Space: A sudden light • Hacker News Board

Re: Space: A sudden light

#31

Post by sixo » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 5:53 PM UTC

pjungwir wrote: post #17

chris_va wrote: post #9

The real problem with the space economy is that there are really very few business plans: - Space Tourism - Imagery Acquisition - Communications - Science - Astroid Mining (pending) ... And it turns out that none so far have been good businesses, and the small sat form factor is really limited. I really really love space stuff, but I don't see any of these creating explosive growth in the short term. Eventually the c…

I keep daydreaming about what a killer business might be. A few other ideas that probably won't pan out but are interesting to think about: - Since nuclear reactors are dangerous, what if we build them on the moon instead? Is there any way to generate energy there and get it back to earth? - In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress the moon-dwellers fight earth by hurling rocks (maybe just threatening?), which strike with mor…

I think it's housing, although there's a big hurdle to make it valuable since you need stuff for people to do first.

Re: Space: A sudden light

#32

Post by falconman » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 5:55 PM UTC

What's so interesting to me is that the more we want to do and further we want to go in space the more unity and collaboration we seem to need at the planetary level

Re: Space: A sudden light

#33

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:08 PM UTC

pjungwir wrote: post #17

chris_va wrote: post #9

The real problem with the space economy is that there are really very few business plans: - Space Tourism - Imagery Acquisition - Communications - Science - Astroid Mining (pending) ... And it turns out that none so far have been good businesses, and the small sat form factor is really limited. I really really love space stuff, but I don't see any of these creating explosive growth in the short term. Eventually the c…

I keep daydreaming about what a killer business might be. A few other ideas that probably won't pan out but are interesting to think about: - Since nuclear reactors are dangerous, what if we build them on the moon instead? Is there any way to generate energy there and get it back to earth? - In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress the moon-dwellers fight earth by hurling rocks (maybe just threatening?), which strike with mor…

[deleted]

Re: Space: A sudden light

#34

Post by erikpukinskis » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:11 PM UTC

hossbeast wrote: post #6

viach wrote: post #3

What problem do space flights solve?

Long term continuity of the human race, by backing up to another physical medium, I.e. planet

Anyone looking to invest in the long term continuity of the human race would be foolish to invest in space travel. There are practically limitless terrestrial investments which would offer much better ROI.

I have yet to see anyone describe a single scenario of even low probability where Mars is more habitable than the entirety of Earth.

Re: Space: A sudden light

#35

Post by extrapickles » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:32 PM UTC

chris_va wrote: post #22

pjungwir wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep daydreaming about what a killer business might be. A few other ideas that probably won't pan out but are interesting to think about: - Since nuclear reactors are dangerous, what if we build them on the moon instead? Is there any way to generate energy there and get it back to earth? - In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress the moon-dwellers fight earth by hurling rocks (maybe just threatening?), which strike with mor…

- Zero g manufacturing ( good edit , has some potential) You have something with the spaced based solar (SBSP). The unsolved problem there is the microwave power beaming, which has some technical hurdles (synchronizing microwave frequencies across multiple dishes is apparently hard, but necessary for power beaming, and there is an ozone problem). Any other space based power system has this same transmission problem (…

Even if you solve the synchronization problem, you still have the main problem with power beaming of the massive sizes needed of the transmitter and receivers at space scale distances, thanks to diffraction.

Microwaves need prohibitively large transmitter/receiver arrays if you go beyond LEO (drag is an issue in LEO). While putting a kilometer^2 scale transmitter in orbit isn't a problem, putting the similarly sized receiver for it on the ground is. At optical or smaller wavelengths, the arrays can be much smaller, but they will still be large structures.

Disclaimer: I worked with a company that does terrestrial optical power beaming.

Re: Space: A sudden light

#36

Post by viach » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:48 PM UTC

erikpukinskis wrote: post #34

hossbeast wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long term continuity of the human race, by backing up to another physical medium, I.e. planet

Anyone looking to invest in the long term continuity of the human race would be foolish to invest in space travel. There are practically limitless terrestrial investments which would offer much better ROI. I have yet to see anyone describe a single scenario of even low probability where Mars is more habitable than the entirety of Earth.

Can't agree more. Again, what's in "continuity of human race" for ordinary people, like me and the most over here?

Re: Space: A sudden light

#37

Post by viach » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 6:51 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #10

viach wrote: post #3

What problem do space flights solve?

Off the top of my head: monitoring weather, providing communications, and allowing devices to precisely locate themselves.

True. But by space flights I mainly mean traveling to other planets and solar systems

Re: Space: A sudden light

#38

Post by viach » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:03 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7

hossbeast wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long term continuity of the human race, by backing up to another physical medium, I.e. planet

As well as a massive motivating research goal with incredibly hard problems that tend to have practical applications on Earth. And a means of inspiring billions.

Latest news show (imho) that Earth's ecosystem tend to be ruined in current century. We'll just fly to Mars then, right?

Re: Space: A sudden light

#39

Post by AlgorithmicTime » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:04 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #30

chris_va wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can get it to he moon, may as well put it in the sun :). There is a slight problem with the x% chance the rocket will blow up at max-Q while still in the atmosphere. Plus, all nuclear waste ever generated would fit in 1 football stadium. The rest of the spending is just due to political infighting that looks good to voters.

Yes, there are risks. Just saying its a defensible "permanent" solution to disposing waste with a very long half life. As far as using the Sun as an alternate, it takes less delta-v to get to the moon than it does to get to the Sun. Further, the overall effect of adding nuclear waste to the Moon is completely predictable in its impact, but that is less true of adding it to the Sun.

Pretty sure the impact of adding nuclear waste to the sun is more or less zilch.

Re: Space: A sudden light

#40

Post by rcarmo » Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 7:16 PM UTC

blackbagboys wrote: post #27

api wrote: post #4

This is notable because The Economist penned this a few years ago: http://www.economist.com/node/18897425 Of course economists are on par with Ouija board users at predicting the future.

The typical Economist staff writer is probably a 25-30 year old journalist with a B.A. and a prestigious-sounding alma mater, not an actual economist.

And an Oxford Dictionary on a hair-trigger.