Article View: sci.space
Article #8325Re: NSS Board membership
From: Nick Szabo
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1989 04:05
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1989 04:05
41 lines
3210 bytes
3210 bytes
In article <1989Jan20.180404.7740@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <94@beaver.cs.washington.edu> szabonj@right.UUCP (Nick Szabo) writes: >>Space settlements are another example of *future* technology. > >No, they are an example of future application of current technology. >They are much less speculative than nanotechnology or the other examples >cited; we could clearly build at least small space settlements today if >the money could be found. I wish this cliche could be put to rest. What exactly do you mean by "current technology"? We haven't built any space colonies, so you can't mean the exact technology needed for them. Nor have we designed the supporting structure, such as launchers of sufficient size, machines to build the launchers and the colonies, etc. No space colony has ever been designed in anything but the crudest macro detail. No full-scale or even tenth- or hundredth-scale models of colonies have been tested. We have never experimented with large spinning structures in vacuum or excavations on the Moon. We have never built any machines to extract tons of material in a vacuum, nor to extrude, bend, shape, mold, and the thousands of other industrial processes required, which all must be ported to a zero gravity and vacuum environment. We could not build any colony of >1,000 people, in ten years, even given an infinite amount of money; there is simply too much to be learned and too many people to train. (Unless you like the crude approach: 1,000 space station modules, cluttering up LEO, costing $5,000 billion, plus $500 billon per year to service, given current shuttle cost. If that is your idea of a space colony, I give up.) In contrast, we have electric motors the size of a human hair, single electrons trapped and measured, single molecules held in laser light, etc. today. It is not overly speculative to assume similar progress over the next ten years, and even to expect that nanotechnology will play a big role in both space exploration (check out the Microdevices Laboratory at JPL) and in later space colonization. Things we build in the future will use future technology. I use computer chips and bit-mapped screens, not vacuum tubes and punch cards. If I had planned a computer back in the late 50's, and stuck religiously to my plans, I'd be in pretty sad shape at the moment. Planning space colonies with today's technology is a similar mistake. Nick Szabo szabonj@fred.cs.washington.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<98@beaver.cs.washington.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-larry!szabonjReferences:
<6145@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <1989Jan15.095906.18357@utzoo.uucp> <92@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1989Jan18.043708.27547@utzoo.uucp> <1989Jan18.102436.12838@cs.rochester.edu> <6226@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <94@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1989Jan20.180404.7740@utzoo.uuShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-larry!szabonj From: szabonj@uw-larry (Nick Szabo) Newsgroups: sci.space Subject: Re: NSS Board membership Message-ID: <98@beaver.cs.washington.edu> Date: 23 Jan 89 04:05:05 GMT References: <6145@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <1989Jan15.095906.18357@utzoo.uucp> <92@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1989Jan18.043708.27547@utzoo.uucp> <1989Jan18.102436.12838@cs.rochester.edu> <6226@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <94@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1989Jan20.180404.7740@utzoo.uu Sender: news@beaver.cs.washington.edu Reply-To: szabonj@uw-larry.UUCP (Nick Szabo) Organization: U of Washington, CSCI, Seattle Lines: 41