[ExI] Power sats and the industrial development of space (was global waming again)
jrd1415 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 24 19:31:20 UTC 2009
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> We don't have teleporated robots of this sort,
Spirit and Opportunity. Give 'em general purpose manipulators (ie hands).
> not to mention the
> speed of light delay problem.
Three seconds. Makes things interesting. Hardly a show stopper.
> But if we did an they were there, what
> are you going to *do* with them?
I don't want to be rude, but aren't you being just a bit obstinate?
I'm good with the notion that as a real, accomplished engineering
professional, you feel compelled to thresh this recreational futurism
with a reality-based flail, but could you try to be a bit more
> You can't just say ":mine the moon,"
"Mine the moon." Hmmmm. That wasn't very hard.
> the moon is effectively dirt.
As is the Earth. But as Freitas lays out in KSRM
"Perhaps the most important message of the Fallacy of the Substrate is
that the replicative capacity of a replicator cannot be defined by
specifying the replicator in isolation from its surroundings.
Replicative capacity can only be defined by simultaneously specifying
both the replicator and the input substrate upon which the replicator
will be required to operate."
Lunar Regolith Simulant Materials Workshop
> What chemical processes are you going
> to use? What is power budget? How are you going to make parts?
See above. Your objections seem more about obstinacy than genuine obstacles.
I have tremendous respect for you, but continue to hope for more
Best, Jeff Davis
"We're a band of higher primates stuck on the surface
of an atmosphere-hazed dirtball. I can associate with
that. I certainly can't identify with which patch of the dirtball I
currently happen to be on, and which monkey tribe happens to reside
Only by taking the big view we can make it a common
dream, and then a reality. It's worth it."
More information about the extropy-chat