Although I didn't explain it well.
The basic idea is all deposits are considered gold with the bank managing any exchanges.
Economic expansion and liberty, by Mars Maniac in Chief Ken MMinC., and occasional brilliance and humor by CJ.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
Saturday, June 13, 2015
Is it true?
Americans have it within their power to make the federal government an insurable hazard.I don't know about that because we can't seem to even come to terms with an even more basic truth...
American freedom is being gutted.It's easy to find people that are oblivious to this truth, even willing to argue otherwise.
Sunday, June 7, 2015
The general store
Many mars naysayers claim the colonists on mars will all die when they run out of some critical supply item. First, staying alive is an individual responsibility. Second, the general store and basic economics insures this does not happen.
The general store performs a number of beneficial functions. It buys in bulk and sells items at a markup. This provides a buyer for those that produce stuff. This provides a buffer of items for before they need replacement. It balances supply and demand. Competition establishes the best rates and a further supply buffer.
This is so obvious it shouldn't need a post, but naysayers never seem to acknowledge this... because they don't believe in free enterprise.
The general store performs a number of beneficial functions. It buys in bulk and sells items at a markup. This provides a buyer for those that produce stuff. This provides a buffer of items for before they need replacement. It balances supply and demand. Competition establishes the best rates and a further supply buffer.
This is so obvious it shouldn't need a post, but naysayers never seem to acknowledge this... because they don't believe in free enterprise.
Monday, May 25, 2015
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
Dragon landing
Dragon 2 has 8 SuperDracos in pairs each producing 15,000 lbs of thrust and throttleable to 20% (10% effectively since they are paired.)
Lowest throttle would be 12,000 lbs (4 x 3,000) total. Which is about what the Dragon weighs (landing would be more difficult if it weighed less than minimum thrust. If you didn't contact ground at zero velocity and shut down you'd go up again.) Landing legs should compensate for some imperfection.
From the pad abort test we learn that Dragon has 5 seconds of fuel at full throttle which would last longer at lower throttle settings. We assume it was fully fueled.
It went from zero to 100 mph in 1.2 seconds and reached 345 mph.
What is its terminal velocity in one atmosphere? I don't know. Somehow it would have to slow down enough to land on land, probably in less than a minute. I'd like to see that.
On mars it would make a crater, but SpaceX may bypass the wider red lander (Dragon version 3?) for the MCT. I guess we shall see, when we shall see?
Lowest throttle would be 12,000 lbs (4 x 3,000) total. Which is about what the Dragon weighs (landing would be more difficult if it weighed less than minimum thrust. If you didn't contact ground at zero velocity and shut down you'd go up again.) Landing legs should compensate for some imperfection.
From the pad abort test we learn that Dragon has 5 seconds of fuel at full throttle which would last longer at lower throttle settings. We assume it was fully fueled.
It went from zero to 100 mph in 1.2 seconds and reached 345 mph.
What is its terminal velocity in one atmosphere? I don't know. Somehow it would have to slow down enough to land on land, probably in less than a minute. I'd like to see that.
On mars it would make a crater, but SpaceX may bypass the wider red lander (Dragon version 3?) for the MCT. I guess we shall see, when we shall see?
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
The 'Just do it' architecture
This dismal report starts with this paragraph...
The 'just do it' plan is based on the simple observation that all plans should have two major phases. 1) Getting enough supplies to a base location. 2) Only send colonists after enough supplies are waiting.
But how much is enough? What should the mix include? This is where naysayer input is valuable. We aren't going to be able to predict perfectly all the things the colonists are going to need. Humbly acknowledging this means sending less than what is required for survival wastes the entire mission. Sending more is only marginally bad and can't be avoided anyway, so why not embrace it?
We already know how to send stuff to mars, but should lower the cost. What lowers cost? Competition. So let's have one using just a small part of NASA's mars budget. The best part is we can implement this plan today instead of 20 years from now and avoid costly, decade long detours as well.
Every 26 month launch window, NASA will pay for one Falcon Heavy launch to mars. On board will be two 5.5 ton landers, each with a ton of cargo. The lander that safely lands first within a target ellipse gets $50m, the second gets $30m. We do this every launch window until sending colonists becomes irresistible to some private company. Let the naysayers come up with the cargoes.
Let the Russians or Chinese get there first and steal our cargo. It doesn't matter because the point is learning how to survive on mars. We just keep sending cargo. If we have to embarrass ourselves to get our act together, that works. It's also magnitudes cheaper than the progress suggested above.
This also allows NASA to save face regarding SLS/Orion. They can continue telling us Orion will put crew on mars, spending billions, while $200m a year goes unnoticed actually doing the mars mission. We've put rovers on mars costing billions while gaining valuable knowledge. It's time to take a fraction of that cost and actually move forward.
Significant strides towards the goal of sending humans to Mars have been made over the last few years, not only through advancements in planning and capabilities, but also in the political realm. However, despite this progress, there is a common misperception that there has been little or no motion forward in humanity's efforts and ability to actually achieve this goal.Probably because 'can do' people understand that planning, while useful, is what you do before any moving forward actually occurs. Current plans seem more like, 'running in place and getting nowhere' plans. We can do better by identifying a simple truth: all plans fall short. Plus, we can turn the naysayers to our advantage by making them part of the plan.
The 'just do it' plan is based on the simple observation that all plans should have two major phases. 1) Getting enough supplies to a base location. 2) Only send colonists after enough supplies are waiting.
But how much is enough? What should the mix include? This is where naysayer input is valuable. We aren't going to be able to predict perfectly all the things the colonists are going to need. Humbly acknowledging this means sending less than what is required for survival wastes the entire mission. Sending more is only marginally bad and can't be avoided anyway, so why not embrace it?
We already know how to send stuff to mars, but should lower the cost. What lowers cost? Competition. So let's have one using just a small part of NASA's mars budget. The best part is we can implement this plan today instead of 20 years from now and avoid costly, decade long detours as well.
Every 26 month launch window, NASA will pay for one Falcon Heavy launch to mars. On board will be two 5.5 ton landers, each with a ton of cargo. The lander that safely lands first within a target ellipse gets $50m, the second gets $30m. We do this every launch window until sending colonists becomes irresistible to some private company. Let the naysayers come up with the cargoes.
Let the Russians or Chinese get there first and steal our cargo. It doesn't matter because the point is learning how to survive on mars. We just keep sending cargo. If we have to embarrass ourselves to get our act together, that works. It's also magnitudes cheaper than the progress suggested above.
This also allows NASA to save face regarding SLS/Orion. They can continue telling us Orion will put crew on mars, spending billions, while $200m a year goes unnoticed actually doing the mars mission. We've put rovers on mars costing billions while gaining valuable knowledge. It's time to take a fraction of that cost and actually move forward.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Second Mars Affordability and Sustainability Workshop
I intend to comment on this report.
Overview
Summary
I. Background, Goals, and Structure
SLS/Orion are white elephants that will have nothing to do with mars.
II. Humans-to-Mars Architectures (they consider three.)
III. Humans in the Vicinity of Mars
All based on outpost thinking. This section can be ignored.
IV. Affordability and Sustainability
All about how to turn this into a jobs program to get political support.
Overview
...guide space agency leadership and national policymakers.So they don't really consider commercial interests. To avoid flags and footprints economic viability is essential.
Summary
...[does] not endorse one-way missions to Mars, where the humans on the first mission are settlers.Otherwise known as F&F. It doesn't have to be either/or. A MAV and ERV can be considered a separate mission.
...forward and backward contamination...Please... contamination is a given. Get over it.
science exploration of Mars should be a major elementA huge mistake. The purpose of the first to land is to insure the survival of those that follow which then may include scientists. Scientists will get a lot more done if survival is not their focus. Others should ensure this first.
teleroboticsCan be done any where near mars, including from its surface. This is not a required precursor for anything. However, it would be stupid not to include these tools in the mix.
the technical capabilities required for human lunar surface operations are of limited applicability to human Mars exploration.Agreed.
I. Background, Goals, and Structure
stepping stonesIdentify those that really aren't and eliminate them to achieve lowest cost.
science goals enabled by human presence in the vicinity of Mars.Fine as long as they don't interfere with the primary objective: Learning to survive and thrive on mars. We can move a lot faster than 20 years from now. We could be landing essential precursor colonist supplies today.
SLS/Orion are white elephants that will have nothing to do with mars.
II. Humans-to-Mars Architectures (they consider three.)
(1) an “Apollo-style” mission (ruled out.)Colonization was not considered viable because they were doing it wrong. They had outpost thinking from the start and could not imagine anything else. The irony is an outpost is hugely more expensive and easier to abandon than just focusing on colonization.
(2) an outpost w/ rotating, non-permanent crew.
(3) colonization or settlement of Mars.
Solar electric propulsionNot essential, but could enable larger cargo mass to mars orbit. As long as we use existing technology rather than cause delay for something better, why not?
SLS-class heavy lift vehicle is requiredOtherwise known as cognitive impairment and puts all other conclusions in question. Of course HL increases options. But SEP reduces the need for HL. The cost of one SLS launch cost about what 20 or more FH launches will. SLS will not fly at the frequency required either (if at all.)
sample returnIs not required. We already know general composition and the sample will not be from the actual crew landing site and wouldn't be representative even if it were.
2 to 3 SLS flights per yearPure fantasy. Demonstrates not being serious about colonization.
Asteroid Retrieval Mission (ARM), fully utilizing the ISS, the highest-prioritynear-term “stepping stone” should be a long-duration, crew-tended habitat near the MoonWhat are they smoking? Distractions that give more evidence they are not serious. These distractions cost ten years according to the report.
III. Humans in the Vicinity of Mars
All based on outpost thinking. This section can be ignored.
IV. Affordability and Sustainability
All about how to turn this into a jobs program to get political support.
Saturday, May 2, 2015
How obtuse am I?
Rand could not have seriously meant that I was ignoring asteroids.
So here I will make the comparison (between a planet like mars vs. asteroids as a mining source) that a comment in a post simply would not do justice to.
Consider your location to be fixed. Where ever you are, there you is. Even so in space (and I'm not being obtuse about orbits, so please.) A mine on mars is a fixed location away from you and can be mined for years. Other minerals, in other mines are also fixed positions relative to you. Even more important economically is you are the master of your own fate. You can individually exploit these resources.
Not so in space. Everything is in motion relative to each other. You live in a can of people, where chances are, you're not the captain. But let's make you the captain because that's an unavoidable fantasy for some. How do you exploit the asteroids? Your choices are... 1) move your can to the asteroid, 2a) move the asteroid to your can, 2b) move some of it to you.
Either option has a delta V cost. No asteroid is going to have the diversity of minerals you need, even if you don't deplete the minerals it does have. So you're back to making that choice again, captain. Your best hope is an ecosystem where other cans of people trade with you... meaning more delta V costs. Which is no where near as economical as hopping into your mars truck and picking up a load from the mine. Planet industry wins.
Well that was a lot shorter than I thought it would have to be?
Other factors? Getting colonist into space is basically the same cost other than landing. But with cans of people, more people means more cans. For planets you can reuse the ships, even landers when they're SSTO, used to transport colonists to a planet. So initially, because reuse takes some development, asteroids win; but soon thereafter planets win again.
The Emdrive may be the game changer.
So here I will make the comparison (between a planet like mars vs. asteroids as a mining source) that a comment in a post simply would not do justice to.
Consider your location to be fixed. Where ever you are, there you is. Even so in space (and I'm not being obtuse about orbits, so please.) A mine on mars is a fixed location away from you and can be mined for years. Other minerals, in other mines are also fixed positions relative to you. Even more important economically is you are the master of your own fate. You can individually exploit these resources.
Not so in space. Everything is in motion relative to each other. You live in a can of people, where chances are, you're not the captain. But let's make you the captain because that's an unavoidable fantasy for some. How do you exploit the asteroids? Your choices are... 1) move your can to the asteroid, 2a) move the asteroid to your can, 2b) move some of it to you.
Either option has a delta V cost. No asteroid is going to have the diversity of minerals you need, even if you don't deplete the minerals it does have. So you're back to making that choice again, captain. Your best hope is an ecosystem where other cans of people trade with you... meaning more delta V costs. Which is no where near as economical as hopping into your mars truck and picking up a load from the mine. Planet industry wins.
Well that was a lot shorter than I thought it would have to be?
Other factors? Getting colonist into space is basically the same cost other than landing. But with cans of people, more people means more cans. For planets you can reuse the ships, even landers when they're SSTO, used to transport colonists to a planet. So initially, because reuse takes some development, asteroids win; but soon thereafter planets win again.
The Emdrive may be the game changer.
Friday, May 1, 2015
Sounds foolish, but couldn't be more serious
When I say here, I could do an entire mars settlement program (evergreen) with just one year of SLS/Orion funding using just the FH for launch (13.2 ton is not only enough but preferred to larger vehicles.)
Assuming each year the interest pays for a FH launch with payload. That's two landers every 26 months leaving a habitat in mars orbit for a growing space station. Assuming just one ton of payload per lander to the surface of mars or two crew with a month of supplies and personal property.
Supplies will continuously be sent until there is absolutely no doubt the colonists have a good start. Only then will colonists follow.
We will wait until we can send a minimum of six colonist on the first mission, then those colonist will decide what we send in the following landers.
It is expected that once living on mars is demonstrated, others will fund colonists in addition to those we send every launch window.
Assuming each year the interest pays for a FH launch with payload. That's two landers every 26 months leaving a habitat in mars orbit for a growing space station. Assuming just one ton of payload per lander to the surface of mars or two crew with a month of supplies and personal property.
Supplies will continuously be sent until there is absolutely no doubt the colonists have a good start. Only then will colonists follow.
We will wait until we can send a minimum of six colonist on the first mission, then those colonist will decide what we send in the following landers.
It is expected that once living on mars is demonstrated, others will fund colonists in addition to those we send every launch window.
Thursday, April 30, 2015
We essentially did ARM by doing Dawn
Dawn is a science mission producing fantastic results. ARM is political masturbation. ARM is another example of government dysfunction.
Electric Propulsion is great for long duration missions like Dawn and for station keeping. But chemical propulsion is how we currently get to orbit so the marginal cost to go a bit farther is not much greater (F9 gets 13 ton to earth orbit for $60m. FH gets the same mass to mars orbit for $120m. Add to that the cost of the 13 ton payload... [a craft with a payload of its own] means the cost of a $60m craft to mars orbit is only about 50% more than to LEO.)
Where EP could be very useful is to recover a humans to mars orbit transporter for reuse which also serves as emergency backup thrust.
Electric Propulsion is great for long duration missions like Dawn and for station keeping. But chemical propulsion is how we currently get to orbit so the marginal cost to go a bit farther is not much greater (F9 gets 13 ton to earth orbit for $60m. FH gets the same mass to mars orbit for $120m. Add to that the cost of the 13 ton payload... [a craft with a payload of its own] means the cost of a $60m craft to mars orbit is only about 50% more than to LEO.)
Where EP could be very useful is to recover a humans to mars orbit transporter for reuse which also serves as emergency backup thrust.
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
needle in yer eye
My first... driving home was interesting. Next week they do my good eye. Will get a driver for that. Then repeat for the next six months.
The good news... my eyes should not get worse and could get better. During testing they gave me a shot in the arm that turned the world into pretty colors... no, actual colors, not a psychedelic experience.
The fog should go away in about 36 hours they say (it did, sooner than that.)
The good news... my eyes should not get worse and could get better. During testing they gave me a shot in the arm that turned the world into pretty colors... no, actual colors, not a psychedelic experience.
The fog should go away in about 36 hours they say (it did, sooner than that.)
Monday, April 20, 2015
IGF1?
My doctors have told me about liver problems since right before I got hired as an air traffic controller a quarter century ago (I waited too long and didn't make it through the program.) If I'd considered it when Reagan fired the controllers I'd have almost two decades of retirement (and a completely different life) by now.
So my retinas are going bad along with my kidneys and pancreas. But it could be the liver is the key. I'm looking in to it and thanks to CJ (who probably thinks I don't listen simply because it is my nature to tune out any discussion of my health) I am encouraged. So for what it's worth, thanks.
BTW Update: Becoming an ATCS required me to pass a lot of physical and mental test along with an FBI investigation. I would not have because my right eye was just over the line. But I can be a can do person so I reasoned, "physical measurements are all tolerances not Platonic ideals." So I got an optometrist to give me a prescription that allowed me to pass the FAA requirements. The flight surgeon did notice my eye was exactly at the cutoff point but passed me.
BTW Update 2: After a year I found out I was on slow track in my FBI investigation because I was arrested during my work commute for sleeping on a subway (in suit, tie and vest with briefcase.) Slow track meant no job with the FAA. So I went to NY from Phx to stand before a judge who couldn't believe I was trying to get a decade old ticket thrown out, but he did and I got my FBI investigation moved back onto fast track. Since I interviewed 2 days before being disqualified by age (it takes another day to process the interview because I asked) and having about a year overall delay after that, I am pretty confident I am the oldest person to have been accepted.
Then I failed the program by giving an optional clearance saying 8 instead o 7. That's how close I got. All I had to do was not give that clearance... "let 'em wait in orbit around a vortac for the slow traffic passing below." Seven would have put them underneath the traffic and clear to land. I also made one mistake on a map that had to be drawn from memory but that wouldn't have failed me. I would not even have made that mistake if I'd checked my work (I finished the map with plenty of time) and noticed one item that added up to 359 instead of 360. Must have been an experience for me to still remember these details after almost 30 years, eh?
So my retinas are going bad along with my kidneys and pancreas. But it could be the liver is the key. I'm looking in to it and thanks to CJ (who probably thinks I don't listen simply because it is my nature to tune out any discussion of my health) I am encouraged. So for what it's worth, thanks.
BTW Update: Becoming an ATCS required me to pass a lot of physical and mental test along with an FBI investigation. I would not have because my right eye was just over the line. But I can be a can do person so I reasoned, "physical measurements are all tolerances not Platonic ideals." So I got an optometrist to give me a prescription that allowed me to pass the FAA requirements. The flight surgeon did notice my eye was exactly at the cutoff point but passed me.
BTW Update 2: After a year I found out I was on slow track in my FBI investigation because I was arrested during my work commute for sleeping on a subway (in suit, tie and vest with briefcase.) Slow track meant no job with the FAA. So I went to NY from Phx to stand before a judge who couldn't believe I was trying to get a decade old ticket thrown out, but he did and I got my FBI investigation moved back onto fast track. Since I interviewed 2 days before being disqualified by age (it takes another day to process the interview because I asked) and having about a year overall delay after that, I am pretty confident I am the oldest person to have been accepted.
Then I failed the program by giving an optional clearance saying 8 instead o 7. That's how close I got. All I had to do was not give that clearance... "let 'em wait in orbit around a vortac for the slow traffic passing below." Seven would have put them underneath the traffic and clear to land. I also made one mistake on a map that had to be drawn from memory but that wouldn't have failed me. I would not even have made that mistake if I'd checked my work (I finished the map with plenty of time) and noticed one item that added up to 359 instead of 360. Must have been an experience for me to still remember these details after almost 30 years, eh?
ARM: In response to item #9
Have we ever had so much opposition to a mission?
NASA has an existing mars budget (How much?) which is just part of it's overall $18.4B annual budget. Considering the F9H will put 13 tons into mars orbit for under $200m including the cost of payload that mars budget whatever it is, should be more than enough if not wasted.
The simple answer to why is two fold...
The metric in space is delta V and by that metric anywhere in the solar system is easier to reach (less costly) from mars than from earth, including LEO!
Industry requires three main things: labor, energy and materials. Mars already has energy and materials. It just needs labor. Robots should supplement but can not replace people (though some have such fear.)
Automation is a labor capital multiplier, not a replacement. Any plan that doesn't understand the importance of not just industry, but industrialists, will not effectively compete. Those industrialists will come from the settlement itself (immigration or birth doesn't matter.)
Getting labor to mars is the hard part, but not much more so than any other place off earth (orbit being halfway to anywhere.) Once on mars, living there not only doesn't have to be hard, done right it could be preferable to earth with greater personal opportunities. If done right. Human nature (envy and control freaks) continues to work against that.
If you care about the solar system and future of humanity, you would care about establishing industry on mars ASAP for humanities everlasting benefit.
9. We shouldn’t do anything that isn’t directly on the quickest path to Mars — I probably won’t convince Zubrinites, but it turns out we have this whole Solar System that doesn’t just consist of Earth and Mars. If manned Mars exploration was something we could do quickly, within NASA’s existing budget, or if there were no other interesting or useful destinations along the way, it might be one thing. But even the committee members who are advocating for this have admitted we don’t have the money to do a manned Mars mission in the next 25 years without significant increases in NASA’s funding. While it has been poorly marketed, Flexible Path wasn’t just about “doing asteroids first” or doing them instead of the Moon or Mars. To me the underlying point was that even if Mars is the long-term goal, we should find ways to do interesting exploration along the way to Mars, even if some of those destinations involve slight detours along the way. When you’re talking about a destination over 25 years out, acting like a 3 month delay is somehow insufferable is flat out ridiculous.Seems a bit of a strawman and somewhat condescending, but I am certain Jonathan didn't mean it to be. He writes a good thoughtful article. Let's start by agreeing that the entire solar system is the goal. I would then argue (to follow) that mars settlement is both the fastest and most efficient way to achieve that. If so, then cumulative delays could be extremely costly.
NASA has an existing mars budget (How much?) which is just part of it's overall $18.4B annual budget. Considering the F9H will put 13 tons into mars orbit for under $200m including the cost of payload that mars budget whatever it is, should be more than enough if not wasted.
Mars settlement is both the fastest and most efficient way to achieve advancement into the entire solar system.
The simple answer to why is two fold...
- Any industrial base that can out compete the earth (even just in part) gets us into the solar system both more efficiently and faster.
- Mars will out compete any other location because it has the resources in one place that does not include a rocket equation surcharge.
The metric in space is delta V and by that metric anywhere in the solar system is easier to reach (less costly) from mars than from earth, including LEO!
Industry requires three main things: labor, energy and materials. Mars already has energy and materials. It just needs labor. Robots should supplement but can not replace people (though some have such fear.)
Automation is a labor capital multiplier, not a replacement. Any plan that doesn't understand the importance of not just industry, but industrialists, will not effectively compete. Those industrialists will come from the settlement itself (immigration or birth doesn't matter.)
Getting labor to mars is the hard part, but not much more so than any other place off earth (orbit being halfway to anywhere.) Once on mars, living there not only doesn't have to be hard, done right it could be preferable to earth with greater personal opportunities. If done right. Human nature (envy and control freaks) continues to work against that.
If you care about the solar system and future of humanity, you would care about establishing industry on mars ASAP for humanities everlasting benefit.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Yes, trivial.
My brother is building his second truck. The first one took a week after he towed the engineless carcass into the yard. Dad now drives it to work. To get the engine and transmission into it he built a hoist out of wood. I used the Jimmy to push the carcass into position for the engine before I left on my trip. That's what can do people do. My brother can put any engine into any vehicle regardless of make, model or type. You add metal where it's needed. He rides to work on a regular bicycle he added a two stroke 80cc engine to.
That's the least of his talents. Now that he doesn't drink, there is no telling how much he will accomplish.
I said living on mars will be trivial compared to getting there. Naysayers point to hazards that are easily overcome by can do people. Martians will almost never work in space suits. There's no reason to. They will not work in a toxic environment. They will not work in a cramped environment. They will work in a lower gravity environment. So my brother wouldn't need my help to get an engine positioned. I have to laugh every time I look at the Mars One housing plan (well, and everybody else's as well.) Mars is a world. That is essentially unlimited space with unlimited building materials actually floating in the air. You can actually use pure iron and not worry about free oxygen rusting it, but paint it anyway. Or use steel. Or gold when they find some. Mars has lots of stuff free for the picking which they'll find by accident before they even start a serious search.
They will have industrial levels of energy that cost them nothing. The cost of energy on earth is due to lawyers, not economic reality.
Hell, life on mars will be much less oppressive than life on earth. This isn't some romantic notion. This is just plain fact. Mars has opportunity that no longer exists on earth. On earth, starting a business used to be trivial but isn't anymore. It used to be easy to find a market niche, but on earth somebody has already filled it.
Naysayers are just absurdly blind. Getting there is the only real problem. Even that will be less difficult (not easy) as some now claim. We just have to do it rather than talk about it.
A martian in a huge non toxic shirtsleeve environment (they have absolutely no reason not to be) may even forget they're on mars as they consider the millions of options regarding what to make or what service to provide others.
Martian dust isn't a hazard. That's wealth they don't have to mine. They just need a good vacuum hose and energy to process it. Knowledge they already have. Design will be both old and new.
Talk about land of opportunity!
That's the least of his talents. Now that he doesn't drink, there is no telling how much he will accomplish.
I said living on mars will be trivial compared to getting there. Naysayers point to hazards that are easily overcome by can do people. Martians will almost never work in space suits. There's no reason to. They will not work in a toxic environment. They will not work in a cramped environment. They will work in a lower gravity environment. So my brother wouldn't need my help to get an engine positioned. I have to laugh every time I look at the Mars One housing plan (well, and everybody else's as well.) Mars is a world. That is essentially unlimited space with unlimited building materials actually floating in the air. You can actually use pure iron and not worry about free oxygen rusting it, but paint it anyway. Or use steel. Or gold when they find some. Mars has lots of stuff free for the picking which they'll find by accident before they even start a serious search.
They will have industrial levels of energy that cost them nothing. The cost of energy on earth is due to lawyers, not economic reality.
Hell, life on mars will be much less oppressive than life on earth. This isn't some romantic notion. This is just plain fact. Mars has opportunity that no longer exists on earth. On earth, starting a business used to be trivial but isn't anymore. It used to be easy to find a market niche, but on earth somebody has already filled it.
Naysayers are just absurdly blind. Getting there is the only real problem. Even that will be less difficult (not easy) as some now claim. We just have to do it rather than talk about it.
A martian in a huge non toxic shirtsleeve environment (they have absolutely no reason not to be) may even forget they're on mars as they consider the millions of options regarding what to make or what service to provide others.
Martian dust isn't a hazard. That's wealth they don't have to mine. They just need a good vacuum hose and energy to process it. Knowledge they already have. Design will be both old and new.
Talk about land of opportunity!
Try, try again?
Nope. I'm done. A road trip is simply unaffordable for this poor boy. Gas costs were eating me alive being more than half my expense. The choice: "food or gas?" left me starving. The following may be T.M.I...
The speed limit was 70 on I-15, but for 4 hours it was 2. I pulled over only to be told I had to get back in traffic because emergency services needed the shoulders. Watching my gas gauge going lower I thought "screw that" and pulled over again a bit farther this time. It was cold with a drizzling rain. I got diarrhea and gas. It wasn't a fart, so now I had a shitload. Misery. I had to change, so now I'm bare ass'd (is that where embarrassed comes from?) hoping my Jimmy is blocking the view (not completely) with hundreds of cars inching past me. At first, I couldn't lift my foot to get clean undershorts on, but finally managed. Left pants, shorts and towels full of shit on side of road. Sunshine and time will take care of those. What caused the jam? Looky-lous. An accident on the other side of the highway!
Went to Los Angeles, got within 50 feet of the ocean but didn't see it for an hour because the traffic was so bad.
From the ocean to W. Covina on I-10 it was more parking lot. Got off highway to find a gas station (by now late at night.) I found one with a curb that popped two tires (purchased 4 weeks earlier) so well there was no bump or sound. Next day clerk told me not only do his customers pop tires regularly but he even lost one himself. I can't stick around to fight the city over this and my road hazard is worthless since I'm not carrying the tires back with me (I use a local tire guy back home.)
When I walk (with a nice stick) my blood pressure often drops. BP to zero, me to floor. Ok, not zero, just unmeasurable. It's happened a number of times so I know the drill. EMT's want me to go to hospital but if I'm conscience they have to get my consent to force another few thousand in hospital bills on me. So they bring in the police to threaten arrest (48 hr of loony bin observation) if I don't 'consent.' I could argue with the police (laws do apply to them as well) but just went for a guarantee (worthless it turned out) that I'd get transportation back to my vehicle from the hospital (which confirmed the new kidney problems I'm having... my local doctor is aware.)
The night before visiting one of my millionaire friends (he once bought me a Toyota Avalon my ex-wife is still driving) I planned to get a motel room to make myself presentable for a meeting. BTW, $35k of car is nothing compared to the millions in additional and permanent annual sales I made him. It's amazing what you can do when you have hundreds of vendors, thousands of sales leads and a guy that takes the initiative to use lat-long/zipcode data to better match them up. That took part of one day out of the year I worked for him. This is known as initiative. I've never had a boss that didn't appreciate it (hard for them not to since it always made lot's of money for them... me, not so much.)
I used to be able to afford an occasional motel room. Forget it today. Even a fleabag I wouldn't touch is too expensive. I have alternatives (I think I've lived everywhere and know lot's of folk but I just can't ask. I did ask my sister and her husband but that didn't turn out well. They forced me to end my road trip. It just wasn't worth the argument.)
I planned to visit my son, but he was working out of town for three weeks, so the timing on that didn't work out. I will call him to arrange another time.
Did not make it to Seattle. Did get my first wheelchair because I was unable to walk around stores to buy supplies. Had to pay for it myself, since the place I was told would accept medicare had "lost their bid" I was told by them. The wheelchair worked and I was able to get supplies (not everyplace I want to shop offers those electric carts which I dislike anyway.)
Now some will say they knew all along my road trip would fail. It did, but that doesn't make those "knew it's" any less moronic. Everything fails until it doesn't.
So perhaps I'm not done?
I did sit down next to (and touched) the rotary rocket. That was a spiritual experience. Much less so the two models under glass.
I'm not the only romantic which brings me to Rand's dismissive statement that mars is just a romantic notion...
Wrong Rand... Mars is real. The chemical elements needed for industry are real, widely disbursed and geologically concentrated, and not picked over for thousands of years, and does not have the rocket equation surcharge a not down a gravity well option has.
Mars industry will make the earth a backwater of the solar system in almost no time after a few thousand colonists are there. Getting them there is the hard part. Living there will be trivial in comparison. Earth will only be able to compete by using nuclear propulsion technology they believe non viable today.
The moon will need to continuously import what mars already has.
If you live long enough to see it, you may end up telling us you're the original romantic.
The speed limit was 70 on I-15, but for 4 hours it was 2. I pulled over only to be told I had to get back in traffic because emergency services needed the shoulders. Watching my gas gauge going lower I thought "screw that" and pulled over again a bit farther this time. It was cold with a drizzling rain. I got diarrhea and gas. It wasn't a fart, so now I had a shitload. Misery. I had to change, so now I'm bare ass'd (is that where embarrassed comes from?) hoping my Jimmy is blocking the view (not completely) with hundreds of cars inching past me. At first, I couldn't lift my foot to get clean undershorts on, but finally managed. Left pants, shorts and towels full of shit on side of road. Sunshine and time will take care of those. What caused the jam? Looky-lous. An accident on the other side of the highway!
Went to Los Angeles, got within 50 feet of the ocean but didn't see it for an hour because the traffic was so bad.
From the ocean to W. Covina on I-10 it was more parking lot. Got off highway to find a gas station (by now late at night.) I found one with a curb that popped two tires (purchased 4 weeks earlier) so well there was no bump or sound. Next day clerk told me not only do his customers pop tires regularly but he even lost one himself. I can't stick around to fight the city over this and my road hazard is worthless since I'm not carrying the tires back with me (I use a local tire guy back home.)
When I walk (with a nice stick) my blood pressure often drops. BP to zero, me to floor. Ok, not zero, just unmeasurable. It's happened a number of times so I know the drill. EMT's want me to go to hospital but if I'm conscience they have to get my consent to force another few thousand in hospital bills on me. So they bring in the police to threaten arrest (48 hr of loony bin observation) if I don't 'consent.' I could argue with the police (laws do apply to them as well) but just went for a guarantee (worthless it turned out) that I'd get transportation back to my vehicle from the hospital (which confirmed the new kidney problems I'm having... my local doctor is aware.)
The night before visiting one of my millionaire friends (he once bought me a Toyota Avalon my ex-wife is still driving) I planned to get a motel room to make myself presentable for a meeting. BTW, $35k of car is nothing compared to the millions in additional and permanent annual sales I made him. It's amazing what you can do when you have hundreds of vendors, thousands of sales leads and a guy that takes the initiative to use lat-long/zipcode data to better match them up. That took part of one day out of the year I worked for him. This is known as initiative. I've never had a boss that didn't appreciate it (hard for them not to since it always made lot's of money for them... me, not so much.)
I used to be able to afford an occasional motel room. Forget it today. Even a fleabag I wouldn't touch is too expensive. I have alternatives (I think I've lived everywhere and know lot's of folk but I just can't ask. I did ask my sister and her husband but that didn't turn out well. They forced me to end my road trip. It just wasn't worth the argument.)
I planned to visit my son, but he was working out of town for three weeks, so the timing on that didn't work out. I will call him to arrange another time.
Did not make it to Seattle. Did get my first wheelchair because I was unable to walk around stores to buy supplies. Had to pay for it myself, since the place I was told would accept medicare had "lost their bid" I was told by them. The wheelchair worked and I was able to get supplies (not everyplace I want to shop offers those electric carts which I dislike anyway.)
Now some will say they knew all along my road trip would fail. It did, but that doesn't make those "knew it's" any less moronic. Everything fails until it doesn't.
So perhaps I'm not done?
I did sit down next to (and touched) the rotary rocket. That was a spiritual experience. Much less so the two models under glass.
I'm not the only romantic which brings me to Rand's dismissive statement that mars is just a romantic notion...
Wrong Rand... Mars is real. The chemical elements needed for industry are real, widely disbursed and geologically concentrated, and not picked over for thousands of years, and does not have the rocket equation surcharge a not down a gravity well option has.
Mars industry will make the earth a backwater of the solar system in almost no time after a few thousand colonists are there. Getting them there is the hard part. Living there will be trivial in comparison. Earth will only be able to compete by using nuclear propulsion technology they believe non viable today.
The moon will need to continuously import what mars already has.
If you live long enough to see it, you may end up telling us you're the original romantic.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Snow day
I was planning on cleaning out my Jimmy in preparation for leaving tomorrow, but not while it's snowing. Actually, I'm not in a hurry for anything. It's just that tomorrow is my pay day.
I was hoping to get a loan, but that fell through. So next month it's the dollar menu or less for the entire month... I'm hoping it will not be for two.
I got to move my truck for my brother to get his truck past mine... back later. ... I'm back. That's one thing I'm not going to miss. We've got space to pack 20 cars in the front, but no matter where I park someone will ask me to move my Jimmy. Usually the moment I've found some comfort.
I was hoping to get a loan, but that fell through. So next month it's the dollar menu or less for the entire month... I'm hoping it will not be for two.
I got to move my truck for my brother to get his truck past mine... back later. ... I'm back. That's one thing I'm not going to miss. We've got space to pack 20 cars in the front, but no matter where I park someone will ask me to move my Jimmy. Usually the moment I've found some comfort.
Monday, February 23, 2015
Re: ARM. This is just too funny...
Or sad.
Redirecting an asteroid is not top priority of the Asteroid Redirect Mission? In three days they are suppose to announce option A or B. Option C is much lower cost and less risky: They take a rock from earth to lunar orbit. The problem with that is it removes the smoke and mirrors surrounding the rocket to nowhere... SLS.
As predicted it seems Mars One is going to fall short on funding (See here and here.) They haven't started their reality show yet which is supposed to start this year. The 2018 (aprox. $400m) mission needs to begin now to be ready for launch. This is the least risky mission since it uses a proven lander based on Phoenix. If they don't do this by 2018 they flush away a lot of credibility they may never get back.
This is what Inspiration Mars did by going begging to the government. If they had based their mission on 13 tons lifted by Falcon Heavy with a Dragon return vehicle, they could have done the whole thing for the $200m they already had. What a wasted opportunity! It would have also demonstrated the feasibility of parts of my plan. 2 days to road trip...
Redirecting an asteroid is not top priority of the Asteroid Redirect Mission? In three days they are suppose to announce option A or B. Option C is much lower cost and less risky: They take a rock from earth to lunar orbit. The problem with that is it removes the smoke and mirrors surrounding the rocket to nowhere... SLS.
As predicted it seems Mars One is going to fall short on funding (See here and here.) They haven't started their reality show yet which is supposed to start this year. The 2018 (aprox. $400m) mission needs to begin now to be ready for launch. This is the least risky mission since it uses a proven lander based on Phoenix. If they don't do this by 2018 they flush away a lot of credibility they may never get back.
This is what Inspiration Mars did by going begging to the government. If they had based their mission on 13 tons lifted by Falcon Heavy with a Dragon return vehicle, they could have done the whole thing for the $200m they already had. What a wasted opportunity! It would have also demonstrated the feasibility of parts of my plan. 2 days to road trip...
Friday, February 20, 2015
Our village idiot in chief
Did President Obama really say, "Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding?"
What a [evil] Moron!
Does he know why Jefferson had a Koran and why it came from England? Does he know why the marines sing about the shores of Tripoli?
We believe in tolerance. Don't reinterpret our history for us with your lies Mr. President.
What a [evil] Moron!
Does he know why Jefferson had a Koran and why it came from England? Does he know why the marines sing about the shores of Tripoli?
"Here in America, Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding. Generations of Muslim immigrants came here and went to work as farmers and merchants and factory workers, helped to lay railroads and build up America. The first Islamic center in New York City was founded in the 1890s. America’s first mosque -- this was an interesting fact -- was in North Dakota."So the late 1800's, when railroads were being built in this country, were our founding years?
We believe in tolerance. Don't reinterpret our history for us with your lies Mr. President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)