Don, Ringworld was one of the books I was thinking about when I
mentioned SF....great book! It has been almost 40 years since I read
it...wow!

On Jul 30, 1:14 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sci-Fi gets the creative juices flowing.  It may be time to reread this 
> classic.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringworld
>
> dj
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:48 AM, iam deheretic<[email protected]> wrote:
> > I think to live in space or it is going to take a lot of refining mm massive
> > growing rooms to process the carbon dioxide to keep the air breathable and
> > yes yes oxygen is easily extractable from water as all it takes is a little
> > electricity.
>
> > At best it is not an easy process but the resources are avaliable  and in
> > the beginning it will not be easy, but it would become easier . Material
> > wise a single asteroid can contain more iron than the entire production on
> > earth for several years. the different metals and materials can be
> > determined by radio telemetry (I think that is the word) it is possible to
> > see what is there electronically , so you can pick and chose just what you
> > harvest.
>
> > And it will take people much smarter than me. and I do think todays Space SF
> > is harmful to the concept because interstellar space travel is not practical
> > with todays science. living on the moon or mars is doable but impractical
> > because of the gravity thing, but gravity or artificial gravity can be
> > created by centrifugal force and be controlled easily to simulate earths
> > gravity. The easily accessible asteroid belt make for an ideal solution with
> > its mineral rich diversification .
>
> > Incidentally some of the massive clouds (light years across) are mostly made
> > of ammonia now figure that one.
> > Allan
>
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:41 AM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Fran, thanks for the education. I did speak quite hastily, didn’t I? 
>
> >> Perhaps, even though I spent decades digesting the best SF to be
> >> found, I lack vision. Still, given the current human condition/
> >> situation, I just don’t see how any set of humans we got to, say, the
> >> asteroid belt, would do better than those of us here on earth. By this
> >> I mean that fairly quickly they would be using up resources and
> >> polluting the cosmos let alone other aspects of being human, like mini-
> >> wars.…but more importantly, technologically I don’t see it happening
> >> before we exhaust earth.
>
> >> On Jul 29, 2:50 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > On 29 Jul., 20:03, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:> For
> >> > the record, the above was written by fran and not me.
>
> >> > > And, yes, air, food, water...none are found in the asteroid belt.
>
> >> > Sorry, orn, not true for two out of three. Water and the gases needed
> >> > to constitute a breathable atmosphere are there. In fact, you really
> >> > only need oxygen, which can be easily won from water - the resultant
> >> > hydrogen left over could be used, among other things, as a propellant,
> >> > or source of energy. What we probably really need is the technology
> >> > for controlled fusion to get a lot of this going.
>
> >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining
>
> >> > In the absence of FTL travel we seem to be limited in the foreseeable
> >> > future to the solar system. The scenario which Allan presents
> >> > (habitats in the asteroid belt) seems quite possible. The belt is a
> >> > rich source for all sorts of anorganic material - the economics of
> >> > extracting increasingly limited resources on our planet will make such
> >> > a step increasingly attractive in the next couple of hundred years.
> >> > Despite all sorts of philosophical, ethical and practical objections,
> >> > it seems likely to me that the genetical engineering djinn is already
> >> > truly out of the bottle, leading to possible applications in the area
> >> > of hydroponics and synthetic food production, perhaps even human
> >> > genetic engineering with respect to problematic aspects of
> >> > weightlessness.
>
> >> > I'm not saying that that many of the possible paths of development
> >> > don't contain aspects which I, personally, might find disquieting.
> >> > But, given the human characteristics of monkey inquisitiveness and our
> >> > propensity to take risks to make a potential buck - as well as more
> >> > noble motives - I do see it as probable that we will go this way. We
> >> > will probably not see it - our grandchildren probably will.
>
> >> > Francis
>
> > --
> > (
> >  )
> > I_D Allan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to