Re: On/Off Topic
Gail, I agree. You are usually spot on. I went off-line for a few messages to Bruce and Joe regarding the Shuttle, but I think it a shame if anyone else wanted to share those thoughts or correct me/us about them. We cannot untie the manned space program from Europa exploration. It hit me recently (like today, in discussion with Scott Anderson of UH/JPL) that people will go into space regardless of the risks. As a species, we're almost as mad about entering space as Lemmings marching into the sea for a swim (more so, since the Lemmings story is a fabrication). If people can ever find the means to explore or colonize Europa, I think they will. But first, we'll send the robots. Gary At 06:38 PM 2/11/2003 -0800, you wrote: Since we seem to have so much trouble reining in those who have something to say about space exploration, how about this? Suppose we either just change the name of the group, or keep the name for its intended purpose and just stop worrying about what is discussed? A. This is a wonderfully diverse group with a sincere desire to foster efforts in getting off the planet, and B. There is actually very little to discuss productively about Europa, at least for the foreseeable future. I'd like to see the group continue because it's such a rich resource, and current events discussion could help keep the interest of the members up in the doldrum periods of Europa interest. Please be assured this is in no way a criticism of our site administrator--his is a thankless job at best, and we should all give him a big "Well Done!" for putting up with us for as long as he has. What thinkest thou? Gail Leatherwood
RE: On/Off Topic
There IS stuff going on regarding Europa (i.e., this new Prometheus Project), but people are so into flaming about Columbia that, unfortunately, no one seems interested in talking about Europa. (I’ve tried.) One of the difficult things I’ve had to learn about life is that people have different points of view. This doesn’t necessarily mean they are ignorant, or evil, or even - wrong. Intelligent, well-informed, well-intentioned people can be presented with the same facts as me, and come to totally different conclusions. What’s worse, rarely will my arguments – however well-reasoned – convince them that I am right and they are wrong, nor are they likely to convince me. So I’ve given up trying; I still enjoy the satisfaction of knowing, deep down inside, that I AM right! Having said that, I still believe that the shuttle was the best we could come up with at the time given the constraints of technology and budget, that the ISS (or something like it) is a necessary stepping stone to a permanent human presence in space, and the more wonderful unmanned exploration of the solar system gets, the more it whets my appetite for going there in person. I can’t imagine anything as exciting as the thought of living in a spacefaring civilization. Maybe someday… John Sheff Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Cambridge, MA 02138 Voice: 617-495-4671 Fax: 617-496-0193 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/
RE: On/Off Topic
Greetings, For a lot of people, the shuttle represented man's efforts in space. Robots and spacecraft are what should be lost - not people. I understand the frustration at all the shuttle talk too. I had all but given up on talking about the science. The jupiter tour (as I like to call it) has barely raised an eyebrow outside some very close circles. It is like trying to sell snow in Alaska (although right now I hear that is not too hard a job). The true test of the public's reaction it to go up to someone who obviously is not 'into' the science and ask them what they think. I was sure shocked. BTW, where would you like to see the Europa discussion go from here? One or two ideas might get us back on track. Joe Latrell On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 21:43, John Sheff wrote: > There IS stuff going on regarding Europa (i.e., this new Prometheus > Project), but people are so into flaming about Columbia that, unfortunately, > no one seems interested in talking about Europa. (Ive tried.) > > One of the difficult things Ive had to learn about life is that people have > different points of view. This doesnt necessarily mean they are ignorant, > or evil, or even - wrong. Intelligent, well-informed, well-intentioned > people can be presented with the same facts as me, and come to totally > different conclusions. Whats worse, rarely will my arguments however > well-reasoned convince them that I am right and they are wrong, nor are > they likely to convince me. So Ive given up trying; I still enjoy the > satisfaction of knowing, deep down inside, that I AM right! > > Having said that, I still believe that the shuttle was the best we could > come up with at the time given the constraints of technology and budget, > that the ISS (or something like it) is a necessary stepping stone to a > permanent human presence in space, and the more wonderful unmanned > exploration of the solar system gets, the more it whets my appetite for > going there in person. I cant imagine anything as exciting as the thought > of living in a spacefaring civilization. Maybe someday > > > John Sheff > Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics > Cambridge, MA 02138 > Voice: 617-495-4671 > Fax: 617-496-0193 > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Website: http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/ > > > > > =You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: On/Off Topic
I didn't mean to imply that the shuttle/station wasn't the best that could be done at the time, although some evidence to the contrary has been produced during this past week. We know that many decisions about the whole program, from the earliest responses to Sputnik to actual construction of the ISS and its mission definitions, were political, not technical or scientific. We HAVE learned a lot, but my thesis is becoming that we've "been there, done that, let's move on to the next stage." Let's not put any more resources into something that is aged and unproductive; something that is preventing other avenues of exploration. Gail - Original Message - From: John Sheff To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:43 PM Subject: RE: On/Off Topic There IS stuff going on regarding Europa (i.e., this new Prometheus Project), but people are so into flaming about Columbia that, unfortunately, no one seems interested in talking about Europa. (Ive tried.) One of the difficult things Ive had to learn about life is that people have different points of view. This doesnt necessarily mean they are ignorant, or evil, or even - wrong. Intelligent, well-informed, well-intentioned people can be presented with the same facts as me, and come to totally different conclusions. Whats worse, rarely will my arguments however well-reasoned convince them that I am right and they are wrong, nor are they likely to convince me. So Ive given up trying; I still enjoy the satisfaction of knowing, deep down inside, that I AM right! Having said that, I still believe that the shuttle was the best we could come up with at the time given the constraints of technology and budget, that the ISS (or something like it) is a necessary stepping stone to a permanent human presence in space, and the more wonderful unmanned exploration of the solar system gets, the more it whets my appetite for going there in person. I cant imagine anything as exciting as the thought of living in a spacefaring civilization. Maybe someday John Sheff Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Cambridge, MA 02138 Voice: 617-495-4671 Fax: 617-496-0193 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website: http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/
Re: On/Off Topic
Here's a proposition to get you all thinking: What are the technical problems inherent in sending a zeppelin probe to Europa? Here's the proposition: The probe that eventually goes to Europa will have a significant fuel limit, and a nearly limitless amount of terrain to explore prior to choosing a site for dropping a submersible, if any. Why not send a small probe which uses a nuclear isotope to kick-start a process, wherein water ice is electrolyzed into constituent elements of hydrogen and oxygen. The oxygen provides fuel, and the hydrogen is shunted into a gas bag of sufficient size to make the probe a zeppelin style survey probe. This creates a dual use craft. One, it would be able to land, and refuel. Two, it would potentially be able to shuttle between an actual orbital craft and the surface. Of course, it would also be able to relay transmissions well, and the reflective surface of the gas bag itself would make it easy to bounce signals off of, and be a large surface for receiving them as well (in essence, the entire surface of the bag is the antenna). What are the problems inherent in such a scheme? Well, someone will likely suggest that a zeppelin won't work, for one reason or another. Sure, it's vulnerable to flying micro-asteroids and the like. Explosions? Not in the nearly airless atmosphere of Europa. This ain't the Hindenburg. With a compartmentalized bag, and the capacity to simply pop another bag out, a zeppelin style probe could last for years, certainly long enough to do the work necessary. Of course, the bag could also be deflated during 'down periods', and reinflated at a later date. Oh, and did I mention that despite the lack of sexy glamour that everyone attributes to rockets, a zeppelin concept is CHEAP? Okay, gang, get back to your drawing boards. -- John Harlow Byrne (still crazy after all these years) == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
