SSI Activity (and its rebirth?)

>
> If one pushes for the concept of a single seed that can fit in a
> Space
> Shuttle bay, or similar volume, then any further launches are
> unneeded
> if one is patient.
>
> That would be the ticket if it could be done. But I'm not optimistic
> about the prospects for that in any near-term future. In any era in
> which I might live to see, I'd be mightily impressed by a replicator the
> size of a small apartment building.

I think we are getting to the core of the various assumptions we both
are making. Why do you think a "clanking replicator" would be this big,
and why do you think Cheap-Access-To-Space would be easier to develop
than a shuttle-bay-sized clanking replicator?

I don't mean to put you on the spot, although I'd be curious if you
could articulate the reasons for your opinion. In some ways, nobody
really knows because not enough R&D has been done in this area, which is
part of my point. I am coming from the perspective that cells replicate
and they are quite small, so with a biotech approach alone (organisms
making solid shells, etc.) I would think it is possible (though the
biotech route is not the one I'd take; I'd be looking at the machine
shop route). Consider this, just in terms of proof of concept:
http://www.lindsaybks.com/dgjp/djgbk/series/index.html
"Fantastic For Do-It-Yourselfers Who Enjoy Metalworking! ...
Consider attempting to re-write the history of the advanced machine-shop
right in your own garage! With this series you take an aluminum storm
door, a bag of charcoal, some scrap wood and sand, and an old vacuum
cleaner. With them you create a milling machine, lathe, drill press,
scraper, and many fascinating deluxe accessories that actually perform
(and in many ways out-perform) some of the same machines you buy at
Sears. I've done this myself, so I know it's true -- and I live about 2
miles from the author -- and I've seen what he's done as well! I
personally discovered just how durable aluminum is when used to build
machine-shop equipment, but the best part is -- if something breaks --
no need to call 1-800-WHO-CARES!!! You built the machine -- you can
easily fabricate a new replacement yourself." Now obviously this is more
complex when you are in space and a robot or something like one does the
actual work, but it does show in general how possible the basics are --
even when you don't have machine tools to start!

Also, even if it was the size of a small apartment building, and took
100 shuttle flight (so, about 100 billion dollars) in lift costs, well
doesn't that still show CATS is unneeded? Large sums of money are
routinely expended by government or industry for various dubious ends.
About a trillion dollars is to be spent over the next decade or so on
oil & gas exploration. For another example, the recent Iraq war in part
for oil is going to cost one to two trillion dollars over the next
decade or so; between about $200 billion in direct appropriations so far
in less than two years, a huge amount of interest on that debt over the
next decade or two (so, another $200 billion at least, as interest rates
rise), all the extra costs to consumers from rising oil prices given
turmoil in that region, additional direct expenditures over time on
troops, and indirect expenditures (life long treatment for thousands of
wounded GIs, replacing military equipment, paying reparations for
civilian casualties, removing depleted uranium and other toxics, etc.);
all told we're looking at at least a trillion dollar cost for this
latest adventure (even not including other countries' costs from
disrupted trade, etc. which by itself may also reach into the
trillions). And by the way this scale of costs was estimated by some
people even before the war. See for example:
"How Much Would US War on Iraq Cost?"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1480.htm
(That estimate there is now looking very low.)

So, there is no shortage of money if people have the will (misguided or
not). So, even at a trillion dollars in lift costs for the first
clanking apartment-building sized replicator, this activity is feasible
if the government gets behind its launch.

My focus on the small seed is purely to make it possible for one very
wealthy individual (of a hundred or so such people worldwide) to fund
its launch as charity at around $1 billion -- although there are some
very few individuals who could still fund a $100 billion launch cost.
Also, some few foundations might also be able to swing the smaller
amount. And once the system is operating in space around asteroids,
presumably launch costs will eventually drop as vehicles and their fuel
(or power to make their fuel) can be returned from space, so we can all
get off this rock and all live in style without ever having specially
developed any sort of CATS approach.

CATS requires new materials, precision timing, dealing with large
quantities of explosives, negotiating a huge maze of permits and dealing
with fickle funders and making uncertain estimates about demand. A
Clanking Replicator as I outline it is mostly just figuring out what
industrial production processes are most essential or from which others
can be constructed and maybe making them a little smaller -- essentially
just inventorying what we know and moving the data around (although
there are then issues with having 3D models for what to make). While in
practice it will be made easier by some benchtop tests, especially in
developing new ways to do some things which are currently hard to do,
like Nader Khalili's SSI-funded work on fusing sand with focused
sunlight), most of it in theory could all be done at a computer while
consulting a good technical reference library (although, admittedly,
much manufacturing knowledge is kept proprietary or is passed along
tacitly in apprenticeships, so there are some other issues here, and
there are other issues related to the robots that would run the system
and their computers and adaptive programming).

At the very least what is becoming clear here is that there is an
assumption deeply embedded into Gerry O'Neill's slow economic expansion
model -- that a small seed approach is not feasible (and he more or less
said that to me himself when I pushed for that idea now about 20 years
ago). Had Gerry been a biologist or an ecologist he might have made very
different assumptions about what was easy and what was hard. And, in his
defense, with today's computers and the internet, putting together a lot
of information such as to design a clanking replicator seed is much more
feasible than it was in the 1970s or 1980s. So, again, if Gerry was
alive today, he might be revising his plans to take in account new
possibilities.

--Paul Fernhout