People !!!! Does anyone agree with the idea of a US project
to build three 10,000 population (Island One size)
colonies before end of decade? One on surface of moon,
one on surface of Mars & one rotating in spaceon G.K.O'Neill
model. Why is this any greater challenge today than JFK's
~ 1961 goal to put men on moon & bring them back in that
decade? (given the advances in technologies in the 50 years)
To be safe my idea is to use rotating toroid shapes for moon
& Mars surface colonies to simulate full earth gravity.
Toriods would be supported by magnetic levitation.
I got impression G.K.O'Neill favored a Bernal Sphere shape
from his book while T.A.Heppenheimer favored the toroid
shape for the colony in space. On the space one I'd favor
locating adjacent a moon of Mars but open to idea of a NEA
location instead. Hallelujah Praise Spacesettlers !!!!! Ed S.
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Re: : One step backwards (Step zero)
No apology required :-) Interesting ad, detailing methods to improve launch
capability!
Regards
Selvaraj
After learning that some astronauts are suffering from problems of vision, I
am wondering whether medically certifying both Moon and Mars should be the
next step in space colonization.
over periods varying from one to ten years to see how they manage.
Growing food etc can be given second priority - the same can be carried from
Earth. Whatever exploration they can do during their stay there can be
considered a bonus.
Regards,
Selvaraj
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2011/09/20/Astronauts-reporting-vision-problems/UPI-20861316531550/
Personnally, I am less enthusiastic about a 10 year plan to build 1 to 3 habs from moon to Mars.
Being so close to earth it is very feasible to use remote control of the equipment. Without a life support system adding weight, more equipment could be transferred to moon, more tests could be conducted and more rapid technological progress made.
After this, it could be possible to consider a longer term human presence in space --- after adequate radiation sheilding is in place where they will reside.
From: sraj
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 3 Pronged Approach
After learning that some astronauts are suffering from problems of vision, I
am wondering whether medically certifying both Moon and Mars should be the
next step in space colonization.
If so, we should plan to have at least 10 men stationed on Moon and Mars
over periods varying from one to ten years to see how they manage.
Growing food etc can be given second priority - the same can be carried from
Earth. Whatever exploration they can do during their stay there can be
considered a bonus.
Regards,
Selvaraj
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2011/09/20/Astronauts-reporting-vision-problems/UPI-20861316531550/
On 26 September 2011 20:49, Schonert Edward wrote:
People !!!! Does anyone agree with the idea of a US project to build three 10,000 population (Island One size)colonies before end of decade? One on surface of moon,
one on surface of Mars & one rotating in space on G.K.O'Neillmodel. Why is this any greater challenge today than JFK's~ 1961 goal to put men on moon & bring them back in thatdecade? (given the advances in technologies in the 50 years)To be safe my idea is to use rotating toroid shapes for moon& Mars surface colonies to simulate full earth gravity.Toriods would be supported by magnetic levitation. I got impression G.K.O'Neill favored a Bernal Sphere shapefrom his book while T.A.Heppenheimer favored the toroid shape for the colony in space. On the space one I'd favorlocating adjacent a moon of Mars but open to idea of a NEAlocation instead. Hallelujah Praise Spacesettlers !!!!! Ed S.
>
> From: sraj
> To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 10:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Re: : One step backwards (Step zero)
>
> No apology required :-) Interesting ad, detailing methods to improve launch
> capability!
>
> Regards
> Selvaraj
>
> On 28 June 2010 20:35, Schonert Edward wrote:
>
> > Selvaraj !!! Sorry for this tardy apology for my hasty/sloppyresponse to your June 6 moon colony idea.I totally share your frustration at slowness of our progress
in getting colonies on G.K.O'Neill model OR on surfaces ofour moon OR Mars built & believe all can be started together.
Note I've been through this before & included above 3 in mynewspaper ad ~ a year ago which someone put on internet @
> >
> > http://pissycat.multiply.com/journal/item/673
> >
> > Ed S. Hallelujah Praise Spacesettlers !!!
> >
> > From: sraj >
> > To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, June 7, 2010 6:54:14 AM
> >
> > Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Re: : One step backwards (Step zero)
> >
It is unfortunate that we don't have bases on the Moon and that we have not landed on Mars as yet. Both were eminently doable with the resources we have on our planet.
> >
Unfortunately much of the fault lies with the scientific and engineeringcommunity. Look how long they have taken to find out that there is water
on the Moon!? Just as our scientists on terra firma are busy doing all kinds of scientific stuff, even as our planet gasps for breath; in space too theyare
busy taking pretty pictures of the universe (not that we don't need thesepretty pictures), even as they ignore the importance of human presence in space.
On Sep 26, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Schonert Edward wrote:
> People !!!! Does anyone agree with the idea of a US project
> to build three 10,000 population (Island One size)
> colonies before end of decade?
>
There is one scenario where this is possible, even easy. If mankind
gives up war and directs the $2 trillion or so per year devoted to
death and destruction towards space settlement construction.
Not likely to happen. Pity.
Irrespective of other activities, it is wiser to establish a minimal
presence on the moon as early as possible. The zero gravity in the space
station is undesirable and could have life threatening consequences. One
sixth G on the Moon provides a directional component, so it is much safer.
It will be good if we find out as soon as possible how long people can
safely live on the moon and what the physiological challenges and
opportunities are.
Selvaraj
I agree. Use of nearby ET resources is key to almost everything, and radiation shielding is the low-hanging fruit of space-resource use.
Mike Combs
From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Matt Gallimore
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 4:13 PM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 3 Pronged Approach
Personnally, I am less enthusiastic about a 10 year plan to build 1 to 3 habs from moon to Mars.
What I'd prefer seeing (for the resources it would take) is a serious program to develop lunar manufacturing capabilities. That would consist of a series of robotic missions. These could test moving regolith, sintering, metallic refining. From this simple protective structure with shielding could be built on the moon which would protect equipment or possible inflatable base module.
Being so close to earth it is very feasible to use remote control of the equipment. Without a life support system adding weight, more equipment could be transferred to moon, more tests could be conducted and more rapid technological progress made.
After this, it could be possible to consider a longer term human presence in space --- after adequate radiation sheilding is in place where they will reside.
On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:35 AM, sraj wrote:
> presence on the moon as early as possible. The zero gravity in the
> space
> station is undesirable and could have life threatening consequences.
In orbit, you can rotate the structure and get 1g.
Dozens of people have spent many months in 0g in various space
stations. None has died of it.
On 9/28/11 7:11 PM, Al Globus wrote:
> stations. None has died of it.
They have suffered to some degree, though. It's too bad we don't have
any data at all on extended exposure to G levels more than 0 but less
than 1. We don't know what a few years at, say, lunar or Martian
gravity would do to you. More importantly (IMHO), we don't know how
big/fast we have to make our orbital colonies for long-term health,
especially if we're going to have growing children there.
I tend to favor a multi-deck design, with the largest living area in the
outer deck at 1G, but higher decks at subsequently lower Gs for various
purposes. Agriculture, factories, and so on would be on the higher
decks, tended by a small number of adults for whom I suspect the daily
hours of lower gravity would be no detriment. There would also be
recreational facilities, including flying gyms (aviaries?), low-G
dance/sports/performance halls, etc., but those too would be only
visited for limited amounts of time. However, we might find that the
elderly or infirm might want/need to live on a higher deck, where
gravity doesn't weigh so heavily on them, and a fall doesn't have to
mean a broken bone. (Assuming we haven't managed to cure aging by then,
of course.)
A multi-level design also makes the most efficient use of your expensive
structural shell, too, but that's a topic for another thread.
Best,
- Joe
On Sep 28, 2011, at 7:28 PM, Joe Strout wrote:
>
> > Dozens of people have spent many months in 0g in various space
> > stations. None has died of it.
>
> They have suffered to some degree, though. It's too bad we don't have
> any data at all on extended exposure to G levels more than 0 but less
> than 1. We don't know what a few years at, say, lunar or Martian
> gravity would do to you. More importantly (IMHO), we don't know how
> big/fast we have to make our orbital colonies for long-term health,
> especially if we're going to have growing children there.
>
We are pretty much entirely in agreement here.
I've often wonder what the effect of changing g levels would have in
a multi-deck design, or even without multi-deck but good access to 0g
at the center. Although real research is necessary to get the answer,
chances are it's not a problem. We already has 8-9 hours of bed rest
a day, and bed rest is routinely used for 0g simulation on the ground
to study human response. True, the studies put you slightly head
down, but it's not that far off.
Al Globus wrote:
Dozens of people have spent many months in 0g in various space
stations. None has died of it.
....
1) Expedition 11 Commander Sergei Krikalev will become the human with the
most cumulative time in space early Aug. 16. At 1:44 a.m. EDT he will pass
the record of 748 days held by Sergei Avdeyev.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Sergei-Krikalev-Breaks-Time-in-Space-Record-6426.shtml
What would have happened if he had spent the 748 days in one mission?
2) Having a minimum presence on the Moon will check out the lunar 1/6 g life
style. How people work, how they tire, how they eat, sleep etc. With a few
dogs, cats etc, we can also checkout how other life forms adjust and form
part of the whole. The goal should be for someone to clock a full 10 years
on the Moon. (The sooner we start the better)
Regards,
Selvaraj
On 29 September 2011 06:41, Al Globus wrote:
AL & ALL RESPONDENTS ON THIS SUBJECT !!!!! Try to
understand that when JFK set that goal (50 years ago today?)
he did NOT have all the technical problems figured out, he
just assumed they could be worked out in that decade.
I'm sure there were lots of people arguing we'd have to give
up the cold war we were in the middle of just like you are arguing
all we'd have to give up Al !!! PLEASE take a look at the illustrations
on Internet of what colonies will look like particularly notice how
inhabitants are NOT floating around upside down with their hair
sticking straight out like pictures NASA bombards us with as life
in space: Stanford Torus Colony illustration proposed for surfaces
of moon & Mars at:
http://www.nss.org/settlement/space/toruscutaway.htm
Bernal Sphere Colony proposed for asteroid or moon of Mars location at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bernal_Sphere_3.jpeg
Hallelujia Praise Spacesettlers !!!!!! Ed S.
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] 3 Pronged Approach
On Sep 26, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Schonert Edward wrote:
>
> People !!!! Does anyone agree with the idea of a US project
> to build three 10,000 population (Island One size)
> colonies before end of decade?
>
There is one scenario where this is possible, even easy. If mankind
gives up war and directs the $2 trillion or so per year devoted to
death and destruction towards space settlement construction.
Not likely to happen. Pity.