From: "andy-nimmo"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] More agriculture in zero-g

> Hi Lucio,

Hi Andy,

[snikt]
> By the way, have you come to any decision yet on putting the possibility
> of a merger between the two Space Settlers' Societies to your Yahoo
> group?

I've been delaying this for a long time and I'm indeed quite ashamed for
that, so my apologies... Anyway, I'll use the occasion to expose your
proposal to our listmates and start discussions about that. Andy, please
correct me if my exposition gets obscure or misinterpreted in some point;
also, feel free to add more points:

First, I'll try to put the issue as briefly as possible. Some while ago (a
couple of months or more, maybe), Andy e-mailed me privately to propose a
merger between the Space Settler Society (of which he is a member), based in
UK, to our group. Then, an *International* Space Settlers' society would be
created, comprising both the members of the UK Space Settlers Society and
members of this list willing to join such an association. (The UK group
would then, of course, become a local chapter of this new society.)

If this International Space Settlers Society (or I3S, as I nicknamed it for
now ;-) is founded, then a lot of new issues and possible directives arise:

1) This e-mail list served as an aggregator of space settlement enthusiasts
that may or may not join the society. This list should remain, as it always
was, an open forum for those who want to discuss space, much like the SSI
list is. I3S should create a list for members only if that is judged to be
necessary.

2) As any other society, I3S has to define its goals and rules. This is the
most open issue till now, as I see. Specifically in the case of the rules
governing the society, there is a constitution for the UK group that may be
used or not as a basis for developing a corresponding document for I3S.

3) Once item (2) is established to some minimum extent, then we can discuss
more concrete issues, if they are pertinent - if members of I3S will pay
fees, held meetings, engage in militant activities, etc...

Well, that is it, I hope that I was not too clumsy exposing the idea. I hope
that this message will span a discussion that can get into some commitment.

> Best wishes, Andy.
[snikt]

Best wishes, Lucio.

I would only make one comment.

Right now, the description on our webpage says:

"Space Settlers" is the group for people who think that
space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
space cities - are a better option for human colonization
in space than planetary colonization and terraforming. If
you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
agree, come and expose what you think are the weak points
of that idea."

I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this
issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message get
diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was diluted after
its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is cool" focus are
a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlement of space as
opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons are rare-to-nonexistent,
and I think have a valuable and important message that should continue to be
heard.

Regards,

Mike Combs

Right now, the description on our webpage says:

"Space Settlers" is the group for people who think that
space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
space cities - are a better option for human colonization
in space than planetary colonization and terraforming. If
you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
agree, come and expose what you think are the weak points
of that idea."

I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message get diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was diluted after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is cool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlement of space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons are rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and important message that should continue to be heard.
Regards,
Mike Combs

I agree with Mike Combs.

"Combs, Mike"
09/21/01 04:21 PM
Please respond to spacesettlers

To: "'spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com'"
cc:
Subject: RE: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society

I would only make one comment.

Right now, the description on our webpage says:

"Space Settlers" is the group for people who think that
space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
space cities - are a better option for human colonization
in space than planetary colonization and terraforming. If
you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
agree, come and expose what you think are the weak points
of that idea."

I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this
issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message
get diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was diluted
after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is cool"
focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlement of
space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons are
rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and important message
that should continue to be heard.
Regards,

Mike Combs

"Combs, Mike"
09/21/01 04:21 PM
Please respond to spacesettlers

To: "'spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com'"
cc:
Subject: RE: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society
I would only make one comment.

Right now, the description on our webpage says:

"Space Settlers" is the group for people who think that
space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
space cities - are a better option for human colonization
in space than planetary colonization and terraforming. If
you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
agree, come and expose what you think are the weak points
of that idea."

I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message get diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was diluted after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is cool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlement of space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons are rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and important message that should continue to be heard.
Regards,
Mike Combs

From:
To:
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 5:21 PM
Subject: RE: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society

> I agree with Mike Combs.
>

So do I. (I should, since *I* wrote the aforementioned description. ;-)

I think that we can take some lessons from the Mars Society itself. One of
the reasons of their success, I think, is their tight focus on the idea
"Colonization and terraformation of Mars is the manifest destiny of
Humanity", or something like that. The proposed I3S should keep a similarly
tight focus in the O'Neilian ideas.

[snikt]
Lucio Coelho

Hi Everyone,

I think you've put our proposal very well, Lucio.

All I would add are that if any of you wish to have a look at a copy of
the UK Space Settlers' constitution, you'll find one in Word format on
the web that you can download and study at your leisure in the Settlers
folders in the Files sections on the SDC web sites:

http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/sdcv and

However UK-based Settlers would be quite happy to consider changes
proposed by the Yahoo Space Settlers. Indeed, we also proposed that if
enough of you are interested in this, we should arrange a joint meeting
somewhere, say at Fort Lauderdale, at some time we could perhaps take
in a Shuttle launch, perhaps next year, at which a new joint
constitution or agreement could be thrashed out.

This proposal was considered at this years' UK Space Settlers' AGM,
where it was also proposed that Lucio himself should be put forward as
first International Settlers' President - 100% of our members have
already agreed to this.

The SDC, on whose sites our constitution is available, is the UK's Space
Development Council, originally set up jointly by ourselves and the Mars
Society UK on 8th April last year, but now encompassing 12 UK-based
space groups including Spaceguard UK, ASTRA etc. The idea is simply that
we all campaign together in the hope of achieving all of our aims on a
step by step basis. Right now we are campaigning for Spaceguard UK to
run the UK's National NEO Centre, which the UK Government have already
agreed to fund, and also a longer term campaign to 'Get a Briton in
Space'. When we achieve these, we'll go on to the next steps etc.

Best wishes, Andy.

"Dr. Omni" wrote:

> From: "andy-nimmo"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] More agriculture in zero-g
>
> > Hi Lucio,
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> [snikt]
> > By the way, have you come to any decision yet on putting the
> possibility
> > of a merger between the two Space Settlers' Societies to your Yahoo
> > group?
>
> I've been delaying this for a long time and I'm indeed quite ashamed
> for
> that, so my apologies... Anyway, I'll use the occasion to expose your
> proposal to our listmates and start discussions about that. Andy,
> please
> correct me if my exposition gets obscure or misinterpreted in some
> point;
> also, feel free to add more points:
>
> First, I'll try to put the issue as briefly as possible. Some while
> ago (a
> couple of months or more, maybe), Andy e-mailed me privately to
> propose a
> merger between the Space Settler Society (of which he is a member),
> based in
> UK, to our group. Then, an *International* Space Settlers' society
> would be
> created, comprising both the members of the UK Space Settlers Society
> and
> members of this list willing to join such an association. (The UK
> group
> would then, of course, become a local chapter of this new society.)
>
> If this International Space Settlers Society (or I3S, as I nicknamed
> it for
> now ;-) is founded, then a lot of new issues and possible directives
> arise:
>
> 1) This e-mail list served as an aggregator of space settlement
> enthusiasts
> that may or may not join the society. This list should remain, as it
> always
> was, an open forum for those who want to discuss space, much like the
> SSI
> list is. I3S should create a list for members only if that is judged
> to be
> necessary.
>
> 2) As any other society, I3S has to define its goals and rules. This
> is the
> most open issue till now, as I see. Specifically in the case of the
> rules
> governing the society, there is a constitution for the UK group that
> may be
> used or not as a basis for developing a corresponding document for
> I3S.
>
> 3) Once item (2) is established to some minimum extent, then we can
> discuss
> more concrete issues, if they are pertinent - if members of I3S will
> pay
> fees, held meetings, engage in militant activities, etc...
>
> Well, that is it, I hope that I was not too clumsy exposing the idea.
> I hope
> that this message will span a discussion that can get into some
> commitment.
>
> > Best wishes, Andy.
> [snikt]
>
> Best wishes, Lucio.

>

I think you've put our proposal very well, Lucio.
All I would add are that if any of you wish to have a look at a copyof the UK Space Settlers' constitution, you'll find one in Word formaton the web that you can download and study at your leisure in the Settlersfolders in the Files sections on the SDC web sites:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/sdcv
and
.
However UK-based Settlers would be quite happy to consider changes proposedby the Yahoo Space Settlers. Indeed, we also proposed that if enough ofyou are interested in this, we should arrange a joint meeting somewhere,say at Fort Lauderdale, at some time we could perhaps take in a Shuttlelaunch, perhaps next year, at which a new joint constitution or agreementcould be thrashed out.
This proposal was considered at this years' UK Space Settlers' AGM,where it was also proposed that Lucio himself should be put forward asfirst International Settlers' President - 100% of our members have alreadyagreed to this.
The SDC, on whose sites our constitution is available, is the UK's SpaceDevelopment Council, originally set up jointly by ourselves and the MarsSociety UK on 8th April last year, but now encompassing 12 UK-based spacegroups including Spaceguard UK, ASTRA etc. The idea is simply that we allcampaign together in the hope of achieving all of our aims on a step bystep basis. Right now we are campaigning for Spaceguard UK to run the UK'sNational NEO Centre, which the UK Government have already agreed to fund,and also a longer term campaign to 'Get a Briton in Space'. When we achievethese, we'll go on to the next steps etc.
Best wishes, Andy.

"Dr. Omni" wrote:
From: "andy-nimmo"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] More agriculture in zero-g

> Hi Lucio,
Hi Andy,
[snikt]
> By the way, have you come to any decision yet on putting thepossibility
> of a merger between the two Space Settlers' Societies to yourYahoo
> group?
I've been delaying this for a long time and I'm indeed quite ashamedfor
that, so my apologies... Anyway, I'll use the occasion to exposeyour
proposal to our listmates and start discussions about that. Andy,please
correct me if my exposition gets obscure or misinterpreted in somepoint;
also, feel free to add more points:
First, I'll try to put the issue as briefly as possible. Some whileago (a
couple of months or more, maybe), Andy e-mailed me privately topropose a
merger between the Space Settler Society (of which he is a member),based in
UK, to our group. Then, an *International* Space Settlers' societywould be
created, comprising both the members of the UK Space Settlers Societyand
members of this list willing to join such an association. (TheUK group
would then, of course, become a local chapter of this new society.)
If this International Space Settlers Society (or I3S, as I nicknamedit for
now ;-) is founded, then a lot of new issues and possibledirectives arise:
1) This e-mail list served as an aggregator of space settlemententhusiasts
that may or may not join the society. This list should remain,as it always
was, an open forum for those who want to discuss space, much likethe SSI
list is. I3S should create a list for members only if that is judgedto be
necessary.
2) As any other society, I3S has to define its goals and rules.This is the
most open issue till now, as I see. Specifically in the case ofthe rules
governing the society, there is a constitution for the UK groupthat may be
used or not as a basis for developing a corresponding documentfor I3S.
3) Once item (2) is established to some minimum extent, then wecan discuss
more concrete issues, if they are pertinent - if members of I3Swill pay
fees, held meetings, engage in militant activities, etc...
Well, that is it, I hope that I was not too clumsy exposing theidea. I hope
that this message will span a discussion that can get into somecommitment.
> Best wishes, Andy.
[snikt]
Best wishes, Lúcio.

.

Hi Mike,

I would like to wholeheartedly agree with this one.

Best wishes, Andy.

"Combs, Mike" wrote:

> I would only make one comment.Right now, the description on our
> webpage says: "Space Settlers" is the group for people
> who think that
> space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
>
> space cities - are a better option for human
> colonization
> in space than planetary colonization and terraforming.
> If
> you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
>
> better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
>
> agree, come and expose what you think are the weak
> points
> of that idea."I very much like this description as I
> have very strong feelings on this issue. Whatever else happens, I
> would not like to see the above message get diluted in the same manner
> that the L-5 Society's message was diluted after its absorption into
> the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is cool" focus are a dime a
> dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlement of space as opposed
> to the surfaces of other planets or moons are rare-to-nonexistent, and
> I think have a valuable and important message that should continue to
> be heard.Regards,
>
> Mike Combs
>

I would like to wholeheartedly agree with this one.
Best wishes, Andy.
"Combs, Mike" wrote:
Iwould only make one comment.
Rightnow, the description on our webpage says:
"Space Settlers" is the group for people who think that
space settlements - huge rotating orbital habitats, or
space cities - are a better option for human colonization
in space than planetary colonization and terraforming. If
you agree with this idea, come and discuss with us the
better ways to make it a reality someday. If you don't
agree, come and expose what you think are the weak points
of that idea."
Ivery much like this description as I have very strong feelings on thisissue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above messageget diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was dilutedafter its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space iscool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the settlementof space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons are rare-to-nonexistent,and I think have a valuable and important message that should continueto be heard.
Regards,
Mike Combs

.

Complete agreement!

Best wishes, Andy.

"Dr. Omni" wrote:

Combs, Mike wrote:

> I would only make one comment.
> I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this
> issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message
> get diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was
> diluted after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space
> is cool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the
> settlement of space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons
> are rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and important
> message that should continue to be heard.

Yes.

I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
O'Neill structure.

> Regards,
>
> Mike Combs

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

--- In spacesettlers@y..., andy-nimmo wrote:
> This proposal was considered at this years' UK Space Settlers' AGM,
> where it was also proposed that Lucio himself should be put forward
as
> first International Settlers' President - 100% of our members have
> already agreed to this.
>

For what it's worth, I also support this. It is a good idea to have
one guy as a focal point, and it might as well be Lucio.

:) ed

From: Ian Woollard [mailto:ian.woollard@...]

I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
O'Neill structure.

Absolutely. I'm not at all dismissive of the idea that space tourism might
get us there quicker than SPS.

It can certainly get us there in a more evolutionary fashion, and that might
be exactly what's called for.

Regards,

Mike Combs

From:
Ian Woollard [mailto:ian.woollard@...]

I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
O'Neill structure.

Absolutely. I'm not at all dismissive of the idea that space tourism might get us there quicker than SPS.

It can certainly get us there in a more evolutionary fashion, and that might be exactly what's called for.
Regards,
Mike Combs

As a strong proponent of space tourism, I don't think it should be an
explicit part of this group's charter. While I think space tourism is
BY FAR the best and most practical route to space colonization, I might
be wrong. This group is about space colonization, and I like that. We
can discuss space tourism to our heart's content, just as we discuss
asteroid mining and many other topics.

Ian Woollard wrote:
>
> Combs, Mike wrote:
>
> > I would only make one comment.
> > I very much like this description as I have very strong feelings on this
> > issue. Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message
> > get diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was
> > diluted after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space
> > is cool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the
> > settlement of space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or moons
> > are rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and important
> > message that should continue to be heard.
>
> Yes.
>
> I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
> this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
> to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
> O'Neill structure.
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike Combs
>
> --
> - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)
>
> "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> technological civilization?"
> - Gerard O'Neill
>

--
Al Globus
CSC at NASA Ames Research Center
aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html

The dinosaurs weren't spacefaring. We are. I don't think that's an
accident. Maybe we are life's taxi to the stars.

From: "Ian Woollard"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society

[snikt]
> I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
> this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
> to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
> O'Neill structure.
>

When I said that our yet hypothetical I3S should stuck to the O' Neilian
ideas, perhaps my statement was to restrictive. The O' Neilians idea that I
was thinking of was the one commonly agree here: space habitats, not
planetary surfaces, are the best place for a technological civilization.
Now, the *ways* to finally materialize space settlements may indeed be
pretty diversified. O' Neil thought of SSP, but now I think that space
tourism is a very promising way to get there. And yes, a rotating space
hotel in LEO can be seen as a kind of embryonic space settlement...

[snikt]
> --
> - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)
>
> "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> technological civilization?"
> - Gerard O'Neill

Lucio Coelho

Hi Lucio,

I must admit I've been looking at the space hotel scene also lately. I'm
attempting to write the first six episodes of a potential TV soap
situated in a space hotel right now so have had to do quite a bit of
research - and put considerable thought into what-would-happen-if type
scenarios.

The hotel the series is based on has four cross-shaped habitations (made
from launch rocket tanks) spinning - two in one direction and two in the
other - on long cables around the ends of a cylindrical centre that does
not spin itself. The cylindrical centre is where the zero-g facilities
such as the entrances and exits, gymnasium, space ballet theatre, and
various space industry businesses are situated. There are cable cars to
the habitations which are at 1 G.

There's an armoured centre to each cross to protect against radiation.
One cross is English speaking, one Russian speaking, one Japanase (they
own the hotel), and one variable. One arm of each cross is hydroponic
gardens, another is common rooms such as restaurant and dance floor
etc., and the other two are for crew and passengers' cabins.

As you'll appreciate, the regular characters are the crew, and they live
up there, with periodic holidays on Earth - for their health apart from
anything else. As you'll appreciate I have had all sorts of problems to
solve with this, and no doubt more will come up before I've finished,
but my point in bringing it up here is simply that this is an embryo
space settlement, at least for the crew.

Best wishes, Andy.

"Dr. Omni" wrote:

> From: "Ian Woollard"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society
>
> [snikt]
> > I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourism in
> > this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel leads
> > to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
> > O'Neill structure.
> >
> When I said that our yet hypothetical I3S should stuck to the O'
> Neilian
> ideas, perhaps my statement was to restrictive. The O' Neilians idea
> that I
> was thinking of was the one commonly agree here: space habitats, not
> planetary surfaces, are the best place for a technological
> civilization.
> Now, the *ways* to finally materialize space settlements may indeed be
>
> pretty diversified. O' Neil thought of SSP, but now I think that space
>
> tourism is a very promising way to get there. And yes, a rotating
> space
> hotel in LEO can be seen as a kind of embryonic space settlement...
>
> [snikt]
> > --
> > - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)
> >
> > "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> > technological civilization?"
> > - Gerard O'Neill
>
> Lucio Coelho

>

I must admit I've been looking at the space hotel scene also lately.I'm attempting to write the first six episodes of a potential TV soap situatedin a space hotel right now so have had to do quite a bit of research -and put considerable thought into what-would-happen-if type scenarios.
The hotel the series is based on has four cross-shaped habitations (madefrom launch rocket tanks) spinning - two in one direction and two in theother - on long cables around the ends of a cylindrical centre that doesnot spin itself. The cylindrical centre is where the zero-g facilitiessuch as the entrances and exits, gymnasium, space ballet theatre, and variousspace industry businesses are situated. There are cable cars to the habitationswhich are at 1 G.
There's an armoured centre to each cross to protect against radiation.One cross is English speaking, one Russian speaking, one Japanase (theyown the hotel), and one variable. One arm of each cross is hydroponic gardens,another is common rooms such as restaurant and dance floor etc., and theother two are for crew and passengers' cabins.
As you'll appreciate, the regular characters are the crew, and theylive up there, with periodic holidays on Earth - for their health apartfrom anything else. As you'll appreciate I have had all sorts of problemsto solve with this, and no doubt more will come up before I've finished,but my point in bringing it up here is simply that this is an embryo spacesettlement, at least for the crew.
Best wishes, Andy.
"Dr. Omni" wrote:
From: "Ian Woollard"
To:
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society

[snikt]
> I guess the only question is to whether we could include Tourismin
> this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotelleads
> to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
> O'Neill structure.
>
When I said that our yet hypothetical I3S should stuck to the O'Neilian
ideas, perhaps my statement was to restrictive. The O' Neiliansidea that I
was thinking of was the one commonly agree here: space habitats,not
planetary surfaces, are the best place for a technological civilization.
Now, the *ways* to finally materialize space settlements may indeedbe
pretty diversified. O' Neil thought of SSP, but now I think thatspace
tourism is a very promising way to get there. And yes, a rotatingspace
hotel in LEO can be seen as a kind of embryonic space settlement...
[snikt]
> --
> - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)
>
> "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> technological civilization?"
> - Gerard O'Neill
Lúcio Coelho

.

Hi Andy

check out this website:

http://www.spaceislandgroup.com

they describe something fairly similar to what you propose, and they
also have floorplans...

:) ed

--- In spacesettlers@y..., andy-nimmo wrote:
> Hi Lucio,
>
> I must admit I've been looking at the space hotel scene also
lately. I'm
> attempting to write the first six episodes of a potential TV soap
> situated in a space hotel right now so have had to do quite a bit of
> research - and put considerable thought into what-would-happen-if
type
> scenarios.
>
> The hotel the series is based on has four cross-shaped habitations
(made
> from launch rocket tanks) spinning - two in one direction and two
in the
> other - on long cables around the ends of a cylindrical centre that
does
> not spin itself. The cylindrical centre is where the zero-g
facilities
> such as the entrances and exits, gymnasium, space ballet theatre,
and
> various space industry businesses are situated. There are cable
cars to
> the habitations which are at 1 G.
>
> There's an armoured centre to each cross to protect against
radiation.
> One cross is English speaking, one Russian speaking, one Japanase
(they
> own the hotel), and one variable. One arm of each cross is
hydroponic
> gardens, another is common rooms such as restaurant and dance floor
> etc., and the other two are for crew and passengers' cabins.
>
> As you'll appreciate, the regular characters are the crew, and they
live
> up there, with periodic holidays on Earth - for their health apart
from
> anything else. As you'll appreciate I have had all sorts of
problems to
> solve with this, and no doubt more will come up before I've
finished,
> but my point in bringing it up here is simply that this is an embryo
> space settlement, at least for the crew.
>
> Best wishes, Andy.
>
> "Dr. Omni" wrote:
>
> > From: "Ian Woollard"
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:41 PM
> > Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society
> >
> > [snikt]
> > > I guess the only question is to whether we could include
Tourism in
> > > this; I think we could, as it's easy to see how a space hotel
leads
> > > to O'Neill settlements- in fact a space hotel may BE a standard
> > > O'Neill structure.
> > >
> > When I said that our yet hypothetical I3S should stuck to the O'
> > Neilian
> > ideas, perhaps my statement was to restrictive. The O' Neilians
idea
> > that I
> > was thinking of was the one commonly agree here: space habitats,
not
> > planetary surfaces, are the best place for a technological
> > civilization.
> > Now, the *ways* to finally materialize space settlements may
indeed be
> >
> > pretty diversified. O' Neil thought of SSP, but now I think that
space
> >
> > tourism is a very promising way to get there. And yes, a rotating
> > space
> > hotel in LEO can be seen as a kind of embryonic space
settlement...
> >
> > [snikt]
> > > --
> > > - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@t...)
> > >
> > > "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> > > technological civilization?"
> > > - Gerard O'Neill
> >
> > Lucio Coelho
>
Service.

From: "andy-nimmo"
To:
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] International Space Settler Society

> Hi Lucio,
>

Hi Andy,

[snikt]
> There's an armoured centre to each cross to protect against radiation.

Am I correct when I assume that your fictional space hotel is located at
LEO? If so, is it really necessary to have a radiation shelter in each
cross? LEO is deep in Earth's magnetosphere, and thus it is shielded against
a big deal of cosmic and solar radiation. Indeed, in nearly twenty years of
experiments involving long permanence (over one year) of humans in LEO,
there seems to be no noticeable health hazard caused by radiation...

[snikt]
> Best wishes, Andy.
[snikt]

Best whishes, Lucio.

Hi Ed,

Thanks very much. Will check them out this evening. Am rushing right
now.

Best wishes, Andy.

Ed Minchau wrote:

Hi Lucio,

You are quite right on that. It is indeed in LEO and deep below our main
magnetosphere. Nevertheless, some time back I consulted Dr Graeme
Duncan, a former president of Uk Space Settlers who is a medical doctor
specializing in oncology. Indeed, I believe Graeme is now an Associate
Professor of this subject at the University of British Columbia in
Canada, and when he is back in Scotland (where he hails from) he
lectures the Royal Society of Medicine on space medicine, and he advised
that such a shelter would be a good thing for two reasons.

1) It would put the minds of the more hypocondriac passengers at peace,
and

2) During intense Solar Flares it might actually be a good thing if the
crew in particular, were to avail themselves of this, as they would
generally be getting a higher than normal average dose of radiation than
folk living on Earth with the extra protection of our atmosphere.

Best wishes, Andy.

"Dr. Omni" wrote:

--- In spacesettlers@y..., "Combs, Mike" wrote:
> Whatever else happens, I would not like to see the above message get
diluted in the same manner that the L-5 Society's message was diluted
after its absorption into the NSS. Groups with a broad "space is
cool" focus are a dime a dozen, but groups which emphasize the
settlement of space as opposed to the surfaces of other planets or
moons are rare-to-nonexistent, and I think have a valuable and
important message that should continue to be heard.

While I don't feel that O'Neill-type habitats by themselves are the
best solution, I do believe they are a critical piece of the puzzle.

More importantly, (and this comes from Peter Drucker's The
Post-Capitalist Society), while businesses have the bottom line to
keep them focused, non-profit organizations need to stay focused on a
single issue to be effective.