Re: NASA: Forget Space-- Go Deep

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Thu Feb 27 2003 - 17:00:18 MST

  • Next message: Lee Corbin: "RE: weapons of mass panic"

    --- Anders Sandberg <asa@nada.kth.se> wrote:
    > On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 09:25:19PM -0000,
    > cryofan@mylinuxisp.com wrote:
    > > Yeah, I totally agree:
    > >
    > >
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.03/view.html?pg=2
    >
    > Yes, although I doubt subsea He3 mining will ever be
    > a hit. Also, the
    > sea is an even more hostile place than space - it is
    > a very active
    > chemical environment under high pressure, which
    > requires more extreme
    > protection than most space environments.
    >
    > Space is important because it is *space*. For
    > resources, yes, go to the
    > sea.

    That's exactly the attitude they're attacking, though
    I believe their attack to be flawed. Almost all of
    their criticisms can be traced to the way we have
    attempted to go to space - for instance, NASA - rather
    than the potential of space itself. Had something
    like NASA been in place with regards to Earth's
    oceans for the past 40 years, I dare say there would
    be a flag and a few more pieces of junk at the deepest
    point of the Earth's oceans, but nobody would have yet
    come near the Titanic, for example, though some
    multi-billion dollar plans to do so would have been
    floated.

    Which is not to say that oceanic applications of
    science could not use more investigation. For
    instance, robot deep sea submarines (or even sea floor
    crawlers) to hunt for significant concentrations of
    certain valuable minerals and/or energy. Or possibly
    research into cheap but durable aquatic residences, to
    allow population pressures in certain coastal cities
    to be partially eased by expanding into the sea, while
    still keeping people relatively close to the trade
    hubs that are their reason for living near the cities
    in the first place. Say, an arcology in the San
    Francisco Bay, designed not to upset the local ecology
    (at least, any more than houses for an equivalent
    number of human beings would). Just that attacking
    space is a flawed approach to get the funding for
    this.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 27 2003 - 17:02:39 MST