I would like to make a suggestion about SSI activity. I met Freeman Dyson about three years ago. SSI consisted then of one part-time volunteer, and it appears that by now SSI does not function anymore. I am also an SSI old-timer, but always viewed space colonies as centuries into the future. Going back to the Moon is a great development. For now, however, the constructive thing would seem to be to keep the idea alive and evoloving through technical research, and mostly, education, as are indeed the original SSI goals. For now, space colony advocates could probably do best by continuing research and education, so that when the "beyond Moon" decision is made, colonies will be an acceptable alternative. It appears that the old SSI will not revive sooon, lacking funds and a full-time leader. I wonder if SSI could be transformed into a web- based Society, however, maybe with the help of this SSI list's members.
It could: - Maintain the ongoing debate; - Keep accumulating and archiving technical literature; - Encourage publishing books and articles on the subject; - And primarily, educate by maintaining and promoting a user- friendly, and student and child-friendly website.
Maybe we could raise amongst us some nominal funds, a couple of thousands of dollars per year, to have these activites managed professionally by a part-time, semi-volunteer coordinator. All this could be done in cooperation with or as part of SSI, maybe changing it into a realistically sustainable operation. This may be less than ideal, but it can keep the idea going and evolving on a sustainable basis.
It would be good to see the List's thoughts on this.
Michael N. Mautner, Ph. D. Research Professor of Chemistry Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia 23284-2006 USA
Senior Research Fellow Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division Lincoln University Lincoln, New Zealand Phone: (64) (3) 325-2811 X 8352 Fax: (64) (3) 325-3607 mautnerm@...
>
> I would like to make a suggestion about SSI activity. I met Freeman
> Dyson about three years ago. SSI consisted then of one part-time
> volunteer, and it appears that by now SSI does not function anymore.
> I am also an SSI old-timer, but always viewed space colonies as
> centuries into the future. Going back to the Moon is a great
> development. For now, however, the constructive thing would seem to be
> to keep the idea alive and evoloving through technical research, and
> mostly, education, as are indeed the original SSI goals.
> For now, space colony advocates could probably do best by continuing
> research and education, so that when the "beyond Moon" decision is
> made, colonies will be an acceptable alternative.
> It appears that the old SSI will not revive sooon, lacking funds and a
> full-time leader. I wonder if SSI could be transformed into a web-
> based Society, however, maybe with the help of this SSI list's members.
>
> It could:
> - Maintain the ongoing debate;
> - Keep accumulating and archiving technical literature;
> - Encourage publishing books and articles on the subject;
> - And primarily, educate by maintaining and promoting a user-
> friendly, and student and child-friendly website.
>
I wonder if SSI would consider a "merger" with the National Space
Society - there are already two special-interest chapters with
world-wide membership (on space medicine and space elevators) and I'm
aware of others that are being considered. NSS's origins are in part
with the L5 Society, which was also based on O'Neill's orbital colony
ideas. NSS provides quite a few online facilities to chapters, including
have more direct access to a larger number of people.
to merge might be around the time of next year's ISDC meeting in
Washington DC (May 2005).
In the interests of disclosure - I'm running for an NSS regional board
position, and I also met and had lunch with Freeman Dyson a few years
ago. But we didn't talk about SSI then.
Arthur
> [Lots of good ideas]
going. I know SSI periodically grows around the conferences too, as
there are probably a dozen or more (short term) volunteers then.
And, of course, let's not forget there is also Mike Combs' volunteer
work on the SSI web site, even if it is probably not done from the SSI
office.
> It would be good to see the List's thoughts on this.
The major thing I would add to your list is that all works be released
under a free license. I'm tired of subsidizing proprietary information.
I think non-profits have to move on to better revenue making approaches
than maintaining an artificial scarcity of information in the internet age.
--Paul Fernhout
P.S. if you are in the "Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division"
you might like our free garden simulator for your students.
http://www.gardenwithinsight.com
originally thought up in part as a step to a space habitat simulator.
> I wonder if SSI would consider a "merger" with the National Space
> Society - there are already two special-interest chapters with
> world-wide membership (on space medicine and space elevators) and I'm
> aware of others that are being considered. NSS's origins are in part
> with the L5 Society, which was also based on O'Neill's orbital colony
> ideas. NSS provides quite a few online facilities to chapters, including
> have more direct access to a larger number of people.
>
> But that would largely be up to Lee Valentine I suppose - the ideal time
> to merge might be around the time of next year's ISDC meeting in
> Washington DC (May 2005).
>
> In the interests of disclosure - I'm running for an NSS regional board
> position, and I also met and had lunch with Freeman Dyson a few years
> ago. But we didn't talk about SSI then.
and I want to say, and with no right as not being an L5 member, and no
complete information having not joined the NSS (because of a planetary
focus), that I think the L5 merger with the NSS was one of the worst
things to happen for space habitats, since NSS seems pretty Mars
oriented, and I got the feeling reading publications (when I decided to
join L5 and then found out it merged) that the L5 mission just
evaporated under NSS. Just look at the NSS home page -- Moon, Mars,
where is asteroids or space habitats?
If SSI was to dissolve, I'd rather see it's assets go to LUF.
http://www.luf.org/
At least they have a diversity of habitat ideas.
Or The Space Frontier Foundation:
http://www.space-frontier.org/
Although I'd rather see it do the SR seed project I outlined. :-) Well,
and add in the sort of web outreach Michael Mautner outlines, why not,
especially if those older works could become free.
Anyway, don't mean to sound too harsh. Maybe if NSS decide to change
their direction or signed some contract promising some level of
attention to asteroids and space habitats, then maybe it could be
reasonable. But, as with most mergers, really what is the benefit for
NSS? Clearly the SSI "brand" would be tossed, along with the Board, many
members probably overlap, so what is in it for NSS? A little PR? Some
assets or copyrights? Absorbing non-overlapping members? Getting a
probably out-of-date mailing list? I guess and I can see a special Space
Power special interest group. That would probably interest many on this
list or the previous membership. And that could potentially be separate
from an asteroids or space habitats groups. Or an SR technology group.
Anyway, you might have to have several special interest groups to cover
all of SSI's main points.
For me, part of my interest in reviving SSI is admittedly sentimental; I
used to be a Senior Associate-level supporter, I took a course from
Gerry (admittedly, for "Poets"), enjoyed the conferences, liked the link
to a school I attended (Princeton). Plus he called me a "dreamer" for
proposing self-replicating space habitats instead of his slow economic
expansion plan, so I'll get even ;-) if/when I realize that dream (and
so his too!). But frankly, the SSPS/capitalist emphasis of SSI may be
too much for me to counter, and might be a better match for someone who
wanted to work with that rather than discard it (so, perhaps NSS or SFF
or LUF).
--Paul Fernhout
>
>>I wonder if SSI would consider a "merger" with the National Space
>>Society [...]
>>
>[...] I think the L5 merger with the NSS was one of the worst
>things to happen for space habitats, since NSS seems pretty Mars
>oriented, and I got the feeling reading publications (when I decided to
>join L5 and then found out it merged) that the L5 mission just
>evaporated under NSS.
>
Actually, the L5 people pretty much run the society these days. The only
reason for a Mars orientation is that a lot of current members care
about Mars (in part thanks to Bob Zubrin's evangelism) - in fact NSS has
recently emphasized the Moon as the next important step in space
development - see this position paper from last year:
http://www.nsschapters.org/policy-cmte/files/NSS_NextSteps_03.html
which is believed to have fed into the details behind the new "national
space exploration vision".
>where is asteroids or space habitats?
>
Well, there's no mention of space elevators either. The web site could
use some improvement - and an SSI contingent would likely help to
revitalize that. That said, if you go to the chapters resource "hub":
http://www.nsschapters.org/hub/
you'll see a nice image of some sort of off-planet habitat.
Arthur
> Actually, the L5 people pretty much run the society these days. The only
> reason for a Mars orientation is that a lot of current members care
> about Mars (in part thanks to Bob Zubrin's evangelism) - in fact NSS has
> recently emphasized the Moon as the next important step in space
> development - see this position paper from last year:
> http://www.nsschapters.org/policy-cmte/files/NSS_NextSteps_03.html
> which is believed to have fed into the details behind the new "national
> space exploration vision".
--Paul Fernhout