[ExI] Mining the Sky SL Talk I gave today

spike spike66 at att.net
Mon Apr 26 19:19:42 UTC 2010


 

> ...On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Mining the Sky SL Talk I gave today
> 
> --- On Mon, 4/26/10, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > ...Without a 
> > space shuttle or equivalent, we need to hoist a reentry 
> vehicle to at 
> > least LEO at $10k per kg... spike
> 
> Ah, now here's another trick:
> 
> You're mining an asteroid of mostly iron anyway?  Build a 
> disposable re-entry shell, then nudge the shell into a 
> decaying, Earth-entry orbit...

Cool idea, especially if we can manage to do the re-entry without a control
system and without a thruster, which would be useless without a control
system.  Then the challenge becomes finding the thing.  Without a control
system, and assuming a re-entry body made entirely from on-orbit material
and assuming reentry by atmospheric decay of the orbit (no parachute or
thrusters available) the uncertainty in landing means it could land anywhere
on the globe.

>  Aim for a splash down - maybe 
> ...since you'll want ships temporarily securing that zone to 
> screen out claim jumpers and innocent bystanders)...

I need to think about this longer.

> Some of the iron will be burned away during re-entry, but the 
> point is the platinum...

Ja.  Landing that stuff seems hard enough to me that the iron in
interplanetary space is far better utilized in space structures than in
bringing home a bit of platinum.

Your original point was that none of this will happen unless we figure out a
way to pay for it, and the platinum does that.  You have found my
Hofstadterian paradox; the wily tortoise has once again destroyed the crab's
phonograph.  If humans work together and pay taxes to distill and use in
orbit the stuff that is already there, then the activity makes sense, sorta,
depending on how one looks at it.  On the other hand, an entrepreneur could
put up the money to recover material from where it is useful, to bring it
here, where it really isn't useful but has monetary value.

If the humans work together and pay taxes, they could produce something that
is wildly useful *to someone else* who didn't pay for it.  If the
entrepreneur is sufficiently competent, she could make the venture pay her
and her investers, but in the process would destroy most of the value of the
natural resource.  The paradox is that the precious material is either
destroyed or never used.  With current technology I see no other
alternatives besides those two.

spike

Perhaps we should cross post this discussion to PERMANENT?  Samantha, do
feel free to post my material.  Adrian would be cool with it too?






More information about the extropy-chat mailing list