Space Colonization Thread

[Khanan]

We do not have enough energy-generating technology for humanity to be sustainable on long term. Space colonization won't happen, or only for a few humans.

[TommyJo]

Yea, I grabbed the lower figure for lifespan to make it seem as ridiculous as possible. They are hoping to push its operational lifespan out to ten years. It won't be used much beyond this because unlike Hubble, the JWST will not be able to be serviced. This means, first and foremost, no replacement gas for maneuvering jets. At some time it will run out of gas and it will be left pointing in the same direction forever. Even if the other parts still work. Assuming it deploys correctly and that it survives launch. It is also going to be placed at L2 I think which is an extremely difficult place to get a service crew to.

I mean it's a great piece of kit but it's a great example of how corrupt and inefficient NASA has become and why space needs to be privatised. Most of the planets we know of are gas giants, we know very little about brown dwarfs and it will push back the veil of time and allow us to see further back towards the big bang.

I'm glad it exists but by the end of it's lifetime there will hopefully be a whole host of advanced telescopes all over the moon and being manufactured to be placed elsewhere also.

Hi, I'm new here, and generally wanted to understand and read about the game, but your discussions fascinated me. I would like to ask Jalpha: by privatization do you mean the transfer of basic research to the control of private companies? If so, do you know that there are over 45 commercial space companies in the world at the moment? And the list continues to expand. How do you see prospective research and flights organized by private companies? What do you think is the advantage of private companies over national institutions?

[Jalpha]

Off the cuff:

If you cut me I bleed red. Gold coins do not fall out. What I mean by that is I do not really like capitalism, and an ideal government would be far superior to corporations. However the reality is that an ideal government does not exist and corporations hold much of the real power now.

This aside what private companies have to offer is stability and efficiency. Current governments are too dynamic to sustain the long term vision and action necessary to bridge our migration beyond earth orbit. Parties and leaders change and so does national policy as a result. Companies have much more capacity for long term stability of vision and action. Additionally private companies are motivated by financial profit. There is profit to be made beyond earth orbit. It will take some government support to build up to the point where that profit is accessible. However once that support is able to be withdrawn private companies will be forced to strive for economic efficiency. This philosophy stands in opposition to government funded entities like NASA, which are motivated by the lobbying of their employees. This results in a large proportion of (arguably) squandered resources.

The privatisation of space will be messy. In a lot of ways it will be very messy. It would be better if there was a government to take up the needed role to push us beyond earth orbit. However the reality is that any such government will most probably arise as a result of the privatisation of space, and it will most probably emerge beyond earth orbit.

It is the first steps which are the most difficult.

I will try to answer your other questions in a bit.

[iamahh]

Private initiatives are limited by fear and irrationality but when action is crucial you need to rise above these limitations, and the markets forces are blind as ever in 2020. To the point our only viable spaceship in this hostile universe is compromised.

Western scientists are sounding like hobos begging for a change here and there, meanwhile China is delivering punch after punch, simply because is not haunted by the ghost of profit.

Earth was kind enough to allow us to play with irrationality and fear typical of the markets, but the time is up, the future is only possible with planned rationality, and the only culture showing signs of doing it is the 5000yo sibling being hated by the West.

[Jalpha]

Much of the research being done on the ISS right now is chartered experiments paid for by private companies. Obviously there is money to be made by researching in orbit. I assume this can only expand.

When considering observatories though it will probably still be government who funds this kind of research. I can imagine opportunities for private companies to host the scientists and technicians who will service and operate these observatories, and I can imagine opportunities for privately owned and operated stations to mount observational equipment for a fee.

A lot of research will continue to be done by government, however the role for private companies to support this research while conducting research of their own should expand immensely. I do not see research being the primary focus of space industry for some time, though materials sciences and engineering are examples where private industry is likely to do the bulk of the discovery.

I should also mention that private companies have more room to be less scrupulous. This opens up opportunities for cost savings and risks to be taken which a government could never make. The ethical and moral grounds will become more fluid as private companies move beyond earth orbit.

I think it will be interesting to see how China fares in this scientific battleground. They also have profit in mind no doubt, and I fully expect a battle for resources to take place on the moon. For China this is a disadvantage because its national interests will come into play here and this brings the risk of physical confrontations with other nations extending to the earths surface. Private companies are more likely to settle their conflicts of interest in the court of law, however private security firms may be employed at some stage. I suppose this is another point in favour of the privatisation of space. Any conflict is likely to be of a small scale so long as national interests are not at great threat.

[vatas]

Reminds me of how it would be relatively simple to make a space station with artificial gravity through centrifugal spin, but it would invalidate the main reason of ISS: having a laboratory that is in stable, permanent state of zero gravity.

"Why you need zero gravity" is bit complicated afaik, only thing I can think of right now is that certain types of crystals can only form in zero gravity, and experiments with organisms and monitoring of the astronauts is the only way to get practical data of how lack of gravity affects living things.

[mvgulik]

but it would invalidate the main reason of ISS: having a laboratory that is in stable, permanent state of zero gravity.

Were there is the will, there is a way.


"microgravity environment" btw.

[Jalpha]

While there is much room for further scientific and industrial knowledge to be gained in zero-g the emphasis for government has shifted to micro gravity. This is a major reason for the push for a moon base.

See we have already learned about as much as we need to from zero-g regarding human adaptation to that environment. We have gained sufficient knowledge to now be sure that the risk of injury to any astronaut landing on Mars after an extended zero-g jouney is too great for that journey to be feasible. After several months of weakening bone density and vision problems it is too much to expect with certainty that those astronauts would make the descent, and then be able to travel around for a few months on Mars, in potentially rough terrain, with weakened bones, vision and muscles for them to not have an accident. If such an accident were to occur the mission is a failure. All scientific goals would have to be discarded and the priority becomes getting that injured astronaut safely back to Earth.

It reminds me of a story from my military days. All sections were given a tasking to rendezvous from their various locations at a point surrounded by steep rough terrain. There was only one route of access with "reasonably" level ground. All section commanders were instructed not to take a shortcut over the steep terrain, but to utilise the easier access route instead. Oh yea, and that day there was a heatwave. Due to the nature of the terrain radio communications were also problematic.

One section commander in particular figured that if he and his section started the climb early enough they could make it to the downward slope before it got too hot. He was wrong. When the first member of his section went down from heat stress he could not get in contact with HQ. They decided to start climbing back down the slope after constructing a stretcher to carry the sick member. This was when one of the stretcher bearers twisted their ankle and also needed a stretcher. It wasn't long before another member of his section went down from heat.

Meanwhile most of the other sections had been severely delayed by having to constantly take detours along their chosen routes to higher ground where they could get in radio contact with HQ (necessary to provide gridsquare locations regularly) and had at various points been instructed to seek shelter and hold position because the heatwave was even worse than expected.

Anyway, I digressed a little there but the point is that these situations tend to get out of control very quickly. This time the section commander and his sig made it to the peak of the ridge in the heat to contact HQ and had a rescue party sent who were not fatigued from several days of pack marching and who were not carrying 40+ kgs on their backs. This is not an option on Mars.

It is vitally important that our first steps into space go well. Any disasters are going to steal momentum from the push to move our species BEO. Public will and support is fickle and people need to be inspired not made fearful.

If moon gravity is enough to reduce bone matter loss to reasonable levels then that is a much simpler level of artificial gravity to provide on the journey to Mars. Getting the astronauts onto the surface fit for purpose, and fit to survive re-entering a 1-g environment after many, many months in low-g is vital to the success of any mission to Mars.

That being said there is a great deal of experimentation to be done in zero-g. Crystals aside there is also metallic foams to consider which are very problematic to produce in 1-g. There is also easy access to near vacuum and this will become increasingly vital as miniaturisation of electronics progresses. Plants are also said to grow better without gravity holding them down, but there are issues with this. For example the root tips of plants have a kind of lump of heavy material in them which tells the surrounding cells which way is down so they have a point of reference for which way to grow.

Spinning habitats are the future. They are our only hope for providing future generations a healthy environment free of the toxins we have already contaminated the entire Earth with. Try to find me fish that hasn't been contaminated by heavy metals, chemicals and microplastics. Mars is little more than a stepping stone in some respects, however I do see Mars becoming home to a vast array of supercomputers which produce an artificial paradise reality into which people will migrate when their bodies fail them. Probably their brains will be plugged in and they will be fed by machines. Literal brains in jars with wires hanging out.

However it is much more likely to start out as a kind of wild west mining town.

[shubla]

I think that the reason for moon base is, that government realized that colonizing mars just is not realistic yet. But colonizing moon is probably possible, because of the smaller delays for radio and bringing supplies.

For quite long time I think they said something like "no point in going to moon because we can do everything in ISS that we could do in moon lets just go straight to mars" but then they suddenly changed plans!

[Apocoreo]

+1 please add will consider