Minh-Nhat Le wrote:
You push the envelope in the direction of a logical evolution.
Biplanes and jets share one thing in common, and that is the idea of
wings. In the same vein, clipper ships and dreadnaughts share the
same idea of floating in water. The difference is the power source.
Now, an airplane and a flying mech shares what in common?
Flight.
Are we anywhere NEAR space colonization yet?
Exactly. So your writing off of everything remotely related to mechs is
obviously premature.
There are more pressing
concerns right now as far as that goes, which is how to get humans up
there, keep them up there, keep them alive, and get something useful
out of the entire endeavor. I think keeping them alive is more
important than defending them against space aliens.
I agree. So answer the question. All those pressing concerns, outline
a possible series of advances and inventions to get us there that do not
include robots, mechs or portable reactors.
To me it seems that space construction alone will push forward the
development of mechs, probably with manipulator hands. Humanoid shaped,
probably not. Robots, yes. Enough power to get all that going, yes.
You last comment says that since mechs and fusion reactors are not the
first or second step in colonization that they are not included period.
I disagree. More to the point, I say that there's no way for you to
know and write off those ideas as idiotic or useless.
Alfred.
--
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Success is not no violence."
- President Bush, on trying to find a way to be able to claim future
progress and success in Iraq without having to achieve the
complete victory he used to state as the only acceptable goal.
Alfred Urrutia - Digital Domain - 310.314.2800 x2267 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
