Asteroid use

tntucker@... wrote:

>
> Darren Brown,
>
> Interesting post. I guess we need to learn more about the UN treaty.
> Did the US Senate ratify it? I wonder how it would be enforced? How
> would private property be purchased on Mars while being settled?
> Would each earthling be given a square KM, sort of like the law of
> the Sea treaty that given land-locked nations access to mineral
> wealth at the sea's floor that they have not lifted one finger to
> exploit?
> Does this teaty also apply to stars/planets? I wonder if a private
> colony sent a star-ship to one or more stars to colonize planets
> would the UN then send space police after them to tell them that they
> can only orbit scientific satellites around their potential new
> world? If the distant space colonies from local O'Neil colonies gang-
> up on the earth's UN, then perhaps this could turn into the first
> interstellar war: us against the UN :-)
> I wonder what would have happened to the US if the UN, back in 1600s,
> had forbidden colonization?
> Some laws, like the English tax on salt for India and tea for
> America, were made to be broken, and so I wonder if this is one of
> those laws?
>
> Regarding exploration of Mars, all scientific questions about life
> should be answered by robots now before man arrives and scientists
> should be on notice to this now. Once man arrives, everything will be
> contaminated and this should be understood now. I don't want to hear
> scientists whining that astronauts have to bring special toilets with
> them when they go for excursions into the Martian desert so that the
> dirt won't become contaminated if they pee on the ground :-).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom Tucker
>

Tom,

This is a very confusing and strange subject and one that needs a lot
more thought, smart enemies don't use knives, they stick you with sharp
lawyers instead.

I dont claim to be an expert on this subject but I have looked at it
because I think that one of the biggest problems facing future space
settlement is not technical but legal. I dont know if the US has
ratified it but I seem to recall something I read indicated that it has
but dont take that as certain, in any case I understand that any nation
can withdraw from them.

Now I wouldnt go to court with this and will stand corrected by any
more knowledgeable person, but here goes. There is a number of treaties
, 2 of which I have up-loaded to the files section, to be considered
but from what I understand it comes down to a few basics.

First it seems that a nation state can not claim ANY celestial body, I
read that as meaning anything, star, planet, asteroid, comet, anything.
This only applies to natural objects, which is why I asked how much an
object needed to be changed before it wasnt considered a natural object
but man made. If I take a lump of space iron and hammer it into the
shape of a large room and then move into it, cam I claim that it isnt a
natural object but one I built and as such not subject to the provisions
of the treaty. And if so, how much change is needed to make this claim,
do I need to change everything or just parts? Also in answer to your
question about who can claim an interest, it seem that everybody can as
the treaty makes the point that space resources must be exploited for
the benefit of all mankind, irrespective of their state of development.
Also there is a provision relating to keeping the environment clean and
uncontaminated, sorry Marcel but that will kill your Martian mines and
Tom, your astronauts will have to take along the special potty, no
peeing on the ground. In fact if you want to take it at its literal
meaning, the shuttle is in violation every time they dump waste into
orbit so the treaty isnt being rigidly enforced at the moment, IMO
anyway. The big out here, this only seems to apply to nation states, so
companies and individuals can do what they like, except (there had to be
a hook), the nation which registers the craft would/might be tasked with
keeping them in line, something like ship registries now but Im not a
lawyer so really these are just my random musings and might very well
have no connection with reality. Argue away people.

A couple of links and 2 files in the file section.

Final word, due to my lack of a firm footing on this subject I will
yield to the superior knowledge with the proviso that I reserve the
right to press my opinion, even without the benefit of being correct
;-).

Darren Brown
Canberra Australia

http://www.permanent.com/

http://www.spacelaw.com.au/

http://www.islandone.org/Treaties/

http://www.spacelaw.com.au/content/exploitation.htm

tntucker@... wrote:

Darren Brown,
Interesting post. I guess we need to learn more about theUN treaty.
Did the US Senate ratify it? I wonder how it would be enforced? How
would private property be purchased on Mars while being settled?
Would each earthling be given a square KM, sort of like the lawof
the Sea treaty that given land-locked nations access to mineral
wealth at the sea's floor that they have not lifted one fingerto
exploit?
Does this teaty also apply to stars/planets? I wonder ifa private
colony sent a star-ship to one or more stars to colonize planets
would the UN then send space police after them to tell them thatthey
can only orbit scientific satellites around their potential new
world? If the distant space colonies from local O'Neil coloniesgang-
up on the earth's UN, then perhaps this could turn into the first
interstellar war: us against the UN :-)
I wonder what would have happened to the US if the UN, back in1600s,
had forbidden colonization?
Some laws, like the English tax on salt for India and tea for
America, were made to be broken, and so I wonder if this is oneof
those laws?
Regarding exploration of Mars, all scientific questions about life
should be answered by robots now before man arrives and scientists
should be on notice to this now. Once man arrives, everything willbe
contaminated and this should be understood now. I don't want tohear
scientists whining that astronauts have to bring special toiletswith
them when they go for excursions into the Martian desert so thatthe
dirt won't become contaminated if they pee on the ground :-).
Cheers,
Tom Tucker

Tom,
This is a very confusing and strange subject and one that needs a lotmore thought, smart enemies don't use knives, they stick you with sharplawyers instead.
I dont claim to be an expert on this subject but I have looked at itbecause I think that one of the biggest problems facing future space settlementis not technical but legal. I dont know if the US has ratified itbut I seem to recall something I read indicated that it has but dont takethat as certain, in any case I understand that any nation can withdrawfrom them.
Now I wouldnt go to court with this and will stand corrected by anymore knowledgeable person, but here goes. There is a number of treaties, 2 of which I have up-loaded to the files section, to be consideredbut from what I understand it comes down to a few basics.
First it seems that a nation state can not claim ANY celestial body,I read that as meaning anything, star, planet, asteroid, comet, anything. This only applies to natural objects, which is why I asked how much anobject needed to be changed before it wasnt considered a natural objectbut man made. If I take a lump of space iron and hammer it into theshape of a large room and then move into it, cam I claim that it isnta natural object but one I built and as such not subject to the provisionsof the treaty. And if so, how much change is needed to make thisclaim, do I need to change everything or just parts? Also in answerto your question about who can claim an interest, it seem that everybodycan as the treaty makes the point that space resources must be exploitedfor the benefit of all mankind, irrespective of their state of development. Also there is a provision relating to keeping the environment clean anduncontaminated, sorry Marcel but that will kill your Martian mines andTom, your astronauts will have to take along the special potty, no peeingon the ground. In fact if you want to take it at its literal meaning,the shuttle is in violation every time they dump waste into orbit so thetreaty isnt being rigidly enforced at the moment, IMO anyway. Thebig out here, this only seems to apply to nation states, so companies andindividuals can do what they like, except (there had to be a hook), thenation which registers the craft would/might be tasked with keeping themin line, something like ship registries now but Im not a lawyer so reallythese are just my random musings and might very well have no connectionwith reality. Argue away people.
A couple of links and 2 files in the file section.
Final word, due to my lack of a firm footing on this subject I willyield to the superior knowledge with the proviso that I reserve the rightto press my opinion, even without the benefit of being correct ;-).

Darren Brown
Canberra Australia

http://www.permanent.com/
http://www.spacelaw.com.au/
http://www.islandone.org/Treaties/
http://www.spacelaw.com.au/content/exploitation.htm