved power supplies, free-flying technology platforms, space
propulsion technology, and techniques for planetary surface exploration."
"Central to the SERT program was a series of five or six experimental flight
demonstrations of progressively larger power-generation capacity"
"For each of the major SSP subsystems, NASA managers developed
top-level cost targets in cents per kilowatt-hour (kW-hr) that they felt
would have to be met to deliver baseload power at a target of
5 cents/kW-hr."http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1

President Bush's Vision For Space Explorationhttp://history.nasa.gov/Vision_For_Space_Exploration.pdf

Why in the world would a ..Texas oilman, President Bush, oppose
Solar Power as a solution to our future energy needs???

Please write your Congressmen and urge them to support
Space Solar Power as a new more sensible goal for NASA
and our future. The decision on a new goal for NASA is
being decided RIGHT NOW, your email can certainty
make a difference.

Thank you for reading.

To contact your Representative:https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Jonathan

s

Cheap and clean energy from space, as well as acquiring off-world
minerals and rare elements that'll make life a whole better right here
on good old Earth, are rather basic priorities as to what any public
funded investment should be focused upon. In other words, getting
back something more than we have to put out would be real nice for a
change, though even breaking even would be rather nifty.

The discovery of other life could become more problematic than it's
worth, unless that other life has evolved their survival intelligence
in ways that we have yet to consider as valuable.

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...

The discovery of other life could become more problematic than it's
worth, unless that other life has evolved their survival intelligence
in ways that we have yet to consider as valuable.


The primary reason I wish life is found on Mars is because that's the
only way science and religion can at last find ....common ground.
As long as this two thousand year schism continues, we'll still
be in the Dark Ages.

It's why Complexity Science appeals to me so much. It's a combination
of reductionist and holistic methods, reduced to a single view
consistent with both. The way to 'solve' the problem of combining
science and religion (philosophy) is straight forward.

First break each down in terms of their chosen frame of reference
And the tools each use to gather 'data'.
Then eliminate the two which don't make sense, and
combine what's left.


Science:

Reductionism
Tools of modern science

Religion:

Holism
Scripture


There is nothing wrong with using a reductionist frame of reference.
Using the part details drive fundamental laws. However, what few
grasp is the essential discovery of the Chaos sciences. Which is
the relationship between order and the ability to detail components.

The basic relationship of Nature is....

As order increases, component behavior becomes more chaotic.

Don't you see? The study of part details is only possible for the
very simplest of systems, for the /least meaningful/ of all.
So a reductionist frame is tossed, along with unreliable scripture.
Leaving a systems or holistic approach of religion, but retaining
all the wonderful tools of modern science.

Complexity Science;

Systems of Holistic frame
Tools of modern science


Only through a holistic or systems frame of reference can higher
level order, with it's all important emergent properties, be
understood in a scientific way. It's the only way in which we can
derive the fundamental laws of the universe properly, from the
most complex the universe has to offer, not the simplest.
Life shows us how the physical universe works, not the other
way around, that's how completely backwards and Dark Age
is our science today.

This allows all systems, living, physical or philosophical, to be treated
with a single universal science. But it gets even better.
The abstract model, the Complex Adaptive System, is a template
so to speak of the ideal system structure. A CAS shows us
what the /future/ of any system should aspire to.

In short, a CAS supplies the best possible solution for the ...future..of
any given problem....in advance...and with any discipline at all.

So, Complexity Science gives us the solution to the ideal....future.
It's specialty is deriving what the future...should be.
Classical methods detail reality, what things are.
We now can connect the two, science and philosophy, what things are
and the future we desire...scientifically...and into a path towards the
ideal future system state.

It really is worth it to spend some time in the themes page
of the first link. I'm telling you, once the idea sinks in, the
universe never looks the same again.

CALResCo Complexity Writings

Themes
http://www.calresco.org/themes.htm



DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS

"The study of complex systems in a unified framework has become
recognized in recent years as a new scientific discipline, the ultimate
of interdisciplinary fields. Breaking down the barriers between physics,
chemistry and biology and the so-called soft sciences of psychology,
sociology, economics, and anthropology, this text explores the
universal physical and mathematical principles that govern the
emergence of complex systems from simple components.
Dynamics of Complex Systems is the first text describing
the modern unified study of complex systems."

Full Online Text
http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/


s





~ BG

On Oct 15, 6:43*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

The discovery of other life could become more problematic than it's
worth, unless that other life has evolved their survival intelligence
in ways that we have yet to consider as valuable.

The primary reason I wish life is found on Mars is because that's the
only way science and religion can at last find ....common ground.
As long as this two thousand year schism continues, we'll still
be in the Dark Ages.

Those faith-based Dark Ages are here to stay, even if there's
intelligent other life on Mars or Venus to behold. Religions will
manage to directly and/or indirectly via false flags manage to get
themselves and most everyone else killed, or simply kept so spiteful
and ethnic orientated that fighting to our death may seem easier to
accept.

All it takes is a couple of faith-based bad apples and the whole damn
barrel of apples goes bad.


It's why Complexity Science appeals to me so much. It's a combination
of reductionist and holistic methods, reduced to a single view
consistent with both. The way to 'solve' *the problem of combining
science and religion (philosophy) is straight forward.

First break each down in terms of their chosen frame of reference
And the tools each use to gather 'data'.
Then eliminate the two which don't make sense, and
combine what's left.

Science:

Reductionism
Tools of modern science

Religion:

Holism
Scripture

There is nothing wrong with using a reductionist frame of reference.
Using the part details drive fundamental laws. However, what few
grasp is the essential discovery of the Chaos sciences. Which is
the relationship between order and the ability to detail components.

The basic relationship of Nature is....

As order increases, component behavior becomes more chaotic.

Don't you see? The study of part details is only possible for the
very simplest of systems, for the /least meaningful/ of all.
So a reductionist frame is tossed, along with unreliable scripture.
Leaving a systems or holistic approach of religion, but retaining
all the wonderful tools of modern science.

Complexity Science;

Systems of Holistic frame
Tools of modern science

Only through a holistic or systems frame of reference can higher
level order, with it's all important emergent properties, be
understood in a scientific way. It's the only way in which we can
derive the fundamental laws of the universe properly, from the
most complex the universe has to offer, not the simplest.
Life shows us how the physical universe works, not the other
way around, that's how completely backwards and Dark Age
is our science today.

This allows all systems, living, physical or philosophical, to be treated
with a single universal science. But it gets even better.
The abstract model, the Complex Adaptive System, is a template
so to speak of the ideal system structure. A CAS shows us
what the /future/ of any system should aspire to.

In short, a CAS supplies the best possible solution for the ...future..of
any given problem....in advance...and with any discipline at all.

So, Complexity Science gives us the solution to the ideal....future.
It's specialty is deriving what the future...should be.
Classical methods detail reality, what things are.
We now can connect the two, science and philosophy, what things are
and the future we desire...scientifically...and into a path towards the
ideal future system state.

It really is worth it to spend some time in the themes page
of the first link. I'm telling you, once the idea sinks in, the
universe never looks the same again.

CALResCo Complexity Writings

Themeshttp://www.calresco.org/themes.htm

DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS

"The study of complex systems in a unified framework has become
recognized in recent years as a new scientific discipline, the ultimate
of interdisciplinary fields. Breaking down the barriers between physics,
chemistry and biology and the so-called soft sciences of psychology,
sociology, economics, and anthropology, this text explores the
universal physical and mathematical principles that govern the
emergence of complex systems from simple components.
Dynamics of Complex Systems is the first text describing
the modern unified study of complex systems."

Full Online Texthttp://necsi.org/publications/dcs/

s

I'm with you. However, most of everything on your wish-list depends
on accomplishing a revision of recorded history in order to uncover
and reflect the best available truths. Good luck with that, and
remember what they (our faith-based cabal/cartel) did to a certain
dark-skinned guy that was being a little too damn honest for his own
good (they had him put on a stick, along with any other trouble
makers), and later on Catholics merely hired mercenaries and set their
holy army to exterminate hundreds of thousands of those nice Cathars
that weren't paying their fair share of dues and otherwise ignoring
the Pope's demands for absolute loyalty. Trust me, nothing has
changed, it's just being kept more secret.

Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...


Those faith-based Dark Ages are here to stay, even if there's
intelligent other life on Mars or Venus to behold. Religions will
manage to directly and/or indirectly via false flags manage to get
themselves and most everyone else killed, or simply kept so spiteful
and ethnic orientated that fighting to our death may seem easier to
accept.

All it takes is a couple of faith-based bad apples and the whole damn
barrel of apples goes bad.


Ya, for the masses that get all their science from FOX and the like.
But what I mean is a scientific language must be developed that
both science and religion can use. So they can talk to each other
in a reasonable way. Remember, I'm not talking about lay science
or common religion. But at the higher levels of each.


I'm with you. However, most of everything on your wish-list depends
on accomplishing a revision of recorded history in order to uncover
and reflect the best available truths.

I think it merely takes a new scientific language. Let me try restating
some 'truths' in common terms.

Complexity Science;

The ideal system structure, a complex adaptive system, forms from
the unstable equilibrium of opposite extremes in possibility space.
When the two opposites stand at a persistent phase transition between
each other, intractably entangled so that one can't tell which-is-which,
self organization or evolution emerges.

Such as the ideal society being an equilibrium of the opposites
of "The Rule of Law", and "Freedom".

Such as evolution emerging from the competition of the opposites
of "Mutation" and "Genetics".

Such as a cloud resulting from the union of the opposite forces of
condensation and evaporation..... etc etc


Jesus Christ;

Love is the answer!
(hint, replace opposites extremes with male and female)

Both fields come to the very same conclusion.
They just don't know it yet.

It takes a common scientific language to see, for the first time, what
is common amongst all the disciplines.
In science, the disciplines are so narrow, so specialized and getting
more so every day. How can a, say, physicist talk to a biologist?
Let alone to a religious philosopher? So how can the 'big picture'
ever be found?

If you've spent any time really reading
the writings of the Vatican, through the Catholic Encyclopedia, I think
you'd be surprised just how well developed and reasonable is their
philosophy. All the simple stories and miracles and such are metaphors
designed for the desperate and uneducated third world, their primary
flock, that needs the comfort and guidance of a simple lesson.

It's so easy for people to misuse those metaphors by taking them
literally.


To quote the Vatican

"This is technically expressed by saying that all our knowledge of God
is analogical, and that all predicates applied to God and to creatures
are used analogically, not univocally. I may look at a portrait or at its
living original, and say of either, with literal truth, that is a beautiful
face.

"And this is an example of analogical predication. Beauty is literally and
truly realized both in the portrait and its living original, and retains its
proper meaning as applied to either; there is sufficient likeness or analogy
to justify literal predication but there is not that perfect likeness or
identity between painted and living beauty which univocal predication
would imply. And similarly in the case of God and creatures.
What we contemplate directly is the portrait of Him painted, so to speak,
by Himself on the canvas of the universe."

"The same reasons that justify and recommend the use of metaphorical
language in other connections justify and recommended it here, but no Theist
of average intelligence ever thinks of understanding literally the metaphors
he applies, or hears applied by others, to God, any more than he means
to speak literally when he calls a brave man a lion, or a cunning one a fox."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm


The Vatican has embraced Darwinian evolution, and
constantly claims they have no quarrel with (well) established
science. They are deliberately slow to accept new science though
so as to not confuse their flock with every new theory that
comes along.


Good luck with that, and
remember what they (our faith-based cabal/cartel) did to a certain
dark-skinned guy that was being a little too damn honest for his own
good (they had him put on a stick, along with any other trouble
makers), and later on Catholics merely hired mercenaries and set their
holy army to exterminate hundreds of thousands of those nice Cathars
that weren't paying their fair share of dues and otherwise ignoring
the Pope's demands for absolute loyalty. Trust me, nothing has
changed, it's just being kept more secret.



The world is what we make it, the possibilities are endless.




Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

On Oct 19, 5:57*pm, "jonathan" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

Those faith-based Dark Ages are here to stay, even if there's
intelligent other life on Mars or Venus to behold. *Religions will
manage to directly and/or indirectly via false flags manage to get
themselves and most everyone else killed, or simply kept so spiteful
and ethnic orientated that fighting to our death may seem easier to
accept.
All it takes is a couple of faith-based bad apples and the whole damn
barrel of apples goes bad.

Ya, for the masses that get all their science from FOX and the like.
But what I mean is a scientific language must be developed that
both science and religion can use. So they can talk to each other
in a reasonable way. Remember, I'm not talking about lay science
or common religion. But at the higher levels of each.

I'm with you. *However, most of everything on your wish-list depends
on accomplishing a revision of recorded history in order to uncover
and reflect the best available truths.

I think it merely takes a new scientific language. Let me try restating
some 'truths' in common terms.

Complexity Science;

The ideal system structure, a complex adaptive system, forms from
the unstable equilibrium of opposite extremes in possibility space.
When the two opposites stand at a persistent phase transition between
each other, intractably entangled so that one can't tell which-is-which,
self organization or evolution emerges.

Such as the ideal society being an equilibrium of the opposites
of "The Rule of Law", and "Freedom".

Such as evolution emerging from the competition of the opposites
of "Mutation" and "Genetics".

Such as a cloud resulting from the union of the opposite forces of
condensation and evaporation..... etc etc

Jesus Christ;

Love is the answer!
(hint, replace opposites extremes with male and female)

Both fields come to the very same conclusion.
They just don't know it yet.

It takes a common scientific language to see, for the first time, what
is common amongst all the disciplines.
In science, the disciplines are so narrow, so specialized and getting
more so every day. How can a, say, physicist talk to a biologist?
Let alone to a religious philosopher? So how can the 'big picture'
ever be found?

If you've spent any time really reading
the writings of the Vatican, through the Catholic Encyclopedia, I think
you'd be surprised just how well developed and reasonable is their
philosophy. *All the simple stories and miracles and such are metaphors
designed for the desperate and uneducated third world, their primary
flock, that needs the comfort and guidance of a simple lesson.

It's so easy for people to misuse those metaphors by taking them
literally.

To quote the Vatican

"This is technically expressed by saying that all our knowledge of God
is analogical, and that all predicates applied to God and to creatures
are used analogically, not univocally. I may look at a portrait or at its
living original, and say of either, with literal truth, that is a beautiful
face.

"And this is an example of analogical predication. Beauty is literally and
truly realized both in the portrait and its living original, and retains its
proper meaning as applied to either; there is sufficient likeness or analogy
to justify literal predication but there is not that perfect likeness or
identity between painted and living beauty which univocal predication
would imply. And similarly in the case of God and creatures.
What we contemplate directly is the portrait of Him painted, so to speak,
by Himself on the canvas of the universe."

"The same reasons that justify and recommend the use of metaphorical
language in other connections justify and recommended it here, but no Theist
of average intelligence ever thinks of understanding literally the metaphors
he applies, or hears applied by others, to God, any more than he means
to speak literally when he calls a brave man a lion, or a cunning one a fox."http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm

The Vatican has embraced Darwinian evolution, and
constantly claims they have no quarrel with (well) established
science. They are deliberately slow to accept new science though
so as to not confuse their flock with every new theory that
comes along.

Good luck with that, and
remember what they (our faith-based cabal/cartel) did to a certain
dark-skinned guy that was being a little too damn honest for his own
good (they had him put on a stick, along with any other trouble
makers), and later on Catholics merely hired mercenaries and set their
holy army to exterminate hundreds of thousands of those nice Cathars
that weren't paying their fair share of dues and otherwise ignoring
the Pope's demands for absolute loyalty. *Trust me, nothing has
changed, it's just being kept more secret.

The world is what we make it, the possibilities are endless.

*Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

All forms of religion are anti-science, though some more tenaciously
than others.

The only faith-based support as to off-world sorts of space related
science is if it's either too far away and/or otherwise at best inert
eyecandy worthy.

~ BG