Philosophy behind space settlements Forum: Spacesettlers
Thread: Philosophy behind space settlements
# 13212 bymikecombs@... on Jan. 30, 2014, 2:30 p.m.
Member since 2021-10-03
I think the American Model was in fact a combination of 1 and 2. Yes, there were independent farmers and ranchers, but a big part of the early American economy was sending tea and pelts back to Europe. We might justifiably call that the beginnings of globalization. The American economy was never like the economy of North Korea, which in fact impoverishes itself for not trading with other countries.
In regard to the latter part of your posting, I think convincing people that the life-support problems are solvable is the easy part. The hard part is convincing investors there's a viable market which can be profitable.
Regards,
Mike Combs
From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sraj
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 7:47 AM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [spacesettlers] : Philosophy behind space settlements
There seem to be two distinct philosophies behind space settlements:
1. Those who believe that the current economic model practiced on Planet Earth, that of Global Markets, will have to be extended for any activity in space to be successful.
2. Those who believe that it will have to take the form of individual self-sufficiency, the original American Model, which helped to settle a great part of the American continent, which will be the model that will be successful. (I think those who plan a one way trip to Mars are perhaps votaries of this philosophy).
One obvious problem with the first model is that, for it to be successful, at least in terms of trade in physical resources, there should be simple and cost effective methods of transport. There is no evidence that it will ever be possible to have this form of transport. Taken to the extreme situation of a space ship speeding through the cosmos, this will be next to impossible. (I am afraid space based novels on this subject, have mislead space enthusiasts).
Hence I see only one practical route to space settlements.
1. Prove that a settlement of say a thousand people can be set up in the middle of the Sahara desert, who enjoy a high quality of life making use of all scientific advancements, who are self-sufficient in terms of availability and use of water (they are very efficient in its use), and self sufficient in terms of ability to harness renewable energy. They do not import more than 10% of their daily needs from outside sources.
2. Prove that it is possible to set up a sealed biosphere in the middle of the Sahara desert which will provide a high quality of life for a thousand people. No more than 20% of water can be imported every year from an outside source.
(The conditions any where in the cosmos are likely to be more life threatening than the conditions that exist in the middle of the Sahara Desert.)
Regards,
Selvaraj
I think the American Model was in fact a combination of 1 and 2. Yes, there were independent farmers and ranchers, but a big part of the early American economy was sending tea and pelts back to Europe. We might justifiably call that the beginnings of globalization. The American economy was never like the economy of North Korea, which in fact impoverishes itself for not trading with other countries.
I agree that trade in terms of physical resources is problematic. That's why I'm so enthusiastic about O'Neill's proposal for SPS built from ET resources. The space settlers can sell a product to Earth people which in fact does not have to be transported to the surface of the Earth to be valuable to the people there.
In regard to the latter part of your posting, I think convincing people that the life-support problems are solvable is the easy part. The hard part is convincing investors there's a viable market which can be profitable.
Regards,
Mike Combs
From:
spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of
sraj
Sent:
Thursday, January 30, 2014 7:47 AM
To:
spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject:
[spacesettlers] : Philosophy behind space settlements
There seem to be two distinct philosophies behind space settlements:
1. Those who believe that the current economic model practiced on Planet Earth, that of Global Markets, will have to be extended for any activity in space to be successful.
2. Those who believe that it will have to take the form of individual self-sufficiency, the original American Model, which helped to settle a great part of the American continent, which will be the model that will be successful. (I think those who plan a one way trip to Mars are perhaps votaries of this philosophy).
One obvious problem with the first model is that, for it to be successful, at least in terms of trade in physical resources, there should be simple and cost effective methods of transport. There is no evidence that it will ever be possible to have this form of transport. Taken to the extreme situation of a space ship speeding through the cosmos, this will be next to impossible. (I am afraid space based novels on this subject, have mislead space enthusiasts).
Hence I see only one practical route to space settlements.
1. Prove that a settlement of say a thousand people can be set up in the middle of the Sahara desert, who enjoy a high quality of life making use of all scientific advancements, who are self-sufficient in terms of availability and use of water (they are very efficient in its use), and self sufficient in terms of ability to harness renewable energy. They do not import more than 10% of their daily needs from outside sources.
2. Prove that it is possible to set up a sealed biosphere in the middle of the Sahara desert which will provide a high quality of life for a thousand people. No more than 20% of water can be imported every year from an outside source.
(The conditions any where in the cosmos are likely to be more life threatening than the conditions that exist in the middle of the Sahara Desert.)
Regards,
Selvaraj