----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damon Agretto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:34 PM
Subject: RE: Chinese manned space flight


>
> > This is SO exciting, but its not getting much
> > coverage here at all :(
>
> I wonder if that's because its a Chinese flight, or
> whether its an illustration of the public's (or the
> news media's) lack of interest in space exploration?
> :(

This might be a good point to interject something I've been thinking about
for a while.  Many folks have likened manned expeditions into space to the
expeditions into the American West.  But, there is really a significant
difference.  The American West was a land that had abundant resources for
supporting human life.  It was populated by people who survived fairly well
using significantly inferior technology to that used by the citizens of the
US. Fairly large civilizations had already existed in the US, many years
before.

Space does not support abundant life.  There are not a number of people now
living in space, using primitive technology.  So, a much better metaphor
for expeditions into space is the expeditions to the poles, roughly 100
years ago.

Take Antarctica, for example.  90+ years after humans first reached the
South Pole, it is still minimally inhabited.  It is a vast continent,
supporting life; but it still has very little commercial value.  Further,
there is no indication that 50 or 100 years from now, humans will have a
massive South Pole presence.

If we look at human exploration of space, we see parallels to this. Space
is far more hostile to life than the South Pole, and 40 years after humans
first went into space, there is still no practical reason for a manned
space program.  Further, there is no evidence that we will see the type of
cost reduction that will allow tangible results that are in any sense cost
effective (in tangible results I do include scientific results).

A couple of weeks back I was accused of assuming y'all were idiots when I
talked about only a 40% improvement over the present cost of human space
flight if a top quality person had a clean slate and a good team to start
over.  My point was that, since practical manned space flight required
orders of magnitude improvement in lift cost, a 40% improvement over the
costs of the 25 year old shuttle really isn't all that impressive.  Just
like commercial fusion power, there's been talk about massive drops in lift
costs just around the corner for decades now.  Unfortunately, aerospace is
exhibiting all the signs of a mature technology, with massive efforts
required for incremental improvements.

So, to get back to Damon's comments, let me ask a question.  Why should a
PR victory for a communist dictatorship elicit all that much interest?

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to