One stone, number of mangoes.. continued (2)

> 1. Our economic system based on mass production and free market
> economy, which involves transfer of goods from one corner of
> the globe to another will it work when humans become space
> faring.

There will still be economies of scale, and the "Invisible Hand
theorem" will still be a theorem. There will still be money. There
will still be people willing to pay various amounts of it for
various things. There will still be various factors of production,
although the relative costs will differ.

Otoh, the first permanent habitats will be too small to benefit from
a lot of the economies of scale that help the current system muddle
by, and real economies will still differ markedly from the ideal
markets the theorem applies to.

Currently, it doesn't cost much or take long to ship goods around
the world -- from any inhabited place to any inhabited place. In
space, there will be some places separated by a lot of transit time
and not much delta-vee, and other places separated by a lot of delta-
vee and not much time. That will make a difference, but I don't
think it's news to many of us here.

> 2. The design of our cities, in which agriculture plays no
> important part, which just acts as a sink for organic matter.
> Will future cities in space be designed this way.

That depends on the technicalities, partly in ways mediated by the
economics. The agriculture might not need as much radiation
shielding as the people, and thus be done in separate habitats. The
agricultural systems might *be* the radiation shielding for the
people, and thus be done in the same haitats. If it somehow turns
out that it takes >60% of the population to do the agricultural
work, that would be big news.

It's unlikely that sinks of anything but energy and reaction mass
will feature too prominently: mostly there will be nearly-closed
loops.

And before I move on to discussion of child-rearing, I'd better
attend to a certain real-world baby. Perhaps I'll get back to it
later.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, sraj wrote:
>
> One stone, number of mangoes.. continued (2)
>
> Frequently we treat with impatience anyone trying to divert the
topic of
> discussion in this group from what we think is the purpose of this
group -
> to discuss the technicalities of setting up space habitats. A very
> interesting topic indeed, but dear friends, if we are going to set
up space
> habs, engineers will have to factor in umpteen different issues,
many that
> engineers on earth do not have to contend with. So, we need to
ask, is it
> possible to extrapolate directly systems and attitudes that we use
to
> conduct affairs on our own planet to the space environment?
>
> Some of the issues we need to discuss are:
>
> 1. Our economic system based on mass production and free market
> economy, which involves transfer of goods from one corner of
the globe to
> another will it work when humans become space faring.
> 2. The design of our cities, in which agriculture plays no
important
> part, which just acts as a sink for organic matter. Will future
cities in
> space be designed this way.
> 3. The nature of the educational system. Clearly children in
space
> habs will have to be taught early in life the nature of the hab
and areas of
> collective responsibility to keep the hab safe. Something not
taught to
> terran children. In fact terran grownups don't even seem to
know what would
> be the safe population for the planet. Will this attitude work
in space
> habs.
> 4. The nature of the political system, which seems on planet
earth to
> center around populist ideas, will it work in future space habs.
> 5. The problem of health. Many health issues are created by the
> environment in which humans live, environments that engineers
play a part in
> creating. To make space habs possible, will it be necessary for
engineers to
> become more skilled in understanding issues of occupational
health. (What
> sticks in my mind the most from the biosphere II experiment is
that by the
> end of 2 years non of them were on talking terms)
> 6. Engineers; are they worker ants. They seem to be actively
involved
> in changing the face of the globe and they are good at creating
gadgets; but
> seem to be conspicuously absent in the major decision making
forums. How
> will it be in space habs.
>
> Living in space will be ten times more difficult than parking
ourselves in
> the middle of the Sahara desert. How can we prepare ourselves so
that our
> venture into space does not fail. Can we simulate suitable
conditions on
> planet earth and learn from the experience? The ideas that we
generate from
> this brainstorming and from this simulation should help to
mitigate some of
> the problems we face on our own planet.
>
> I happened to stumble into a discussion on global warming between
a
> moderator from BBC and I think chief executives from the world's
major oil
> companies. The question put by the BBC moderator was
straightforward. Global
> warming will become critical if the CO2 composition in the
atmosphere
> exceeds 450 parts per million, how are we going to face the
problem? Being
> in a group, perhaps, non of the chief executives wanted to commit
himself:
> the answers they gave was less than edifying. (Keep in mind that
these folks
> represented some of the best brains on the planet, with financial
muscles to
> create now paradigms.) By making tall claims of terraforming Mars,
of
> building space habs, etc, when we lack the ability to solve
relatively
> simpler problems on our own planet, we risk becoming the laughing
stock of