Question about Steve Jordan books - Page 5

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-01-2007, 10:39 AM

Understood... but I'm not advocating orbital research and manufacturing simply for profit motives. The fact is that taking advantage of the microgravity, near-vacuum and near-zero temperatures inherent in orbital access should result in better materials, more efficient electronics and other systems, and new ways of creating compounds that will hopefully allow us to use less power in their manufacture.

This includes more efficient compounds and designs for solar cells, possibly the single best tool we have to fight global warming. Orbital resources may bring us a way to manufacture improved, more efficient cells, cutting our reliance on oil and coal even more.

There may be mixed reasons to go to the Moon, and practically no practical reasons to go any further. But there are great reasons to get into orbit.

yvanleterrible · 11-01-2007, 11:19 AM

One of the reasons to go back to the moon really got my attention because touted as a 'Green Energy' reason.

Apparently the suface of the moon is covered with Helium3, a substance projected by the sun and deflected by our athmosphere. It is very difficult to produce and pretty rare on Earth. It could be used to produce energy in a fusion reactor as small as a room and with little quantity necessary. As it is now, in the experimental models, we use Hydrogen which has a tendancy to destroy the inner walls of current generators. Helium3 would not.

That's a far way off to do mining! We might not have the time left to invest on such endeavors. That said without calculation as to all energy used to get off this planet's surface and related manufacturing pollution aspects. I resent the brain power we allocate to things other than planet preservation to some extent. We manage every kind of power than this one, shouldn't we look into this more seriously?

The fixation on the state of economic aspects is wrong to me. That serves those who have. It's been said this year that for the first time in history, there have been more people working at virtual tasks than physical ones. Those too are at risk, but what risk? If a crash happens they'll still be alive! They will just suffer the same angsts and ills the rest of us suffer every day! Big deal! Do we have to burn our house in their comfort's name? Not a justifyable reason. If the planet crashes now that is serious...

Sorry! I could go on and on... But still I can't help from dreaming of going to space too! Reading your story makes that possible for common people in a way, that's what I meant by upbeat.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-01-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

Reading your story makes that possible for common people in a way, that's what I meant by upbeat.

And that was the point of the story. You got it in one!

nekokami · 11-01-2007, 03:32 PM

Many of the advances in miniaturization that make low-power devices possible were developed as spin-offs of space exploration. (Heinlein wrote a great article about this back in the eighties.) Satellites were what made us aware of the hole in the ozone layer, and are still used to monitor the weather patterns that alert us to global warming trends. And our study of other planets (like Venus) may help us to understand better how to take care of this one.

I'm not saying we should invest frivolously in space exploration while millions starve here on Earth. But I don't think it's an either-or proposition. Space research is basic science research, and pays off for everyone in knowledge gained, often unpredictably. I would like it to be a goal that unites us, constructively, rather than so many of the goals we seem to have that divide us, destructively.

Ok, soapbox off.... Maybe I should go read some Steve Jordan, rather than crabbing at people about space research, eh?

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-01-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nekokami

Ok, soapbox off.... Maybe I should go read some Steve Jordan, rather than crabbing at people about space research, eh?

OK.

Seriously, I'm not saying we shouldn't go into space at all... just that we should be a lot more particular, maybe practical, about what we're doing up there. Trips to Mars and Venus? No. Into orbit, to do good for our planet? Hells yeah.

yvanleterrible · 11-01-2007, 04:37 PM

Did you all know that since sizing down NASA has been having things built and conceived outside. I doubt that the frenzy of invention is still in there and that it will ever come back. Your idea of the 'Seven Heaven' (company collusions) is more likely to become norm Steve. It's damn difficult to build things from scratch anymore, you have to rely on an inordinate amount of specialty suppliers. NASA takes more of a science first approach and lets the tinkerers finicky around the details. Its more influential role is to set goals with strict time tables as "We want such invented and built for then, you can start with this bit of information and we think it can be done this way. Good luck."

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-01-2007, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

Did you all know that since sizing down NASA has been having things built and conceived outside.

Actually, NASA has always worked with outside vendors, held tightly under their wing during a project. That's why I'm sure the vendors themselves could do the job... they already have most of the expertise in-house.

11-01-2007, 11:19 AM	#62
yvanleterrible Reborn Paper User Posts: 8,616 Karma: 15446734 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Que Nada Device: iPhone8, iPad Air	One of the reasons to go back to the moon really got my attention because touted as a 'Green Energy' reason. Apparently the suface of the moon is covered with Helium3, a substance projected by the sun and deflected by our athmosphere. It is very difficult to produce and pretty rare on Earth. It could be used to produce energy in a fusion reactor as small as a room and with little quantity necessary. As it is now, in the experimental models, we use Hydrogen which has a tendancy to destroy the inner walls of current generators. Helium3 would not. That's a far way off to do mining! We might not have the time left to invest on such endeavors. That said without calculation as to all energy used to get off this planet's surface and related manufacturing pollution aspects. I resent the brain power we allocate to things other than planet preservation to some extent. We manage every kind of power than this one, shouldn't we look into this more seriously? The fixation on the state of economic aspects is wrong to me. That serves those who have. It's been said this year that for the first time in history, there have been more people working at virtual tasks than physical ones. Those too are at risk, but what risk? If a crash happens they'll still be alive! They will just suffer the same angsts and ills the rest of us suffer every day! Big deal! Do we have to burn our house in their comfort's name? Not a justifyable reason. If the planet crashes now that is serious... Sorry! I could go on and on... But still I can't help from dreaming of going to space too! Reading your story makes that possible for common people in a way, that's what I meant by upbeat. Last edited by yvanleterrible; 11-01-2007 at 11:32 AM. Reason: sense of sentence loss to typo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
As the Mirror Cracks - Steve Jordan Books	mores	Reading Recommendations	3	06-09-2008 04:46 PM
Steve Jordan books	pilotbob	Reading Recommendations	7	05-25-2008 08:16 PM
Steve Jordan Books $1.50 each for "E-Book Week"	Bob Russell	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	47	03-12-2008 04:19 PM
Steve Jordan now offering Sony Reader books	Moonraker	News	1	05-20-2007 01:36 PM

11-01-2007, 10:39 AM	#61
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Understood... but I'm not advocating orbital research and manufacturing simply for profit motives. The fact is that taking advantage of the microgravity, near-vacuum and near-zero temperatures inherent in orbital access should result in better materials, more efficient electronics and other systems, and new ways of creating compounds that will hopefully allow us to use less power in their manufacture. This includes more efficient compounds and designs for solar cells, possibly the single best tool we have to fight global warming. Orbital resources may bring us a way to manufacture improved, more efficient cells, cutting our reliance on oil and coal even more. There may be mixed reasons to go to the Moon, and practically no practical reasons to go any further. But there are great reasons to get into orbit.

11-01-2007, 03:32 PM	#64
nekokami fruminous edugeek Posts: 6,745 Karma: 551260 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northeast US Device: iPad, eBw 1150	Many of the advances in miniaturization that make low-power devices possible were developed as spin-offs of space exploration. (Heinlein wrote a great article about this back in the eighties.) Satellites were what made us aware of the hole in the ozone layer, and are still used to monitor the weather patterns that alert us to global warming trends. And our study of other planets (like Venus) may help us to understand better how to take care of this one. I'm not saying we should invest frivolously in space exploration while millions starve here on Earth. But I don't think it's an either-or proposition. Space research is basic science research, and pays off for everyone in knowledge gained, often unpredictably. I would like it to be a goal that unites us, constructively, rather than so many of the goals we seem to have that divide us, destructively. Ok, soapbox off.... Maybe I should go read some Steve Jordan, rather than crabbing at people about space research, eh?

11-01-2007, 04:37 PM	#66
yvanleterrible Reborn Paper User Posts: 8,616 Karma: 15446734 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Que Nada Device: iPhone8, iPad Air	Did you all know that since sizing down NASA has been having things built and conceived outside. I doubt that the frenzy of invention is still in there and that it will ever come back. Your idea of the 'Seven Heaven' (company collusions) is more likely to become norm Steve. It's damn difficult to build things from scratch anymore, you have to rely on an inordinate amount of specialty suppliers. NASA takes more of a science first approach and lets the tinkerers finicky around the details. Its more influential role is to set goals with strict time tables as "We want such invented and built for then, you can start with this bit of information and we think it can be done this way. Good luck."

Advert

Advert