The need to conserve

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

> A good thing about travel on our planet is that it does not as
> a whole lose mass each time people travel in a jet from London
> to Shanghai. In Space Habs on the other hand the situation will
> be dramatically different. Any movement, any thruster firing will
> result in a loss of mass from the composite system - irrevocably
> lost.

True for traditional methods of space travel. But consider this
scenario. Suppose we have a large number of space habitats in the same
orbit, but with several miles spacing in between. Imagine if they built
something a bit akin to a mass driver connecting them all together.
Imagine that this structure can take modest compressive loads, and is
sized sufficiently to allow at least car-sized vehicles to travel
through it.

A civilization composed of such interconnected habitats could enjoy
routine travel amongst a vast number of habitats over enormous
distances, all for the cost of a little solar-generated electricity, and
with no expulsion of reaction mass.

> 3. Don't make the same mistake we made on our planet.
> Plan for a modest population in Space Habs. There have
> been projections of a trillion people living in space habs.
> Let's keep the number more manageable. Ten billion let us say.

But in the type of setup I've outlined, any reason to not allow
populations to go into the trillions?

Regards,

Mike Combs