Question about production numbers

From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
panamabob@...

> Just gonna have to suck it up and figure out someway to
> truly replicate as much as possible the human environment.

I agree totally. I see so many proposals for settlements beyond the
Earth which make rather radical assumptions about what people can easily
adapt to (egs: food will be restructured Spirulina algae, people will do
just fine under artificial illumination, 1/3 G is OK long-term, people
don't really need wide open spaces overhead so lets put in 50 decks for
as many more people). I've even seen people argue that ET settlement
will require radical changes to such fundamental aspects of the human
condition as methods of reproduction.

I still think most highly of the High Frontier proposals, and partly
because of all of them, this is the set of proposals which make the most
conservative assumptions. By that I mean assumptions which try to
minimize unforeseen problems by engineering, to as great an extent as is
practical, the same lifestyle and way of living as we presently know for
a fact works here on Earth. About the only assumption we're asked to
make is that centrifugal force can be a workable substitute for gravity.
I started to include the assumption that a 1/2 atmosphere with twice the
percentage of oxygen will be OK, but we can even back away from that if
unexpected problems should arise (O'Neill's original "Physics Today"
calculations assumed normal, sea-level pressure air). Zubrin and
Savage's assumptions in this area are far less conservative.

I think later generations of space settlers might well start to
experiment with markedly different methods of doing things like
providing food or illumination, and might well enjoy the efficiency
improvements cited by some of the promoters of the more radical ideas.
But I expect the first few generations of space settlements to have
enough problems as it is without trying to invent radical new ways for
humans to live with which we've had no prior validating experience.

Regards,

Mike Combs