Revision of my plan for a lunar base Part 1
LV Poker Player
revising the text document I posted here a while back. One of the more
interesting things I stumbled across was a proposal written in 1962 for
something like this. I explain why this is so interesting in the section about
landers. It has grown long enough that I need to post it in two parts.
Lunar Colony Proposal
<Anything enclosed in brackets such as this will be deleted before any formal
submission. I would like anyone reading this to offer any critiques
whatsoever, from spelling and grammar errors, to style suggestions, to
suggestions as to how something might work in the colony. Let me know if I
have left out something that should be here, or if you think I am mistaken in
how something should be done, or anything like that.>
Introduction:
I think it is possible, feasible both financially and technically, and
desirable to put a small colony on the moon today using current boosters. The
rewards for doing this could be tremendous in terms of scientific research and
a boost to the economy. Any private organization that did this could be in a
position to reap financial rewards from this endeavor.
Section 1: What I Envision:
A small base could be set up to house a small number of colonists. The
number of persons to send in the beginning needs to be carefully considered. A
small team of three or four might be best. It is my intention that this base
be almost entirely self supporting, with minimal imports needed from Earth.
With care and planning, it should be possible to use Lunar raw materials for
almost everything needed to maintain this base, once it is established. I also
think it could be established with a reasonable number of launches of currently
existing boosters such as the Ariane 5. Once established, the colonist(s) can
expand this base using Lunar raw materials, and prepare for the arrival of new
colonists along with performing functions beyond mere survival. Survival does
have to be the top priority at the beginning.
Section 2: The Boosters
The Ariane 5 booster can put 4,500 kilograms into Lunar transfer orbit,
and the Russian Proton M can place 5,700 kg into Lunar transfer orbit. Other
launchers such as Atlas V and Titan IV could be considered. The Ariane costs
about $120 million per launch. Since multiple launches will be needed, perhaps
a volume discount could be arranged. This should keep the cost of the program
manageable, since designing a new booster would be very expensive. A small
scale base should be possible with several launches of existing boosters.
The Proton M has a higher payload capacity, and Russia has a chronic
foreign exchange shortage. If this project were to locate in Russia and use
the Proton, and spend a large amount of American dollars in doing so, the
Russian government might be very interested in providing a favorable
environment in exchange. I see problems though. Russia is very corrupt, and
payoffs might eat up any savings from the favorable environment. Also, I think
U. S. technology in some areas is more dependable. This can be studied.
Section 3: The Lander
At http://www.marsinstitute.info/rd/faculty/dportree/rtr/mm09.html I found
a reference to a paper published in 1962 entitled "The One-Way Manned Space
Mission," IAS 62-131, John M. Cord and Leonard M. Seale; paper presented at the
Institute of the Aerospace Sciences National Summer Meeting in Los Angeles,
California, June 19-22, 1962.
"The One-Way Manned Space Mission," John M. Cord and Leonard M. Seale,
Aerospace Engineering, December 1962, pp. 60-61, 94-102.
This paper describes a proposal to set up a lunar base similar in concept
to what I describe. According to the paper a one way, one person lunar lander
could be built that would weigh 2190 pounds on lunar touchdown. Unfortunately,
the article does not say how much propellant is expended before this touchdown
weight is reached. About ž of the Apollo missions were fuel, so if we assume
the same ratio we would need to launch about 10,000 pounds into lunar transfer
orbit, which is within the capability of the Ariane 5 booster. Since this was
written in 1962, technology has advanced and we can do things lighter and
smaller than they could then, and rocket engine performance has increased.
A lander will have to be designed to fit the chosen booster. I think it
should be a modular design, so that it can be built in a manned or unmanned
configuration. I do not know how much it would cost to design this. I also do
not know how much of the 4,500 kg (assuming Ariane 5) would be lander (engines,
fuel, structure, and such) and how much could be actual payload.
When we design the manned version, we have to make a philosophical
decision. Will this be a one way trip, where the colonists MUST succeed to
survive, or will they have evacuation capability? I don't think a return
capable lander could be made within the 4,500 kg limitation. It has to have
the engines and fuel to get into Earth return orbit, a heat shield, and a
landing system, probably parachuting into an ocean. There might still be a way
though. Multiple launches into Low Earth Orbit could be made, each with a
lander section, which is then assembled at a rendezvous point and flown to the
moon.
Another possibility would be to send a lander that can return, but send
cargo instead of the needed fuel. If evacuation is later needed, the fuel can
be sent in a cargo launch.
In the cargo configuration, the lander would be unmanned and
unpressurized, to give maximum cargo capacity. There would be no reason to
give these a return capability.
I don't know if a lander could be designed to carry more than one person,
given weight constraints.
A possibility to be considered is to use the chosen booster to send a
combination lander and upper stage into Low Earth Orbit, then use this upper
stage to boost into lunar transfer orbit. This possibility can be studied to
determine if it could place more payload on the moon.
Section 5: The Base Itself:
I am going to assume that a small team of perhaps three or four people is
sent in the beginning to build the base. There would be advantages to sending
more than one. For one thing, in a hostile environment the "buddy system" is
an excellent idea. Two or more people could build the needed items faster than
a single person could. The advantage of one person is that he needs less room,
less hydroponics, less life support supplies, and fewer launches for all this.
A lot would depend on the colony budget, and this is another thing that should
be carefully studied before committing to this effort.
This will probably start out as a bare toehold, but plans will be made to
expand it into an actual foothold, and we can hope that someday it becomes a
full blown colony. Before sending a manned mission, it will almost certainly
be necessary to send unmanned cargo flights to pre-position some supplies and
equipment. It might be a good idea to send a robot probe before anything else
to make sure the proposed area is suitable for the base.
It is possible that the initial habitat can be sent from Earth in one or
more landers. Then the colonists would assemble it, living in the lander(s)
until it was built. Another possibility is to send the equipment needed to
mine, smelt, weld and work metal. Then they build it from lunar raw material,
once again living in the lander(s) until it is complete. Since this equipment
will be needed anyway to expand the base later, this might be the best way, if
this can be done in a reasonable time. Either way, the sections will probably
be welded together. Since this welding will almost certainly be electrical, it
might be necessary to set up the reactor or solar panels first. Since all this
has to be done in vacuum, they need pressure suits. It might be a good idea to
send two each, just in case. Since they will be exploring polar craters in the
hopes of finding ice, at least one of the suits sent must be designed for
extreme cold that is close to absolute zero. Some way to transport the ice
will be needed too. Perhaps something similar to a RadioFlyer red wagon could
be used, once again designed for extreme cold.
This base should probably be buried under the lunar regolith for safety
and structural reasons. A meter or two (estimated, once again studies should
be made) of regolith will give protection from solar radiation and meteors.
This might make temperature control easier too. Since the habitat needs to be
pressurized, there will be outward force on the walls. Burying it could
provide a balancing inward force. Excavation equipment will be needed for
this, probably including some way to break up rocks if necessary. This might
be explosives that will work in a vacuum, or perhaps a jackhammer or rotary
rock hammer designed to work in lunar conditions. Some way to lift rocks out
of the excavation will be needed, probably a block and tackle.gh
An airlock to the surface will be needed, along with a pump to save the
air. A tank for this saved air will be needed. Since the initial airlock will
be small, the tank will be small, and it might be easier to just send it from
Earth rather than building it on the moon. When larger structures with larger
airlocks are built, then the tanks should be built locally. I think just
letting the air escape is going to be too wasteful, even though oxygen will be
produced as a byproduct of smelting operations and in hydroponics. There are
other essentials in the air beyond oxygen that we would not want to escape each
time the airlock is used.
The atmosphere almost certainly should not be pure oxygen. Pure oxygen,
even at low pressure of around 4 or 5 pounds per square inch, is a serious fire
hazard. For this reason, some of the pressure should come from something else.
Nitrogen can be considered, especially since some plants can fix it into
hydroponics fertilizer. It does have the problem that sudden decompression can
result in aeroembolism, or "the bends". It has been detected in trace amounts
on the moon, so it should be possible to extract it as needed (another reason
to save the air rather than letting it go each time the airlock is used).
Helium is another possibility. It is present in the trace lunar atmosphere,
but I do not know if it could be extracted. According to
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001842876_moonmine24.html
Helium 3 is present in the lunar crust in quantities that could be mined. It
is possible that all three of these should be part of the air mix. Carbon
dioxide is also needed, and I think that if it is present in the atmosphere in
larger amounts than on Earth, this would encourage plants to grow faster.
Power is going to be needed. Plants need lights, temperature control is
needed, and many other needs will be met by electricity. There seem to be two
ways we might obtain this power. One way would be solar panels, and the other
would be a nuclear reactor similar to those carried by some space probes. The
reactor has the advantage of not needing sunlight. It has the disadvantage
that it will be a long time before the colony is able to mine and refine fuel
for it, and when expansion of power generation is needed, more reactors have to
be sent from Earth. Not very much fuel is needed though, so it might be
practical to ship it from Earth as needed. It might be possible to use a
reactor for the initial base, but then build solar panels as a backup system,
to expand the colony once the reactor is at full capacity, and to replace the
reactor when needed.
Lights are needed for hydroponics and other purposes. It should be
possible to build them from lunar raw materials quite soon, although the first
few will have to come from Earth. It is also possible that glass fibers and
mirrors could be used to bring in sunlight.
If we use solar panels, it might be possible to locate the colony at a
lunar pole. According to
http://www.hollandsentinel.com/stories/050499/new_lunar.html there are
locations at the south pole that are in almost continuous sunlight. Batteries
or fuel cells could be used to power the base when needed. Since the periods
of darkness are short, it might be possible to survive without power for that
length of time. Another advantage of a polar site is that polar craters are in
continuous darkness, and might contain ice. This would be a huge advantage
over importing water from Earth. The temperature is almost constant too, which
will be easier to deal with than day/night fluctuations. Depending on the
distance, power could be carried by wire or by microwave transmission. I think
wire would be best if the distance is not prohibitive. It should be possible
for the colonists to make their own wire quite soon, but making microwave
transmitters and receivers probably would not be possible. According to
http://www.asi.org/adb/02/08/solar-cell-production.html it should be possible
to manufacture solar cells on the moon. Keeping imports from Earth to a
minimum is needed to keep costs manageable. <Importado, importado! I never
TOUCH importado! - Wyoh in TMIAHM>
Once they have the habitat built and pressurized, and have power from a
reactor or solar panels, planting hydroponics will have to be a high priority.
As soon as possible, they should be eating things grown there instead of food
shipped from Earth. They need to use the mining, smelting, metal working and
welding equipment to expand the original habitat or build a second habitat.
Then they need to get hydroponics set up. The first crop will probably consist
mostly of fast growth type plants. Lighting, temperature, carbon dioxide
content, and plant nutrients can all be optimized for fast growth. Bodily
wastes will almost certainly have to be used as hydroponics fertilizer, and
anyone offended by this would not make a suitable colonist. At some point
plant products such as rubber and cotton will have to be considered, but in the
beginning food is what is needed, along with oxygen. Plant nutrients will be
needed. As with a lot of other things, the initial ones will have to be sent
from Earth, but as soon as possible these should be made from lunar materials.
Equipment to do so will have to be sent. If ice is found in a polar crater
oxygen would be less of a priority.
A purely vegetarian diet might be possible in theory, but in practice I
think meat should be considered. Fish could be sent, especially the ones that
can be sent as eggs. Also, fertilized chicken eggs could be sent in an
incubator and scheduled to hatch shortly after arrival, since chickens have the
advantage of growing fast. Fish, eggs and poultry should make the diet more
varied and healthful.
They should be reaching the stage where survival is assured, and almost
everything they need he is producing locally.
<I would dearly love to be on this team, but it is impossible. Even if I were
the one with the money and calling the shots, I would not go, and it would not
be out of fear. I know this job is unsuited for me, much as I would love to do
it. It is not just a matter of life. The human race deserves the best chance
of colony survival, and that means someone other than me has to build it. Now
if I could finagle a way to get there after it has been built, I would jump at
the chance. This initial colonists have to be a jacks of all trades, and
masters of quite a few of them.>
Section 5: Medium and Long Term Projects
After they have set up everything needed for immediate survival, and are
living off hydroponics instead of shipped food, quite a few things beyond mere
survival can be considered.
The initial habitats are good for the initial team, but we really hope
that others will be joining the colony. Mining, smelting, welding and metal
working equipment has already been mentioned. As soon as it looks like others
will be on the way, they should use it to either expand the habitats or build a
new and larger habitat. For safety reasons, multiple habitats are probably a
good idea. They might be connected by underground tunnels and airtight
hatches. Any large habitat should be compartmentalized for safety reasons in
the event of depressurization. A double hull might be a good idea too, with
the space between independently pressurized, and with sensors and alarms to
warn of a pressure drop. The dead air space should provide good insulation to
help with temperature control. If solar panels are being used for power, more
of these might be needed. It should be possible to make them out of lunar raw
materials. They should expand hydroponics as needed so that food will be ready
for the new arrivals. Depending on the state of extraction with regard to
carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and helium, new colonists might have to bring some
of these along. Shipping carbon is not a problem. If both hydrogen and
nitrogen are needed, these could be sent as ammonia (NH3) or ammonium chloride
(NH4Cl). Ammonium chloride is probably the easiest to ship and would require
the lightest containment methods, which is important. Ammonium nitrate can be
considered too, since it will be needed in hydroponics.
As for scientific research, one obvious area is astronomy. It should be
possible to make modest telescopes right away. Digital imaging equipment
should be sent so that images captured by these telescopes can be sent to Earth
by radio for analysis by professional astronomers. I don't know if this
initial team could build a large telescope such as the 200 inch one at Mt.
Palomar, but they should build whatever they can, and plans should be made for
large scale construction later. With 1/6 g and no winds, it might not be all
that hard to build big ones. It should be possible to link smaller mirrors to
simulate a large mirror. Astronomers need to be consulted to find out what
will be most useful for them.
Other areas of scientific research are open. Geology (or selenology,
perhaps) is another obvious area. Given the availability of vacuum, various
types of chemical research might be valuable. People on Earth can request by
radio the experiments and observations they would like done.
At some point, we can hope that various scientific agencies on Earth will
be interested in sending equipment for this colony to operate. It should be
possible to piggyback equipment and supplies with these launches.
Hydroponics should start growing more than just food. Rubber is such an
all around useful material that I do not think there is any question that we
need it. Rubber trees should be planted as soon as feasible, since they take a
while to grow. Wood of various types will also be useful, and should be
planted early due to the long growth time. Even if we don't have room for the
full grown trees, we can plan on expanding before the space is needed. Cotton
will almost certainly be needed, but since it grows fast it might not be on the
"plant early" list. Various plants such as cotton, tung, and soybeans produce
oils which will have many uses. Petroleum will not be available, so something
of this nature will be needed for lubrication. Some plants may be planted for
their medical uses. It might be possible to use tailored bacteria in vats to
produce some of the things needed, instead of traditional plants. Botanists
will definitely be needed on the design staff.
Looking further into the future, it should be possible to build a mass
driver. This would use electricity to magnetize metal hoops placed in a row.
This could grab any metallic payload and give it a tremendous initial boost
without use of onboard propellant. With 1/6 g, no atmosphere, and a mass
driver for the initial boost, it should be possible to send large payloads
anywhere in the solar system. Scientific agencies on Earth might be interested
in sending very large probes to the moon, where they can be launched. For
really large ones, they might send them in sections, to be assembled by the
colonists then launched. Once again, equipment and supplies for the colony
might ride piggyback. The colony should be able to make fuel for these probes
too. Liquid hydrogen and oxygen are available if we find ice and could be used
in the initial launch after clearing the mass driver. These are unsuitable for
long term missions due to volatility, but perhaps other fuels suited for long
term missions could be made by the colonists too. Even if we do not find ice,
liquid oxygen can be made as a byproduct of smelting. As well as being used by
probes launched from the moon, it might be launched into Low Earth Orbit, where
it could rendezvous with rockets launched from Earth. This way, Earth launches
could carry payload instead of oxidizer.
It should be possible for the colonists to do more and more as time goes
on. At some point, it might be possible for people on Earth to just radio
specifications for the probe, and then the colonists build it. Once basic
survival is ensured, the Earth launches should concentrate on building
equipment rather than finished goods. Instead of sending computers, send the
equipment needed to build computers. Instead of sending a modern high speed
dental drill, send the equipment needed to build this drill. Instead of
sending digital cameras, send the equipment needed to build them. When sending
this equipment, they will also need to send the people who know how to operate
it, or instruct those already there in how to use it. This will not happen
right away, but the goal should be that at some point, anything that can be
built on Earth can also be built on the moon. Once this happens, the only
thing sent from Earth would be people.
The colonists will almost certainly want to design and build their own
vehicles at some point. Experience should show what is needed and what will
work. The initial colony might include one rover similar to what was used on
some of the Apollo missions, but the emphasis should be on the colony producing
these as needed.
With the mass driver and the ability to build probes themselves, we can
consider colonies in other places. It should be possible to set up colonies
just about anywhere with this launch capability. A space station in orbit
around the moon, or the Earth, or at a Lagrange point might be the first one
set up.
It might also be possible to set up a large solar panel farm, and use it
to beam energy to Earth as microwaves. Receivers on Earth could pick these up,
and power sales could be a significant revenue source. It might also be
possible to launch Solar Power Satellites into Earth orbit, even before we have
the mass driver available.
Manufacturing could be set up by private companies. Especially with the
mass driver available, it might be economical to manufacture certain things,
then ship them to Earth. This would be another source of revenue.
I don't think much plumbing will be needed in the early days, but once the
population is expanding this needs to be considered. All colonists will have
to be warned that bodily wastes fertilize hydroponics, and anyone offended had
better stay on Earth.
At some point a second colony can be considered. This will probably have
to be located near the first due to transportation considerations. Once
transportation is well developed, it should be possible to put colonies
anywhere on the moon.
I envision this as a permanent colonization effort, not just an outpost.
At some point, babies will be born. Once we know the colony can survive, women
should be encouraged to have babies. We should try to have medical staff and
facilities on hand before this delightful event occurs. As to exactly when
medical staff, equipment and supplies are sent, this has to be considered. The
initial colonists will probably have to get by with their own first aid
efforts, and whatever first aid supplies can be sent early. If we can find a
doctor who also has a needed skill such as electrician or metal worker or
welder or something like that, it would be fantastic. <Hey Chuck, if you want
to be the CMO of Luna City, learn something along these lines. J>
Section 6: Benefits Of This Proposal
I think this could be a tremendous scientific boon for the human race.
What can a lunar observatory find out, with no atmosphere to limit their
efforts? What would geological (selenological) research find out? What can
researchers find out when they have unlimited hard vacuum available? We don't
know, but it is a safe bet that we will find out a lot.
With unlimited solar power, the colony might someday supply most of
Earth's electricity, generated on the moon or by Solar Power Satellites
launched from the moon.
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/space_power_021031.html
By sending probes throughout the solar system, and following these with
manned colonization efforts, the scientific benefits would multiply. There
would be other benefits to having a human presence throughout the solar system.
No one catastrophe could wipe out the entire race the way it could now.
Something killed off the dinosaurs. That same something will be unable to kill
off humans once we are in space to stay.
Any country that did this would have huge advantages. England once had
world power and influence far in excess of anything justified by its size,
population or resources. This happened because they built their navy. This
analogy is not exact because we almost certainly will not find any natives to
rule and exploit the way England did. I think the analogy is a valid one
though. A country that rules space will have a huge advantage over any other
country that ignores space.
A private company or person should be able to make enough revenue to make
a profit. Especially after research gets going, patents and industrial
processes could bring in huge profits. Once the colony is big enough and
advanced enough to do manufacturing, it could make and sell the products
directly, or sell space to other companies. Power sales have already been
discussed. Use of the mass driver could bring in revenue. If two way space
travel becomes cheap enough, tourism should be a revenue source. The research
made possible by this colony just might bring the breakthroughs that would
reduce the cost of space travel.
<Delos put it this way: one thing that he would start shipping back from the
moon immediately would be knowledge.>
Section 7: Training and Simulation
The first step will be to set up a design team, and this will have to
include people with many different specialties. Engineers, skilled trades,
scientific specialties, medical experts, mining and construction experts and so
on need to draw up detailed plans for what will be done and how it will be
done, always keeping in mind the ways that conditions on the moon are different
from those on Earth.
Before launches start, it would be a good idea to set up training and
simulation. Candidates for the opportunity to build the initial base should go
through every procedure needed, simulating lunar conditions as closely as
possible. Several teams should be in training, and then the best one selected
for the first launch. The others might follow in later manned launches once
the initial base is built and operating.
This will be an attempt to identify problems, and make sure that it is
actually possible to build this base under simulated lunar conditions. It
might identify things that sounded good in theory but that cannot be done in
practice. It might identify problems with one or more of the prospective
colonists that preclude him from colonizing. They will have to get used to
living and working in the very tight quarters that will be available in the
beginning of the effort.
Corners should not be cut in this procedure. Any money spent here will
almost certainly pay off in the long run.
--
Ferengi rule of acquisition #192: Never cheat a Klingon...unless you're sure
you can get away with it.
LV Poker Player
Section 8: Items Hard To Find On the Moon
Carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen are all needed. Carbon is needed to form
carbon dioxide (CO2), which plants need for photosynthesis. Hydrogen is needed
to combine with oxygen to form water, unless we find ice in the polar craters.
Nitrogen is needed for hydroponics fertilizer. According to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon carbon and nitrogen are present in the crust
in the amount of 100 parts per million each, and hydrogen is present at 50 PPM.
Studies would have to be undertaken to find out if these could be extracted in
useful amounts. The good news is that oxygen is present as 43% of the crust,
so we can obtain this, probably as a byproduct of smelting operations.
Hydrogen, ammonia (NH3), methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) are all present
in the trace lunar atmosphere, but it is so rarefied that I doubt if any of
these could be extracted. This is another thing that could be studied.
We need some trace minerals in our diet, including iodine, phosphorus,
magnesium, zinc, selenium copper, manganese, and potassium. Some of these are
available on the moon, but not all of them. The ones that cannot be mined will
probably have to be shipped up in a large quantity, and carefully recycled.
Dead bodies of persons and animals might have to be converted to hydroponics
fertilizer in order to recycle these minerals, and anyone offended by that
would not make a good colonist.
Petroleum has many uses. The colony can use plant products mentioned
earlier for lubrication, but plastic may be more difficult. It should be
possible to get by with plastic items shipped from Earth for a while, but we do
not want to rely on this over the long term. Changing World Technologies in
Carthage, MO has developed the thermal depolymerization process to convert
organic material into oil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization
Once oil has been made this way, it could be made into plastic. There might
be ways to use plant oils to make plastics, too.
Copper may not be absolutely essential, but it is certainly useful as a
conductor, and it is not available on the moon according to my online research.
Silver is an even better conductor, but it is also unavailable. I think the
colony can use substitutes for most applications. Aluminum has about 60% of
copper's conductivity, which is not all that wonderful but could still be used,
and it is available on the moon. The aluminum wiring would have to be
carefully installed to avoid too high of a current load. I don't think
aluminum could work in electric motors and transformers and such. Maybe copper
and silver would have to be shipped, then carefully rationed and conserved for
essential applications. When wiring for the initial colony base is sent, it
might as well be silver; we might as well send the best. For the same reason,
lander wiring could be silver, since these could be cannibalized by the
colonists. I don't think use of silver will significantly increase the costs
of the project. Could an alloy of lunar materials be made that would be a good
conductor? Could the lunar landers be made partly out of brass, which could
later be smelted for its copper content? Could hull sections be made out of
brass, with the intent of later replacing them with colony produced hull
sections?
<Ok, everyone, tear it apart>
jeanette
in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
It will be interesting to see how much meat the chickens will provide.
Most of what we eat is muscle.
I don't think you need to mention where some of the fertilizer will come
from more than once. Only the most clueless "city kids" will be
surprised.
Jeanette
LV Poker Player
>I've expressed my concerns about the muscle development of moon babies
>in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
>of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
>will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
Good points. What would probably be a good idea is to send at least a few
breeding primates (I think chimpanzees are closest to us in the evolutionary
tree?) and, as you say, give them a couple of generations minimum to see what
happens.
I am not sure just when this would happen, but certainly not right away. The
first few launches HAVE to concentrate on basic, immediate survival. Even
after basic, day to day survival is ensured, it might take a while. Any time a
launch is carrying animal life forms, those life forms will almost certainly be
people for a while. There is a lot to be done, and not enough people do do all
that we want to do. For the same reason, as you point out, pregnant women and
children are not going to be priorities either, not for a while.
Still, it should probably be a three step process: (a) get the base
established, then expanded enough to consider sending primates, (b) send some
breeding primates and observe how they do when it comes to childbearing and (c)
possibly authorize and encourage lunar children based on the results of (b).
>I don't think you need to mention where some of the fertilizer will come
>from more than once. Only the most clueless "city kids" will be
>surprised.
True. I had noticed that on a reread but forgot to fix it.
Howard Berkowitz
wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
Thinks of the city kids that explained to me that a milk bottling plant
in a nearby industrial park was a milk factory, where they packaged the
output of the milk machines.
I think this is less clueful than my theory at about 4, when I was
convinced the function of brown cows was to provide chocolate milk, and
the different faucets on all cows gave different products. It wasn't
clear to me if you could order the flavors for the faucets, like
preordering a car, or if you could load the milk machine with four
canisters of milk syrup concentrate (ala soda machine).
Howard Berkowitz
> >From: wolf
>
> >I've expressed my concerns about the muscle development of moon babies
> >in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
> >of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
> >will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
>
> Good points. What would probably be a good idea is to send at least a
> few
> breeding primates (I think chimpanzees are closest to us in the
> evolutionary
> tree?) and, as you say, give them a couple of generations minimum to see
> what
> happens.
Good question, as I wonder about the evolutionary properties of trolls
and spammers.
Bill Reich
> >From: wolf
>
> >I've expressed my concerns about the muscle development of moon babies
> >in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
> >of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
> >will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
>
> Good points. What would probably be a good idea is to send at least a few
> breeding primates (I think chimpanzees are closest to us in the evolutionary
> tree?) and, as you say, give them a couple of generations minimum to see what
> happens.
Chimpanzees are close enough that sending them without their consent,
especially while human volunteers were kept waiting, would be a
serious ethical problem for me.
> I am not sure just when this would happen, but certainly not right away. The
> first few launches HAVE to concentrate on basic, immediate survival. Even
> after basic, day to day survival is ensured, it might take a while. Any time a
> launch is carrying animal life forms, those life forms will almost certainly be
> people for a while. There is a lot to be done, and not enough people do do all
> that we want to do. For the same reason, as you point out, pregnant women and
> children are not going to be priorities either, not for a while.
>
> Still, it should probably be a three step process: (a) get the base
> established, then expanded enough to consider sending primates, (b) send some
> breeding primates and observe how they do when it comes to childbearing and (c)
> possibly authorize and encourage lunar children based on the results of (b).
OR: Somebody risk a pregnancy and see what happens. If you have mixed
crews, you won't need to set a policy.
>
> >I don't think you need to mention where some of the fertilizer will come
> >from more than once. Only the most clueless "city kids" will be
> >surprised.
>
> True. I had noticed that on a reread but forgot to fix it.
Soilent brown, it comes from PEOPLE.
--
Will in New Haven
To HELL with Pete Rose
jeanette
successful pregnancy and delivery on the moon. My main concern is for
children born and raised on the moon. I have wondered before if they
would ever be able to visit the earth. Would it be the equivalent of
6Gs of pressure on them at all times? The potential for handling it is
there, but would low gravity allow the necessary bone and muscle
development? I also wonder if a moon born woman would be able to have
an easy pregnancy. How much do bone and muscle development contribute
to incubation of a fetus?
You are worried about consent issues with a chimpanzee, I think a human
baby would be a terrible experimental subject.
Jeanette
David M. Silver
wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
There's a character, iirc, in Michael Flynn's _The Wreck of the River of
Stars_, Jeanette, who was born at L-5 station, grew up and developed an
elongated body common to all space reared in this novel of Flynn's and
has concluded by early in the story that she has no intention of ever
becoming pregnant because she doesn't wish her own daughter or son to
experience the discrimination practised by those born and reared in
heavy gravities. Then, there's an indication of an accidental pregnancy.
WWJD?
--
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88
Engr Bohn
Hail, Howard Berkowitz! We who are about to post salute you.
> I think this is less clueful than my theory at about 4, when I was
> convinced the function of brown cows was to provide chocolate milk, and
> the different faucets on all cows gave different products. It wasn't
> clear to me if you could order the flavors for the faucets, like
> preordering a car, or if you could load the milk machine with four
> canisters of milk syrup concentrate (ala soda machine).
Caughlin recently had a clever theory. He informed us that milk came from
cows, and we asked where chocolate milk came from (expecting the "brown
cow" hypothesis). Caughlin thought about it for a moment or two, and then
he concluded:
"Feed the cows chocolate chips."
Take care,
cb
--
Christopher A. Bohn ____________|____________
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~bohn/ ' ** ** " (o) " ** ** '
"To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of
preserving the peace." - George Washington, 1790
Engr Bohn
Hail, David M. Silver! We who are about to post salute you.
> There's a character, iirc, in Michael Flynn's _The Wreck of the River of
> Stars_, Jeanette, who was born at L-5 station, grew up and developed an
Something else for me to add to my queue of leisure reading.
> elongated body common to all space reared in this novel of Flynn's and
> has concluded by early in the story that she has no intention of ever
> becoming pregnant because she doesn't wish her own daughter or son to
> experience the discrimination practised by those born and reared in
> heavy gravities. Then, there's an indication of an accidental pregnancy.
> WWJD?
I'm reminded of the song "Love Child".
It's interesting that she's concerned about this discrimination -- seems
to me the Earthers would be out of their element, whereas Spacers would
(literally) be right at home in microgravity. Presumably, the Earthers
would spend only short stints at the stations, or Spacers would soon
outnumber Earthers at the stations; however, with the stations being their
home, Spacers would be able to make the life of the transient Earthers
just a wee bit more uncomfortable with a little guile. Of course,
prejudicial discrimination is rarely rational.
bookman
"Engr Bohn" <BravoOscarH...@cis.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.40.04030...@nu.cis.ohio-state.edu...
> Good morning,
>
> Hail, Howard Berkowitz! We who are about to post salute you.
>
> > I think this is less clueful than my theory at about 4, when I was
> > convinced the function of brown cows was to provide chocolate milk, and
> > the different faucets on all cows gave different products. It wasn't
> > clear to me if you could order the flavors for the faucets, like
> > preordering a car, or if you could load the milk machine with four
> > canisters of milk syrup concentrate (ala soda machine).
>
> Caughlin recently had a clever theory. He informed us that milk came from
> cows, and we asked where chocolate milk came from (expecting the "brown
> cow" hypothesis). Caughlin thought about it for a moment or two, and then
> he concluded:
>
> "Feed the cows chocolate chips."
And, of course, you must feed cow chips to the chocolate.
Rtb
bookman
"David M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-5A700...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <3861-404...@storefull-3112.bay.webtv.net>,
> wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
>
> > Will--I think it is likely that an earth born woman could have a
> > successful pregnancy and delivery on the moon. My main concern is for
> > children born and raised on the moon. I have wondered before if they
> > would ever be able to visit the earth. Would it be the equivalent of
> > 6Gs of pressure on them at all times? The potential for handling it is
> > there, but would low gravity allow the necessary bone and muscle
> > development? I also wonder if a moon born woman would be able to have
> > an easy pregnancy. How much do bone and muscle development contribute
> > to incubation of a fetus?
> >
> > You are worried about consent issues with a chimpanzee, I think a human
> > baby would be a terrible experimental subject.
> >
> > Jeanette
> >
>
> There's a character, iirc, in Michael Flynn's _The Wreck of the River of
> Stars_, Jeanette, who was born at L-5 station, grew up and developed an
> elongated body common to all space reared in this novel of Flynn's and
> has concluded by early in the story that she has no intention of ever
> becoming pregnant because she doesn't wish her own daughter or son to
> experience the discrimination practised by those born and reared in
> heavy gravities. Then, there's an indication of an accidental pregnancy.
> WWJD?
JWRTFM?
HTH,
Rtb
Bill Reich
I agree. However, the first people to leave Africa on the coastal
route to Australia took their children. The ones who went to the
middle east a few thousand years later took their children. The people
who crossed Berengia into North America took their children.
Starvation was always a possibility, new diseases, new predators.
This isn't so much an experiment as a migration. Looked at one way, it
is just plain wrong to go at all, because of the very valid concerns
you express. Looked at another, it is the kind of risk people took
throughout history.
--
Will in New Haven
"Things that used to matter seem so small
When you're looking for a soft place to fall."
Allison Moorer from "Soft Place to Fall"
jeanette
his plan. I am not saying we should never allow children to be born on
the moon. I think, before it happens, there should be a reasonable
expectation (there are no guarantees) those children will be able to
enjoy life.
The following is NOT what I think will happen. We have to be sure it
probably won't. Likely problems will be less obvious. LV, do not
consider this an attack on your plan.
Moon colony idea catches on. Priority given to colonists who have
wombs. Prize of $5 million, free Harvard education and lots of other
good stuff offered for first moon-born baby. Lots of visits to sperm
bank. Many pregnancies. Bunches of cute babies.
First baby taken to earth to show grandparents. Screams the whole time.
Gravity feels crushing. Back to the moon. Who wants to go to Harvard
anyway.
Moon babies grow up, colonists want grandchildren. Have enough boys now
so sperm bank isn't necessary. First moon born woman starts to swell.
Ribs crack under the pressure. Uterus, a muscle, (I don't know if this
is true) which does not depend on gravity for development is strong and
contracts normally. Pelvic bones which usually spread are weak and
crumble. Next babies are Caesarian delivery. Nobody else wants to get
pregnant.
Interesting things happening on earth. Moon is boring. Nobody wants to
go to moon anymore. Sure there are people up there. Let them take care
of themselves.
Jeanette--who is sure there would have been animals born before the moon
babies were old enough to get pregnant.
David M. Silver
"bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote:
What do you call an Irish cow? What happens when you feed it chocolate
chips? Where's Sean when I need him?
LV Poker Player
>> >I've expressed my concerns about the muscle development of moon babies
>> >in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
>> >of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
>> >will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
>>
>> Good points. What would probably be a good idea is to send at least a few
>> breeding primates (I think chimpanzees are closest to us in the
>evolutionary
>> tree?) and, as you say, give them a couple of generations minimum to see
>what
>> happens.
>
>Chimpanzees are close enough that sending them without their consent,
>especially while human volunteers were kept waiting, would be a
>serious ethical problem for me.
Not for me. I'm sorry, but chimps and other animals are not people. No, I do
not think we should be intentionally cruel to animals. I do favor prosecution
of those who are cruel to animals just for the sake of cruelty. I also favor
animal testing, and if doing so harms the animals involved, OH WELL. Better
them than us.
For example, say we have developed some wonder drug that will cure morning
sickness. Call it Thalidomide, for want of a better name. I think it would be
an absolutely fantastic idea to give this drug to pregnant chimps before trying
it on human beings. Then if chimp babies come out missing arms and legs, I
think these deformed babies should be dealt with humanely. They should be taken
care of for their natural life spans, or they should be humanely and painlessly
euthanized. They most definitely should NOT be allowed to painfully starve to
death due to inability to take care of themselves thanks to the lack of limbs.
That said, once again, BETTER THEM THAN US.
The part about human volunteers being kept waiting is a more serious objection,
I admit. Still, I think Jeanette has a valid point. No matter how eager the
woman is, her lunar baby is NOT a person who has given consent, informed or
otherwise.
Sending a pregnant chimp to the ISS might be a good idea (or artificially
impregnating a female chimp sent there), but is almost certainly impractical.
Have they considered smaller animals such as white mice for such an experiment?
This might be more practical than a chimp or other primate, even if less
informative, and might give us some data.
>OR: Somebody risk a pregnancy and see what happens. If you have mixed
>crews, you won't need to set a policy.
This was discussed when I first came up with an idea for a large, self
sufficient lunar colony. The more I looked at it though, the more I realized
that the cost would not be billions, or even tens of billions, but well up into
the hundreds of billions, and maybe up into the mulitple trillions. Oops. The
discussion still applies to this scaled back version that will not be self
sufficient for a long time, but might be feasible in terms of startup costs.
Do we send a unisex crew until we are ready for lunar babies?
I'm sorry ladies, but "unisex" almost cerainly equates to "male" I think. We
are not going to use cranes, front end loaders, bulldozers, pickup trucks,
backhoes, or anything like that in building this initial base. Instead, we
will be using upper body strength. Still, I did assert before that if any
female crew can demonstrate Earthside that they are superior to all the male
crews available, we send them. That still holds. As an aside, I do think a
block and tackle arrangement for moving boulders and other heavy objects around
would be a good idea. This would certainly reduce the need for upper body
strength, so "unisex" might equate to "female." It is not the way I am betting
though.
Sending both sexes, then asking them to refrain from sex until we are ready for
babies, is asking a bit much I think. As for birth control, I don't know. I
certainly would not want any permanent form such as vasectomies or tube tying.
The temporary forms such as pills or rubbers or rhythm or spermicide are
subject to accidents. Then what? Especially if the "accident" is anything but
because the woman wanted to have the first lunar baby?
I tend to favor a unisex crew until we are ready for babies, but that is not a
hard line position.
I suppose one possiblity would be fertile women but men (volunteers) who have
vasectomies. Then when the time comes for lunar babies (after a few successful
chimp generations) we send fertile men and/or frozen sperm.
LV Poker Player
Talking to myself...
>I suppose one possiblity would be fertile women but men (volunteers) who have
>vasectomies. Then when the time comes for lunar babies (after a few
>successful
>chimp generations) we send fertile men and/or frozen sperm.
I just did some online research. The bad news is that chimp females don't have
babies until they are about 10-11 years old. Even if we send adult females
(remember weight) we still have to wait that long for a second generation. It
appears that all of the primates take several years to mature, but some of the
smaller ones take only 2 or 3 years.
I think I would be willing to send these smaller species, and take our chances
if these pregnancies work out well.
fadermcgee
"Bill Reich" <willre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7ce91b09.04030...@posting.google.com...
I think that one potential source of colonists who might well be able to pay
their way (or a big piece of their way) would be refugees. If for some
reason the democracies of the world sharply limit immigration, then mainland
China invades Taiwan, a lot of capital is going to be out there looking for
a permanent home; and so will its owners.
Reasons for moving out of the nest (apart from the ones that drive those of
us who would go "just because") that might appeal to the terribly wealthy in
places like Taiwan which are coveted by mainland China::
- economic freedom. I know that mainland China's Politburo has just
legalized private property, but it's legal here, too - subject to
confiscatory taxes on inherited property, property given by one person to
another, money already taxed once, then taxed again if it was used to
purchase investments or real property which is then resold... the death
tax, gift tax, capital gains tax all betray a pernicious disrespect for the
whole concept of private property. I'm sure that the Chinese Communists
will pioneer whole new ways to pay lip service to the concept of private
property while grabbing everything possible - because they can.
- religious freedom. Hey, it worked for many of OUR ancestors... the
communists in China have committed murder and false imprisonment of
religious believers on a scale undreamed of in the Christian-Muslim or
Protestant-Roman Catholic struggles, or Hitler's rampage. Many (20-30)
millions of people died so Mao could rest easier. Religious freedom in a
conquered Taiwan will probably be among the first things to go.
- political freedom. Eventually the Chinese _capitalists_ - on the
mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao and any other place liable to become part
of Greater China - are going to wonder why they must prop up a violent club
of political parasites. Some of them may find that the idea of a REAL
Celestial Kingdom has merit.
- protecting the people back home. If Beijing has to worry about a
Taiwanese orbital nuclear weapons platform in position to send the Politburo
to Hell on short notice, their lust to invade Taiwan may fade significantly.
The "One China" policy works for Taiwan in this regard - since Beijing has
pushed Taiwan to the periphery of diplomatic recognition, the Taiwanese have
very little to lose by defending themselves (or preparing to do so) just as
fiercely as they can.
Several hundred million dollars to one or more billion might become
available if the lunar colony became a place of refuge for the wealthy and
persecuted.
VPF
Sean
"David M. Silver"
> What do you call an Irish cow? What happens when you feed it chocolate
> chips? Where's Sean when I need him?
An Irish cow is called a Bó (in Irish). Not sure what happens if you feed it
chocolate. Probably get uppity and demand a whiskey. Therein ends the lesson
on how Bailey's Irish Cream is made.
Sean
(...)
bookman
"jeanette" <wo...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:5013-404...@storefull-3117.bay.webtv.net...
One point, Jeanette. You appear to be treating colonization as a
two-way street, where you can go home when it isn't fun anymore.
given current culture, I can understand that mindset. However,
I do think that it will be useful to remember that the historical model
of migration/colonization was almost always a one-way street.
Succeed or die, and a great many went to option two.
The current american attitude of "nothing at all is worth
risking a single life, ever again" (exaggerated for effect)
may well spell the doom of the race in the long run. IMO.
YMMV.
Regards,
Rusty the bookman
Engr Bohn
Hail, jeanette! We who are about to post salute you.
[...]
> Jeanette--who is sure there would have been animals born before the
> moon babies were old enough to get pregnant.
Easily. Even though the ISS has neither a suitable orbit nor a suitable
design to directly support the colonization efforts, it *can*
contribute as the home of a few generations of mice, rats, and other
small mammals. Unlike the shuttle, the ISS is up long enough to raise
and breed successive generations of lab animals in microgravity. If
they can successfully birth offspring after being raised in 1.0g and
after being raised in 0.0g, then it's tempting to interpolate and
believe they can birth offspring after being raised in 0.13g.
jeanette
children. Sometimes the motivation is a better life for the child and
future generations. Sometimes it is for the self-interest of the
parent.
Somebody, someday, will take the chance of having the first moon-born
baby.
I am saying it should be done with a sense of responsibility and concern
for the child's future.
This migration may produce children who physically can not return to the
home of their ancestors. That has never been done before. The first
generations are going to have no choice but to work just to build a safe
environment on the moon. There will be no new frontiers for them.
If moon-born mice and monkeys are unable to produce healthy offspring,
it would be irresponsible to think humans would be different and go
ahead and have babies. That would be like sending someone out the door
without a suit because maybe the moon is different and humans can live
in vacuum.
I am not saying we should not take risks with human lives. Everybody on
this program will be risking their lives. We will all die someday. My
money would say very few (none) of the first colonists will die of old
age.
Other comments--cb--I wonder how much gravity is involved in a
pregnancy. For instance, would a baby end up in the preferred head-down
delivery position in microgravity? It might be better on the moon.
Birth control possibility. All men bank sperm and have vasectomies. I
wonder if the first group will even have children. I don't think they
will have time.
Jeanette
David M. Silver
wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
> I
> wonder if the first group will even have children. I don't think they
> will have time.
Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
drafted and sent.
Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
far in this thread:
Hard, endless, dangerous work,
no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
euporics,
harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
no women,
no prospect of children,
. . .
yep, a male prison -- with auto- and homosexual relief for sexual drives
and stills distilling pruno hidden in every toilet facility.
How many guards are we going to transport each shipment of colonials to
enforce the 'family values' issues? What punishments are they going to
impose as correction? What do they do when they find they cannot come
back either? And how long does their dedication to duty last, before
they start distilling a better brand of pruno for consumption?
LV Poker Player
>> I
>> wonder if the first group will even have children. I don't think they
>> will have time.
>
>Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
>appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
>drafted and sent.
Bullshit. I am guessing that with a few VERY rare exceptions, most of the
people reading this would give anything whatsoever to go under the conditions
of "children if and when, certainly not soon, some possibility that they will
never be possible, harsh conditions that are conducive to accidents in an
environment where any accident is all too likely to be fatal, one way ticket,
return to Earth is going to be physically impossible for the foreseeable
future, 60 or 70 hour (or more) workweeks for the foreseeable future, this is
so new that you might run into conditions that will make long term survival
impossible."
How many of our current astronaut corps would sign up in a heartbeat? Every
single last one of them, perhaps? How many of your typical attendees at a
science fiction convention? Not all of them, by any means, but a good share of
them. How many science fiction fans who do not participate in organized
fandom? Once again, not all but quite a few.
>Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
>far in this thread:
>
>Hard, endless, dangerous work,
Yep, no doubt about that one.
>no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
>euporics,
Good argument for a mixed crew, perhaps with pre vasectomy sperm stored. I
really think we can afford some launch capacity to relieve the tedium. I mean,
a deck or two of cards, come on, we can afford that. Other things that are
small, light and have multiple recreational uses can also be considered.
As for the euporics, I have asked you this before. Do you REALLY think the
typical colonist is going to be all that anxious to set up a moonshine still,
or smuggle a few marijuana seeds, or anything similar? I don't. Here is
something I posted before:
Out of a population of 6 billion or so, I think it should be possible to find 3
or 4 who can meet the criteria of no history of substance abuse, rarely if ever
get falling down drunk, and can put off the brewery and still for an indefinite
period because they WANT to build telescopes, they WANT to conduct chemical
experiments in hard vacuum, they WANT to build a brand new habitat that can be
used exclusively as a laboratory, they WANT to explore the surface, they WANT
to dig holes other than the colony excavations just to find out what is down
there. Work on setting up the brewery? Umm, not today, number 3 telescope is
not tracking properly and I need to find out why.
I don't remember you answering this one before?
>harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
For a long time, yes. I think that once the population is growing, it might be
possible to set up semi independent habitats for single people, families and
small groups. They might have shopping lists that would seem unusual to an
Earthworm. "Let's see, CO2 count is down, so better pick up some carbon.
Nitrogen count seems ok. Oh yeah, the wife asked me to pick up a gallon of
milk too, can't forget that."
>no women,
Not necessarily.
>no prospect of children,
Once again, not necessarily. Le'ts see how the white mice do. Could happen
though.
>yep, a male prison -- with auto- and homosexual relief for sexual drives
>and stills distilling pruno hidden in every toilet facility.
>
>How many guards are we going to transport each shipment of colonials to
>enforce the 'family values' issues? What punishments are they going to
>impose as correction? What do they do when they find they cannot come
>back either? And how long does their dedication to duty last, before
>they start distilling a better brand of pruno for consumption?
Among the U. S. astronaut corps, I am guessing no stills for several years,
don't know about the homosexuality, do they have "don't ask, don't tell?" the
only guards needed would be to limit the launches to the ones who can actually
be carried, don't think punishments will be needed, they will know ahead of
time that it is a one way trip (if we design it that way), and I am guessing
for the rest of their lives.
Pete LaGrange
> Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus far
> in this thread:
>
> Hard, endless, dangerous work,
> no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve euporics,
> harshly strict disciplinary conditions, no women,
> no prospect of children,
>
> . . .
>
> yep, a male prison -- with auto- and homosexual relief for sexual drives
> and stills distilling pruno hidden in every toilet facility.
>
> How many guards are we going to transport each shipment of colonials to
> enforce the 'family values' issues? What punishments are they going to
> impose as correction? What do they do when they find they cannot come back
> either? And how long does their dedication to duty last, before they start
> distilling a better brand of pruno for consumption?
You know, I've been getting a bad feeling about this thread too. I thought
going to the frontier was about getting away from overbearing authority.
--
Pete LaGrange
LV Poker Player
And maybe someday the moon will be settled enough and advanced enough that this
can be true. In the beginning though, we face conditions where any mistake
might kill the whole colony.
Were the crews of the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria sailing to get away from
overbearing authority? From what I understand then, ship captains were
unquestioned, unlimited dictators, with the literal power of life and death
over their crews.
Now if someone can come up with a proposal where the initial crew can do
anything they want, can take any mind altering substance they want with them
because after all this is going to be a free society, they can work when and as
they feel like it because we certainly would not want these poor colonists to
get tired, where launch capability is unlimited (or at least cheap) so that
these things are not cutting into essential shipments, if you come up with a
proposal to do this that would work just as well as what I propose, I am very
interested, I assure you.
Bill Reich
> In article <6526-404...@storefull-3116.bay.webtv.net>,
> wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
>
> > I
> > wonder if the first group will even have children. I don't think they
> > will have time.
>
> Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
> appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
> drafted and sent.
>
> Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
> far in this thread:
>
> Hard, endless, dangerous work,
That's obvious. There have always been people who would do that kind
of work for a dream.
> no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
> euporics,
I think that one will last until the colonists get out of the "state
of permanent emergency." I don't think that state will last anyone's
lifetime, not if a decent habitat is possible at all.
> harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
As above.
> no women,
Who said THAT? If that WERE the case, it would stop me. Even now, when
I can scarcely remember why, women are essential.
> no prospect of children,
There are lots of us for whom that would be no bar. For the eventual
survival of the colony, that would have to change but not being able
to father children wouldn't bother me and there would be others who
would be willing to wait until it became possible.
> yep, a male prison -- with auto- and homosexual relief for sexual drives
> and stills distilling pruno hidden in every toilet facility.
I don't see it that way. Where did you get the no women bit. Of
course, some of the guys might prefer each other but there have to be
women. Who might, if they have any esthetic sense, prefer each other.
But there would be enough with no sense at all, there always are, for
guys like me.
>
> How many guards are we going to transport each shipment of colonials to
> enforce the 'family values' issues? What punishments are they going to
> impose as correction? What do they do when they find they cannot come
> back either? And how long does their dedication to duty last, before
> they start distilling a better brand of pruno for consumption?
"Family values," pew. Actually, I have nothing against family values
when they are not invoked as part of public policy.
--
Will in New Haven
"The silence of a falling star lights up the purple sky
And while I wonder where you are I'm so lonesome I could cry."
Hank Williams from "So Lonesome I Could Cry"
Howard Berkowitz
M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote:
Horrors -- I'm about to commit an on-topic violation. Remember that one
of the less desirable genetic characteristics (from Mordan Claude's
perspective) was a lack of interest in progeny? I'm certainly one such
person, and I've known a reasonable number of people of both sexes that
share that position. There are also quite a number of people of this
persuasion that do have a sense of living on, but in their
non-biological creations.
It may be entirely possible to come up with a few initial groups who
willingly will be sterilized, or perhaps take long-germ,
surgically-reversible-only birth control. I can think of any number of
people in scientific and technological fields who find recreation in
their work, whose discipline is internal. Given the possibility of
forming intimate relationships with like-minded people [1], I don't see
quite the stress you do. These first teams might just be the ones to
hack out the initial colony site.
[1] If reproduction is not a requirement, then it's fairly silly to
insist on heterosexuality. Homesexual relief isn't necessarily
something people do because they have no alternative. I prefer
the ladies myself, but just allow me my pedophobia.
Mac
wrote:
>Rusty--Parents make many decisions that irrevocably affect their
>children. Sometimes the motivation is a better life for the child and
>future generations. Sometimes it is for the self-interest of the
>parent.
>
>Somebody, someday, will take the chance of having the first moon-born
>baby.
>
>I am saying it should be done with a sense of responsibility and concern
>for the child's future.
SNIP SNIP
Where you have humans working and working hard, it will not be long
before some enterprising person makes beer, and another creates the
still and soon, a bar is set-up.
I there are both males and females there, working and surviving, and
both are in the bar, with all due respect, you will soon have children
on the way.
As for some of this thread, yes, there will be hard work.
Probably long hours.
HOWEVER, if whomever is in charge has any brains at all, they will
recognize the vital necessity of downtime, of recreation, and provide
for that.
Some form of basketball in a cavern; forming jazz bands, classical
groups, rock bands...?? Chess, poker... with some oversight to
ensure people do not lose their wages??
Some form of recreation will have to be there.
Probably the "Game Room", the "RecHall" will be constructed at the
same time or soon after the hydroponics, or the bathhouse or...
And, I would not be surprised to find a whore house operating quite
soon.
---Mac
LV Poker Player
>And, I would not be surprised to find a whore house operating quite
>soon.
Possible, and I would FAR rather see this in the beginning than any mind
altering substance.
Bill Reich
> >From: willreich_
>
> >> >I've expressed my concerns about the muscle development of moon babies
> >> >in other posts. In my opinion there should be at least two generations
> >> >of animals before human babies are considered. Remember that children
> >> >will require a lot of time as well as other resources.
> >>
> >> Good points. What would probably be a good idea is to send at least a few
> >> breeding primates (I think chimpanzees are closest to us in the
> evolutionary
> >> tree?) and, as you say, give them a couple of generations minimum to see
> what
> >> happens.
> >
> >Chimpanzees are close enough that sending them without their consent,
> >especially while human volunteers were kept waiting, would be a
> >serious ethical problem for me.
>
> Not for me. I'm sorry, but chimps and other animals are not people. No, I do
> not think we should be intentionally cruel to animals. I do favor prosecution
> of those who are cruel to animals just for the sake of cruelty. I also favor
> animal testing, and if doing so harms the animals involved, OH WELL. Better
> them than us.
I know this is an extreme position but I think saying "chimps are not
people" MIGHT someday be seen as equivalent to saying "Nigras aren't
people." How much thinking, what kind of feelings are going on in the
heads of these beings who share so much of our DNA is not a question I
can answer. There were people, not long ago, who felt that some
cetaceans had close to human sapience. They had less evidence than we
do now for the similarity of chimpanzee (and bonobo) mentation to
human. However, I don't think I could convince people to agree with me
and I am not sure enough to go the John Brown route.
>
> For example, say we have developed some wonder drug that will cure morning
> sickness. Call it Thalidomide, for want of a better name. I think it would be
> an absolutely fantastic idea to give this drug to pregnant chimps before trying
> it on human beings. Then if chimp babies come out missing arms and legs, I
> think these deformed babies should be dealt with humanely. They should be taken
> care of for their natural life spans, or they should be humanely and painlessly
> euthanized. They most definitely should NOT be allowed to painfully starve to
> death due to inability to take care of themselves thanks to the lack of limbs.
> That said, once again, BETTER THEM THAN US.
Even given my opinion, I would say better them than us. However, that
is mighty close to saying "Better that other guy than me."
>
> The part about human volunteers being kept waiting is a more serious objection,
> I admit. Still, I think Jeanette has a valid point. No matter how eager the
> woman is, her lunar baby is NOT a person who has given consent, informed or
> otherwise.
Much as a baby being aborted.
People who can't have heterosexual sex with no risk of pregnancy are
idiots. The urge to have "normal" intercouse goes away a second after
having any of the several substitutes available for heterosexual
couples. Bill Clinton said it wasn't sex. What it wasn't was mutually
satisfying sex. And that would have been easily remedied. My
highschool memories involve a great deal of sex with young women who
kept their stupid hymens until the end of time, as far as I know. No
one missed out on anything. There was no "primal urge" to do something
more. If anyone tries having sex for a few weeks or months without
conventianal intercourse and says that they just absolutely HAVE to go
the baby-maker route, they are probably trying to get pregnant.
> I tend to favor a unisex crew until we are ready for babies, but that is not a
> hard line position.
>
> I suppose one possiblity would be fertile women but men (volunteers) who have
> vasectomies. Then when the time comes for lunar babies (after a few successful
> chimp generations) we send fertile men and/or frozen sperm.
Or we send grownups who have some fucking sense. Even so, someone WILL
eventually put their child in the position of being the unauthorized
first. Somebody walked across Berengia and "condemned" all their
unborn generations to living in the New World.
Of course, your idea of using chimps as experimental subjects leads to
the idea of a Lunar colony that is bi-species. And the chimps WOULD be
a neat addition. AND the colony, even the merely humane ones like you,
would be stuck with their care. Of course, even I wouldn't object to
some tube-tying so that there weren't endless generations of chimps in
an environment that they probably wouldn't handle that well. But if
they seemed to LIKE it, I would want to keep them around.
--
Will in New Haven
"The answer my friend is just pissin' in the wind.
The answer is pissin' in the sink"
Jerry Jeff Walker "Pissin' in the Wind
Jamie Hart
"Pete LaGrange" <oldma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.03.08....@hotmail.com...
> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:29:08 -0800, David M. Silver wrote:
>
> You know, I've been getting a bad feeling about this thread too. I thought
> going to the frontier was about getting away from overbearing authority.
>
that this one, so far, has been discussed as if someone is in charge. One
central authority who decides who goes, what they can take and what they'll
be allowed to do when they get there.
Maybe what we need to do is begin working out what would be needed to keep
one person alive on the moon and how much it would cost to build and launch
it.
Think of a one person habitat, A way of extracting oxygen/nitrogen etc. from
the regolith, water (or means to find ice if it's there) seeds and enough
basic tools to do what's needed. Then allow each person some space for
whatever they want to take, A still, marijuana seeds, scientific equipment,
fertilised chicken eggs, or whatever.
Let anyone who wants to go buy (through sponsorship etc) what he needs and
just go.
Ok, I suspect it would be hugely expensive for the individual, but would
mean that one organisation would not need to put up all the money.
universities could sponsor people to take whatever experimental equipment
would be needed to perform experiments.
I also suspect that a lot of people would end up dead, they have every other
time people migrate to a new frontier, why should this time be different.
It would however keep the colony on a basis I personally feel much happier
about.
LV Poker Player
>> You know, I've been getting a bad feeling about this thread too. I thought
>> going to the frontier was about getting away from overbearing authority.
>Maybe what we need to do is begin working out what would be needed to keep
>one person alive on the moon and how much it would cost to build and launch
>it.
>
>Think of a one person habitat, A way of extracting oxygen/nitrogen etc. from
>the regolith, water (or means to find ice if it's there) seeds and enough
>basic tools to do what's needed. Then allow each person some space for
>whatever they want to take, A still, marijuana seeds, scientific equipment,
>fertilised chicken eggs, or whatever.
>
>Let anyone who wants to go buy (through sponsorship etc) what he needs and
>just go.
You know, this is still possible. Even if we do have a base established, the
moon is still a rather big place. If someone else wants to build an entirely
separate colony with different rules and procedures elsewhere, nothing will
stop them.
>Ok, I suspect it would be hugely expensive for the individual, but would
>mean that one organisation would not need to put up all the money.
>universities could sponsor people to take whatever experimental equipment
>would be needed to perform experiments.
I am hoping that something like this will come about, whether the people are
sent to the initial colony or decide to start up theiir own separate colony.
If they decide to join the initial colony, then they will have to be screened
on the same basis as the initial crew, and they will have to know and follow
whatever safety procedures have been put in place. Maybe someday we will have
figured out how to terraform the surface in spite of the low gravity, maybe
someday living on the moon will be just as safe as living here on Earth, and
maybe someday we can ease up on the restrictions. Until then, I don't think we
have drunken fools endangering everyone. Sorry.
>I also suspect that a lot of people would end up dead, they have every other
>time people migrate to a new frontier, why should this time be different.
>It would however keep the colony on a basis I personally feel much happier
>about.
I feel happier knowing that some people have sense enough to realize the
dangers and difficulties involved, and we only send these people in the
beginning.
jeanette
exchange--candy bars? Who will have the time to staff it? Several
other questions come to mind.
Jeanette--picturing this colony as a relatively small group of
intelligent, well educated, mature, very busy individuals.
Howard Berkowitz
wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
I agree with the latter. Several SF writers, especially dealing with
military themes, have dealt with the issue of mixed crews on combat
vessels, and accepting there will be sex -- but being concerned only
with contraception and being sure to avoid letting romance get in the
way of the line of command. It would make sense for a mixed colony to
recognize human instincts among those scientists that aren't TOTALLY
wrapped up in their work. Even if dormitories are a practical
necessity, there should be some areas around that can be reserved for
privacy.
In other words, it's probably free choice. Again assuming that there's
going to be psychological screening of the first several groups, there's
at least some chance of avoiding people prone to exceptional jealously,
not treating the other gender as equals, etc. I do say "gender" rather
than "sex", because our experience is that in any society not perfectly
matched in sexual phenotype and personal preference, there is bound to
be some homosexuality. If childbearing is actually discouraged, why
discourage safe non-reproductive sex, between people with whatever
plumbing?
At the same time, in a long-term colony, some couples (or greater units,
in respect to the Davis line marriage) may want to bond. This should be
accomodated.
LV Poker Player
>> Jeanette--picturing this colony as a relatively small group of
>> intelligent, well educated, mature, very busy individuals.
>>
>
>I agree with the latter. Several SF writers, especially dealing with
>military themes, have dealt with the issue of mixed crews on combat
>vessels, and accepting there will be sex -- but being concerned only
>with contraception and being sure to avoid letting romance get in the
>way of the line of command. It would make sense for a mixed colony to
>recognize human instincts among those scientists that aren't TOTALLY
>wrapped up in their work. Even if dormitories are a practical
>necessity, there should be some areas around that can be reserved for
>privacy.
>
>In other words, it's probably free choice. Again assuming that there's
>going to be psychological screening of the first several groups, there's
>at least some chance of avoiding people prone to exceptional jealously,
>not treating the other gender as equals, etc. I do say "gender" rather
>than "sex", because our experience is that in any society not perfectly
>matched in sexual phenotype and personal preference, there is bound to
>be some homosexuality. If childbearing is actually discouraged, why
>discourage safe non-reproductive sex, between people with whatever
>plumbing?
>
>At the same time, in a long-term colony, some couples (or greater units,
>in respect to the Davis line marriage) may want to bond. This should be
>accomodated.
>
I agree with both of you. An initial settlement with 3 or 4 people is going to
handle various things one way. After it has been going a decade or two, and
the population is up into the 3 or 4 digit range, things are going to be
handled much differently.
I fail to see why some people here apparently cannot see this?
Mac
wrote:
>>From: Mac
>And, I would not be surprised to find a whore house operating quite
>soon.
>Possible, and I would FAR rather see this in the beginning than any mind
>altering substance.
Basically, I reckon I am saying that you can screen and test all you
want.
You can then send the humans you have selected.
However, once you have a sufficiently sized group ((no, I have no idea
of the numbers but, just for arguments sake, let's say something more
than fifty or a hundred...)) then, once you have that group, be
prepared for some interesting times, humans being humans.
I fully expect the beer and still to come along very soon, even when
the group is fairly small --- I know of several military units that
had rather enterprising individuals almost from the Get-go, and the
First Shirt certainly knew what was going on and he and a few NCO's
made sure that there were limits which were not overstepped.!
And any good Sergeant will know the value of RecRoom/Game Room, and
providing entertainment...
As for other options, I suspect we need a few more humans -- and I
would not be surprised, once you get fifty or a hundred humans there
for them to develop their own enjoyments.
The Colony, the Base will probably start off being very regulated.
It probably has to be just to get built and get running.
However, once over that hump, and expanding, then you can get some
very interesting possibilities.
And yes, if you were getting together a crew I would simply ask for a
moment to grab my toothbrush and be right there with you, even knowing
all of the dangers that lurk and that no sensible insurance company
would even talk to me for quite a while.
---Mac
LV Poker Player
NOW we may be getting somewhere. These are pretty much the points I have been
trying to make all the way through this discussion. Yes, once we have
something more than 50 or 100 people there, conditions and the way things are
run will be MUCH different from when we send those initial 3 or 4, and they are
living in lander(s) until they get the first habitat built. That will improve
things some, but the real improvement will come when they can build a second
habitat that will have room for hydroponics and maybe private living quarters.
Once that happens, can we maybe declare that we are out of the equivalent of
Defcon 1, and perhaps declare a relaxation to Defcon 2? I think so.
Relaxation to Defcon 2 does NOT mean "Hey, we're ready for the still now. How
about those marijuana plants, they ready to be harvested? How about the
poppies and coca plants? Let's have some fun, now that we are away from
Earthside laws!" Not quite. Maybe someday, but not when we have 3 or 4
colonists living in 1 or 2 habitats.
As for the military comparison, I think for quite a while submarines are the
military comparison needed. As has been discussed before, there is zero
tolerance on U. S. subs for any mind altering chemical, legal or illegal. This
seems to result in fewer sunken subs than in the Soviet (now Russian) navy,
where things are apparently less strict.
I don't know if caffiene should be considered mind altering, probably not. As
a matter of crew morale, it might be a good idea to have a coffee plantation be
part of hydroponics fairly soon. That should be the limit though, nothing
stronger. If we do grow coffee, how soon before we actually have coffee from
it? How much space to produce a reasonable amount? If we have one or more
coffee addicts, will it be feasible to send enough coffee concentrate to keep
them going until the plantation is producing?
As for the rec/game room, MOST DEFINITELY. I have already mentioned a deck or
two of playing cards. Anything that can improve crew morale is going to be
worth its weight in hydrogen. Someone else mentioned board games. Sure, find
out what their interests are and send along a few. I don't know about the
basketball court; I'm pretty sure it would have to come after the initial
habitat and hydroponics. It might be the third one though.
Industrial psychologists will have to be consulted for their opinions on just
how hard these people can work, just how many hours they can put in before they
MUST take a break. I'm guessing the typical colonist will be the sort of
person who ground control will have to ORDER to take a break.
Repeating the most important part of the above:
>The Colony, the Base will probably start off being very regulated.
>It probably has to be just to get built and get running.
DEFINITELY, and that is what I have been trying to get across.
I am standing by my assertion on alcohol. We send dedicated professionals who
have a dream of building a lunar colony. They may not be lifetime teetotalers,
but they have NO history of substance abuse. We send them no assistance when
it comes to alcohol production; they are on their own. Then whenever they come
up with a homebrew setup or still on their own, good for them. I'm guessing it
just might take a while. I'm guessing the population will be in the double or
triple digits when this happens.
bookman
"LV Poker Player" <lvpoke...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040308122635...@mb-m28.aol.com...
> >From: Howard Berkowitz
>
<Snip>
> >At the same time, in a long-term colony, some couples (or greater units,
> >in respect to the Davis line marriage) may want to bond. This should be
> >accomodated.
> >
>
> I agree with both of you. An initial settlement with 3 or 4 people is going to
> handle various things one way. After it has been going a decade or two, and
> the population is up into the 3 or 4 digit range, things are going to be
> handled much differently.
>
> I fail to see why some people here apparently cannot see this?
Two things, LV. First off, you might be confusing "failing to see that"
with "failing to agree with you". Those are rather different things, no?
Second, I suggest you have been away from large organizations
for long enough to alter your thinking on this - IMO, you are missing
the concept that initial policy tends to endure, even past the point
where it makes sense. Transition can be very difficult. Also, it
is well to avoid giving orders that you know will be ignored, & all that.
My 2 Mills.
Regards,
Rusty the bookman
Howard Berkowitz
US Naval vessels run on coffee. Other propellants, conventional or
nuclear, are secondary, as are cooling, hydraulic and any other precious
bodily fluids of the ship or boat.
Teresa Redmond
Berkowitz <h...@gettcomm.com> scribbled:
>
>US Naval vessels run on coffee.
So do contractors to the Navy. ;-)
--
~teresa~
AFH Barwench
^..^ "Never try to outstubborn a cat." Robert A. Heinlein ^..^
http://pixelmeow.com/ http://www.heinleinsociety.org/
http://pixelmeow.com/Book_Exchange/index.htm
http://pixelmeow.com/forum/
aim: pixelmeow msn: pixe...@passport.com
fadermcgee
"David M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-C24A2...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <6526-404...@storefull-3116.bay.webtv.net>,
> wo...@webtv.net (jeanette) wrote:
>
> > I
> > wonder if the first group will even have children. I don't think they
> > will have time.
>
> Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
> appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
> drafted and sent.
>
> Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
> far in this thread:
>
> Hard, endless, dangerous work,
> no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
> euporics,
> harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
> no women,
> no prospect of children,
David, you juar described shipboard life in the Royal (British) and United
States Navies from the late 18th century to the formation of the Great White
Fleet. "Wooden ships and iron men" policed the sea lanes and from time to
time protected British and American interests abroad with short, intense
"butcher and bolt" marine infantry and naval actions. Not my idea of fun -
the "no women" and "harsh disciplinary conditions," but there were plenty of
men who accepted that sort of life.
> yep, a male prison -- with auto- and homosexual relief for sexual drives
> and stills distilling pruno hidden in every toilet facility.
Not necessarily. Jeanette has a point - because of the potential for
mutations caused by cosmic ray exposure, it would be prudent to collect
sperm and ova, preserve them cryogenically, and require prospective crew
members - men AND women - to submit to vasectomy/tubal ligation.. The colony
doctor would perform in vitro fertilization and implantation in mothers who
are willing to chance lunar motherhood.
A lunar colony doesn't have to be like the colony in _Aliens III_.
> How many guards are we going to transport each shipment of colonials to
> enforce the 'family values' issues? What punishments are they going to
> impose as correction? What do they do when they find they cannot come
> back either? And how long does their dedication to duty last, before
> they start distilling a better brand of pruno for consumption?
You handle these problems by intensive screening of applicants. In a planet
of four and a half billion people, there have to be a few hundred
technically-proficient, mentally-stable, well-adjusted men and women who are
not only willing but anxious to voluntarily endure the conditions you
mentioned and accept the probability that they are embarking on a one-way
trip. RAH describes the process in broad strokes in _Farmer in the Sky_.
Stable family groups may form for practical reasons among applicants.
In the near future, the gravity problem may be solvable both on the Moon and
in free-fall. Several research groups in the US (some funded by NASA) and
China are working on relatively high-temperature superconductive lattices
that can create an electrogravitic force similar to the pull of gravity - or
a force which counteracts gravity locally.
It may be possible - say, by 2020 - to create living areas with
superconducting lattices under the deck that have full Earth gravity,
eliminating or at least ameliorating any deleterious effects of long-term
exposure to 1/6 G (or microgravity for colonies at the stable Lagrangian
points and elsewhere in space).
Where would the power come from for all this? Perhaps a very high thrust
ion engine (such as the Lorentz Field Accelerator now being studied by NASA
and Russian engineers) or even a cluster of them could be used as the lander
propulsion system, powered by a down-scaled version of General Atomics'
fluidized-bed modular nuclear reactor - and this lander wouild stay down and
provide megawatt quantities of electrical power and heat for the colonists.
The beauty of the Lorentz Field Accelerator concept is that it propels light
ions - lithium, deuterium, normal hydrogen - with great power. Perhaps
aluminum from the lunar regolith might serve as a propellant for this
system, solving the rocket fuel problem. Other landers could travel to and
from the Moon, their reactors powering clusters of Lorentz Field Accelerator
engines that use lunar materials as reaction mass. Not as efficient as a
mass driver, but getting there.
VPF
LV Poker Player
>> >At the same time, in a long-term colony, some couples (or greater units,
>> >in respect to the Davis line marriage) may want to bond. This should be
>> >accomodated.
>> >
>>
>> I agree with both of you. An initial settlement with 3 or 4 people is
>going to
>> handle various things one way. After it has been going a decade or two,
>and
>> the population is up into the 3 or 4 digit range, things are going to be
>> handled much differently.
>>
>> I fail to see why some people here apparently cannot see this?
>
>Two things, LV. First off, you might be confusing "failing to see that"
>with "failing to agree with you". Those are rather different things, no?
>
>Second, I suggest you have been away from large organizations
>for long enough to alter your thinking on this - IMO, you are missing
>the concept that initial policy tends to endure, even past the point
>where it makes sense. Transition can be very difficult. Also, it
>is well to avoid giving orders that you know will be ignored, & all that.
I just might surprise you. For one thing, have I EVER said that alcohol should
be officially prohibited? NO I HAVE NOT. I just see no need to use launch
capability to provide the manufacturing facilities. I also see no need to send
people who are going to be tempted right from the very beginning to build a
still, or smuggle marijuana seeds.
For the <you count 'em> time, THE TIME FOR ALCOHOL IS WHEN THESE PEOPLE GET
AROUND TO MAKING IT THEMSELVES, USING FACILITIES THEY HAVE BUILT FOR
THEMSELVES. I think your typical colonist is going to be more interested in
building a bigger telescope than in building a still, for quite a while.
As for initial policies enduring, you know, I might surprise you again. Maybe
I did think about it. One thing that I have not posted until now is my thought
that we might want a civilian constitution right from the very beginning. Yep,
we maybe have a president, a military commander subordinate to that president,
a legislative body (consisting of one body) and a Chief Justice (well, ok, the
only Justice). If we only send 3 people, president and military commander
might have to be combined. We have a written constitution specifying exactly
how things will run in the beginning (I'm afraid that military commander will
have considerable emergency powers) and how it is to be amended. Amendments
and other legislation will almost certainly be by popular vote for a while, but
as the population grows the constitution can be amended to move away from
direct democracy toward a republic.
It seems kind of silly, and in fact for 3 or 4 people it is kind of silly, but
this is supposed to be a permanent colonization effort, not a temporary base.
Having a tradition of a written constitution before we even leave Earth might
be a good idea in this regard.
In any case, for ANY of this to happen, this initial crew has to survive long
enough to build something.
Dr. Rufo
bookman wrote:
<< big ole snip >
> Also, it
> is well to avoid giving orders that you know will be ignored, & all that.
>
Sound advice, Rusty, in familial, as well as commercial and
governmental venues.
Howard Berkowitz
Something that we don't necessarily look for in astronaut selection, but
would be relevant here, is a decent knowledge of history.
>
> I just might surprise you. For one thing, have I EVER said that alcohol
> should
> be officially prohibited? NO I HAVE NOT. I just see no need to use
> launch
> capability to provide the manufacturing facilities. I also see no need
> to send
> people who are going to be tempted right from the very beginning to build
> a
> still, or smuggle marijuana seeds.
>
> For the <you count 'em> time, THE TIME FOR ALCOHOL IS WHEN THESE PEOPLE
> GET
> AROUND TO MAKING IT THEMSELVES, USING FACILITIES THEY HAVE BUILT FOR
> THEMSELVES. I think your typical colonist is going to be more interested
> in
> building a bigger telescope than in building a still, for quite a while.
You'll have chemists and microbiologists -- making a still shouldn't be
a challenge. Making GOOD stuff might be another.
Mac
<h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
>In article <20040308155924...@mb-m04.aol.com>,
>lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
>
>> >From: Mac
>>
>> >>And, I would not be surprised to find a whore house operating quite
>> >>soon.
>> >********************
>> >>Possible, and I would FAR rather see this in the beginning than any
>> >>mind
>> >>altering substance.
>> >**********************
>> >Basically, I reckon I am saying that you can screen and test all you
>> >want.
>> >You can then send the humans you have selected.
>> >However, once you have a sufficiently sized group ((no, I have no idea
>> >of the numbers but, just for arguments sake, let's say something more
>> >than fifty or a hundred...)) then, once you have that group, be
>> >prepared for some interesting times, humans being humans.
>> >
>> >I fully expect the beer and still to come along very soon, even when
>> >the group is fairly small --- I know of several military units that
>> >had rather enterprising individuals almost from the Get-go, and the
>> >First Shirt certainly knew what was going on and he and a few NCO's
>> >made sure that there were limits which were not overstepped.!
SNIP SNIP
****************** **********************
HOWARD B.
>US Naval vessels run on coffee. Other propellants, conventional or
>nuclear, are secondary, as are cooling, hydraulic and any other precious
>bodily fluids of the ship or boat.
****************** ****************
Oh, yes!
Army also!
And, especially Night-Shifts!
Hmmmmmmmmm?
For those of us who prefer to work Nights, it would be appreciated if
the Cubic provided is not only secure, but "sound-proof"...
And, when on duty, how are we going to handle the coffee issue???
---Mac
Engr Bohn
Hail, Mac! We who are about to post salute you.
> Oh, yes!
> Army also!
> And, especially Night-Shifts!
> Hmmmmmmmmm?
> For those of us who prefer to work Nights, it would be appreciated if
> the Cubic provided is not only secure, but "sound-proof"...
> And, when on duty, how are we going to handle the coffee issue???
Jiminy Cricket! I used to prefer night shifts (and, yes, by the 10th or
11th hour, my caffiene intake went up markedly). Frankly, though, I'd
prefer to avoid night shifts at Luna Base -- by the twelfth or
thirteenth Earth-day, I don't think even Juan Valdez' finest would keep
me awake! <g>
Hmm... Columbia coffee is supposed to be really good because it grows in
the thinner air of the mountains (I think it's because this forces the
growth cycle to slow down). We could artificially reproduce this
situation and create a truly premium coffee bean... and have Luna's
first export (with prices artificially elevated Dirtside due to the
scarcity of "Luna Coffee".
Take care,
cb
--
Christopher A. Bohn ____________|____________
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~bohn/ ' ** ** " (o) " ** ** '
9 March 1993 -- A Lockheed SR-71A Blackbird makes its first
scientific
flight for NASA at the Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards AFB
CA.
Dave Schrader
>
> Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
> appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
> drafted and sent.
>
> Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
> far in this thread:
>
> Hard, endless, dangerous work,
> no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
> euporics,
> harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
> no women,
> no prospect of children,
> --
> David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
> "The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
> Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88
How about if we just run the ad that says
MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
SUCCESS.
that pretty much covers it, doesn't it?
Dave Schrader
Dave Schrader
> As for the rec/game room, MOST DEFINITELY. I have already mentioned a deck or
> two of playing cards. Anything that can improve crew morale is going to be
> worth its weight in hydrogen. Someone else mentioned board games. Sure, find
> out what their interests are and send along a few.
I think that what you'll want to send other than a few games is the
parts for making games, or at least an adaptable set of pieces. This
goes along with the whole colony idea in that you ship the means of
production instead of the finished goods.
One company currently succeeds here on earth using this model, it's
called Cheapass games, located on the web at http://www.cheapass.com/ .
They don't sell you the parts for the games, unless you can't make them
or find them yourself, such as a particular deck of cards or a map.
You're expected to provide your own dice, counters, and pieces. They
sell you the idea behind the game, the rules.
The moon colony would need some programmable flat sheet for the large
playing area displays, and perhaps some stiff programmable cards along
with other game supplies. When you get tired of one game, call up a new
one from the computer memory or have a new one transmitted from earth.
Dave Schrader
Dave Schrader
<snips>
> Think of a one person habitat, A way of extracting oxygen/nitrogen etc. from
> the regolith, water (or means to find ice if it's there) seeds and enough
> basic tools to do what's needed. Then allow each person some space for
> whatever they want to take, A still, marijuana seeds, scientific equipment,
> fertilised chicken eggs, or whatever.
> Ok, I suspect it would be hugely expensive for the individual, but would
> mean that one organisation would not need to put up all the money.
> universities could sponsor people to take whatever experimental equipment
> would be needed to perform experiments.
>
> I also suspect that a lot of people would end up dead, they have every other
> time people migrate to a new frontier, why should this time be different.
> It would however keep the colony on a basis I personally feel much happier
> about.
okay, what are your rules for salvaging the habitats that are no longer
occupied? Can I get anything for continuing to run that abandoned
experiment?
Dave Schrader
David M. Silver
wrote:
> "David M. Silver" wrote:
> >
> > Few, if any, are very likely to apply to go then, if that condition
> > appertains -- maybe convicts will apply, but the rest will have to be
> > drafted and sent.
> >
> > Let's summarize what I've read as necessary conclusions expressed thus
> > far in this thread:
> >
> > Hard, endless, dangerous work,
> > no usual recreations, even during off-duty periods, that involve
> > euporics,
> > harshly strict disciplinary conditions,
> > no women,
> > no prospect of children,
>
>
> How about if we just run the ad that says
>
> MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
> WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
> DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
> DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
> SUCCESS.
>
> that pretty much covers it, doesn't it?
>
> Dave Schrader
Yeah, Dave; but then we don't have Star to offer to help out along the
way. The rule makers seem to want to make sure we don't have anything
else, either.
"Are You A Coward? Then this is not for you. . . . "
Go get something to mix with water from Jani, Teresa, or one of the
other ladies at the bar. :)
LV Poker Player
>> MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
>> WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
>> DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
>> DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
>> SUCCESS.
For one thing, WRONG, WRONG WRONG! The lunar night is only 2 weeks, not
"MONTHS." :)
>>
>> that pretty much covers it, doesn't it?
>>
>> Dave Schrader
>
>Yeah, Dave; but then we don't have Star to offer to help out along the
>way. The rule makers seem to want to make sure we don't have anything
>else, either.
>
>"Are You A Coward? Then this is not for you. . . . "
>
>Go get something to mix with water from Jani, Teresa, or one of the
>other ladies at the bar. :)
Well, we already have 2 volunteers, Mac and me (didn't they do a movie about
that a few years ago?). Seems to me that we don't really need Star, although
she wouldn't hurt, especially if we want a crew of 3 or 4 rather than just 2.
I would go with 2 though, if that is really all we can get. I bet Mac would
too. Ok, he might prefer to go it alone, since he might not consider my
presence to be an asset. I'm not sure on this one. There are four big
problems with me on the crew, one solvable, one partially solvable, and two
others that cannot be solved.
I am overweight. If necessary, I would go on the biggest crash diet in the
history of crash dieting, to go on this mission. I am 49, and that one cannot
be solved. I am a clumsy uncoordinated klutz due to having Asperger Syndrome,
another unsolvable one. I have none of the skills needed. I would go on an
18+ hour/day, 7 day/week training schedule to remedy this, espcially since it
might help me keep my mind off food, but at my age and without physical
coordination I could never obtain a professional level in the skills needed in
any reasonable time frame (probably not at all).
As for the snide comment about "The rule makers seem to want to make sure we
don't have anything else, either." Bullshit. BULLSHIT. *BULLSHIT*.
**BULLSHIT.** ***BULLSHIT!!*** Is there any other way to emphasize the concept
of "BULLSHIT!"? Let me know if there is, because I want to emphasize it as
much as possible.
Does anyone even remember my initial comments on alcohol? I call it the
"DADTDH" policy. That stands for "Don't ask, don't tell, don't help." We send
a small, professional, volunteer, VOLUNTEER, *VOLUNTEER* **VOLUNTEER**
***VOLUNTEER!!!*** crew of about 3 or 4 who, in addition to being
professionally qualified in the skills needed, in addition to being young and
physically healthy, have a dream. Their dream is not only a color blind
society, but a colony on the moon. Did you notice that while I mentioned
things like small, professional, professionally qualified, young, physically
healthy, and having a dream, none of them was really emphasized. I leave it as
an excercize for the student to figure out which of the traits I considered
most important in the list given in the first few sentences of this paragraph.
Are you REALLY going to tell me that we cannot find a crew of about 3 or 4 who
meets all of the above criteria, somewhere in the Earth's population?
Now, as for my DADTDH policy. For one thing, I am not a rule maker at this
point. For another, the chances of me ever being a rule maker in this project
are somewhere around nil and none. I recommend that you buy a Powerball
ticket, rather than betting on me setting the rules for a lunar colony project.
However...if by some act of God (nothing less will suffice)...I do end up
setting the rules...would someone PLEASE tell me why DADTDH is such a terrible
idea? After doing so, would you PLEASE give me your own recommendation? If
that recommendation is that a lunar colony is totally impossible because
alcohol will ruin things...well...I am willing to listen, although I still
think this issue can be overcome.
To summarize: DADTDH means that we send NO purpose built facilities for alchol
production. We send these guys (or guys and gals, or even gals) mining,
smelting, metal working, and welding equipment. They use this to get a habitat
built so that they no longer have to live in their landers. We send them seeds
to set up hydroponics. We send them quite a few other things. When it comes
to fermenting the hydroponics products, and perhaps distilling the products of
said fermentation, though, they are on their own . We send them nothing
whatsoever to help them out, unless it is something that we would send anyway,
such as a still for reclamation of water.
As for non mind altering recreation, I am willing to consider just about
anything. Playing cards are obvious. In a mixed colony, privacy for
heterosexual play should be a high priority. In a unisex colony, I guess it
should depend on the orientation of the colonists. Maybe we should consider
only a like minded crew when it comes to this? Board games? Certainly, let's
find out what our crew likes. A basketball court? Well, they will have to
build it themselves, but I think we can send a basketball. Any other ideas?
I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks is wrong
with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU SUGGEST???
fadermcgee
"Engr Bohn" <BravoOscarH...@cis.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message
news:lsi3c.10273$t16.6...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
> Good morning,
>
> Hail, Mac! We who are about to post salute you.
>
> > Oh, yes!
> > Army also!
> > And, especially Night-Shifts!
> > Hmmmmmmmmm?
> > For those of us who prefer to work Nights, it would be appreciated if
> > the Cubic provided is not only secure, but "sound-proof"...
> > And, when on duty, how are we going to handle the coffee issue???
>
> Jiminy Cricket! I used to prefer night shifts (and, yes, by the 10th or
> 11th hour, my caffiene intake went up markedly). Frankly, though, I'd
> prefer to avoid night shifts at Luna Base -- by the twelfth or
> thirteenth Earth-day, I don't think even Juan Valdez' finest would keep
> me awake! <g>
>
> Hmm... Columbia coffee is supposed to be really good because it grows in
> the thinner air of the mountains (I think it's because this forces the
> growth cycle to slow down). We could artificially reproduce this
> situation and create a truly premium coffee bean... and have Luna's
> first export (with prices artificially elevated Dirtside due to the
> scarcity of "Luna Coffee".
I like the Colombian Arabica bean, but I'd vote for variety - Kona being a
particular favorite of mine (I think that it, too, thrives on high altitudes
along with volcanic soil) and Jamaica Blue Mountain also should be
considered. Hey, the added cost of the fancier coffee tree stock is
miniscule compared to the freight charges - so why not go for superlative
coffee if you're going to all that trouble anyway?
VPF
fadermcgee
> >From: "David M. Silver"
>
> >> MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
> >> WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
> >> DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
> >> DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
> >> SUCCESS.
>
> For one thing, WRONG, WRONG WRONG! The lunar night is only 2 weeks, not
> "MONTHS." :)
Add 'em up and you get "months of complete darkness" :-)
My objections to alcohol voiced in the last thread on this topic were
intended to promote discussion and to get people thinking harder about how
to handle the problem of people getting all f*ed up in a lunar colony.
Face it, just living in a tin can surrounded by vacuum and hard solar
radiation, a quarter-million miles from the nearest fresh air is probably as
demanding as driving a car on Earth. Seems to me that you'd want to
approach the alcohol question verrrry carefully.
> Does anyone even remember my initial comments on alcohol? I call it the
> "DADTDH" policy. That stands for "Don't ask, don't tell, don't help." We
send
> a small, professional, volunteer, VOLUNTEER, *VOLUNTEER* **VOLUNTEER**
> ***VOLUNTEER!!!*** crew of about 3 or 4 who, in addition to being
> professionally qualified in the skills needed, in addition to being young
and
> physically healthy, have a dream. Their dream is not only a color blind
> society, but a colony on the moon. Did you notice that while I mentioned
> things like small, professional, professionally qualified, young,
physically
> healthy, and having a dream, none of them was really emphasized. I leave
it as
> an excercize for the student to figure out which of the traits I
considered
> most important in the list given in the first few sentences of this
paragraph.
>
> Are you REALLY going to tell me that we cannot find a crew of about 3 or 4
who
> meets all of the above criteria, somewhere in the Earth's population?
Hah. We wouldn't have to search long - just announce a competitive
personnel search, set the standards as high as you'd like, and watch the
athletes with graduate degrees in astronomy, physics, medicine and
engineering crowd in.
> Now, as for my DADTDH policy. For one thing, I am not a rule maker at
this
> point. For another, the chances of me ever being a rule maker in this
project
> are somewhere around nil and none. I recommend that you buy a Powerball
> ticket, rather than betting on me setting the rules for a lunar colony
project.
Should I ever be so lucky as to hit the Powerball jackpot, I'll let you know
from the sat phone link on my 42 foot Egg Harbor as the little woman and I
explore the coastline of British Columbia and the western US. Space will
just have to wait..
> However...if by some act of God (nothing less will suffice)...I do end up
> setting the rules...would someone PLEASE tell me why DADTDH is such a
terrible
> idea? After doing so, would ypu PLEASE give me your own recommendation?
If
> that recommendation is that a lunar colony is totally impossible because
> alcohol will ruin things...well...I am willing to listen, although I still
> think this issue can be overcome.
I think that much depends on the crew.
There's an old expression: In a city full of honest people, only a few
policemen are needed; in a city full of dishonest people, ten thousand
policemen are not enough (the guy who coined that one had apparently visited
Los Angeles).
A crew selected for superior character and dedication to the mission will
probably not abuse alcohol - at least not to the point where they become a
danger to themselves and everyone else. But it's a potential pitfall
station design people are going to have to bear in mind. Airlocks and such
should be designed with the possibility that people who've had a bit of the
creature or a Tylenol #3 may be onboard.
> To summarize: DADTDH means that we send NO purpose built facilities for
alchol
> production. We send these guys (or guys and gals, or even gals) mining,
> smelting, metal working, and welding equipment. They use this to get a
habitat
> built so that they no longer have to live in their landers. We send them
seeds
> to set up hydroponics. We send them quite a few other things. When it
comes
> to fermenting the hydroponics products, and perhaps distilling the
products of
> said fermentation, though, they are on their own . We send them nothing
> whatsoever to help them out, unless it is something that we would send
anyway,
> such as a still for reclamation of water.
Agreed. Making the distillery a clandestine and voluntary effort on the
part of the colonists also gives the sponsors of the project a little
protection in case the still blows or one of the colonists gets blotto and
kills himself or others through drunken carelessness.
> As for non mind altering recreation, I am willing to consider just about
> anything. Playing cards are obvious.
There's a book called "The Exitential Pleasure of Engineering" which I
commend to readers of a technical bent. It may be that some of the crew may
enjoy the act of designing or even building advanced features for the colony
in their "off watch" time.
Oh, yeah, now that I think about it, plenty of computers - one
personally-assigned laptop per colonist, PDAs optional. Make sure they come
with Ethernet ports so they can be LANed together for multi-player Doom and
other lofty pursuits.
> In a mixed colony, privacy for
> heterosexual play should be a high priority. In a unisex colony, I guess
it
> should depend on the orientation of the colonists. Maybe we should
consider
> only a like minded crew when it comes to this?
Proposed rule re: lunar sex: Just don't do it on camera and scare the good
folks at home.
> Board games? Certainly, let's
> find out what our crew likes. A basketball court? Well, they will have
to
> build it themselves, but I think we can send a basketball. Any other
ideas?
How about additional electronic and electromechanical parts so the
gadgeteers among the crew can make robotic help - maybe a remotely operated
lunar soil mover to dig those big holes we'll need and pile the dirt over
the habitat as micrometeoroid protection. Probably some need that I can't
think of will arise and our heroes will play around with robot parts and
develop a solution.
> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks is
wrong
> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
SUGGEST???
Sounds good to me, LV.
Quibble:
Where you say "Carbon dioxide is also needed, and I think that if it is
present in the atmosphere in larger amounts than on Earth, this would
encourage plants to grow faster," this is a potential pitfall.
Increasing the CO2 level in the habitat over the normal 40mm partial
pressure is dangerous - the colonists may begin to experience a syndrome
called "hypercapnia." The symptoms of hypercapnia include shortness of
breath, headache, dizziness, nausea, a feeling of "warmth", and eventual
acidosis as carbon dioxide accumulates in the body as dissolved carbonic
acid. After acidosis has set in for a while, the body undergoes adaptive
changes which may result in permanent damage to the body.
A separate greenhouse might solve the problem, workers in the unit being
careful to use closed-circuit respirators.
That's all that stuck out as an "error"
VPF
David M. Silver
lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
[snip screed]
>
> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks is
> wrong
> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
> SUGGEST???
Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV. It may amaze you
how grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most
older candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
"We can't expect to keep them in the nest. . . . this country was not
built by people who were afraid to go. Ross's great-great-grandfather
crossed the mountains in a Conestoga wagon and homesteaded this place.
He was nineteen. His bride was seventeen. . . . I would hate to think I
had let the blood run thin."
You've lived the past forty years in a society that thinks throwing
rules and laws at every situation will "protect" us; in fact you profess
to oppose this and call yourself a libertarian in so doing (and probably
spend a great deal of your time thinking of ways to "bend, fold,
spindle, and mutilate" the Nanny system we have); yet the conditions you
would impose upon a lunar colony reflect an over preoccupation on
'protecting' the colony from itself, keeping them in their 'nest.'
LV Poker Player
>A crew selected for superior character and dedication to the mission will
>probably not abuse alcohol - at least not to the point where they become a
>danger to themselves and everyone else. But it's a potential pitfall
>station design people are going to have to bear in mind. Airlocks and such
>should be designed with the possibility that people who've had a bit of the
>creature or a Tylenol #3 may be onboard.
We have discussed this before. The airlocks should be designed so that it is
absolutely impossible for a single person to open both doors at once. If there
is some extraordinary circumstance where we really do want to evacuate the
entire colony, it should be similar to current nuclear warhead policy, where a
minimum of two people are needed to execute the sequence of opening both
airlock doors at once.
>How about additional electronic and electromechanical parts so the
>gadgeteers among the crew can make robotic help - maybe a remotely operated
>lunar soil mover to dig those big holes we'll need and pile the dirt over
>the habitat as micrometeoroid protection. Probably some need that I can't
>think of will arise and our heroes will play around with robot parts and
>develop a solution.
As for "some need that I can't think of will arise" this is not the first time
I have proposed a lunar colony in this forum. My first idea was a totally self
supporting colony that would need no imports from Earth right from the
begining, after the initial establishment. Then I started considering the
startup costs, and said 'oops!'. It looked like those startup costs would be
in the hundreds of billions minimum, and maybe up into the trillions. When I
was considering this large scale, self supporting colony, I made a prediction.
It was that no matter how much Earthside planning and simulation was involved,
we would still run into unexpeceted problems. Welll, now that I realize that I
have to scale back my initial dream, I predict that we will run into even more
unexpected problems than we would have with my initial large scale proposal.
>Where you say "Carbon dioxide is also needed, and I think that if it is
>present in the atmosphere in larger amounts than on Earth, this would
>encourage plants to grow faster," this is a potential pitfall.
>
>Increasing the CO2 level in the habitat over the normal 40mm partial
>pressure is dangerous - the colonists may begin to experience a syndrome
>called "hypercapnia." The symptoms of hypercapnia include shortness of
>breath, headache, dizziness, nausea, a feeling of "warmth", and eventual
>acidosis as carbon dioxide accumulates in the body as dissolved carbonic
>acid. After acidosis has set in for a while, the body undergoes adaptive
>changes which may result in permanent damage to the body.
>
>A separate greenhouse might solve the problem, workers in the unit being
>careful to use closed-circuit respirators.
This is another problem that has been discussed before. HOW MUCH can we
increase the CO2 level? I don't know. Maybe a little , maybe quite a bit.
Some Earthside simulation would probably be a good idea. As you say,
respirators for hydroponics wrokers might be a good idea if it turns out that
we really cannot tolerate a high level of CO2 without problems.
Experimentation, planning, and simulation. THESE ARE NEEDED!.
LV Poker Player
>> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks is
>> wrong
>> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
>> SUGGEST???
>
>
>Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV.
The absolute best idea I have seen in this or any other thread I have seen in
quite a while. Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh for quite a while.
Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh ever. Since I consider the denizens of
afh to quite a bit above the average of the average general population, that is
saying something.
>It may amaze you
>how grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most
>older candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
Then again, maybe not. Maybe I think a highly dedicated group of professionals
with a dream can be more grown up than around 99.999999999999999999999% + of
the human race.
>"We can't expect to keep them in the nest. . . . this country was not
>built by people who were afraid to go. Ross's great-great-grandfather
>crossed the mountains in a Conestoga wagon and homesteaded this place.
>He was nineteen. His bride was seventeen. . . . I would hate to think I
>had let the blood run thin."
Completely, wholehearted, 100% agreement. No, I MOST DEFINITELY did not NOT
*NOT* **NOT** ***NOT*** say 99.99999999999999 + agreement. I said 100%
agreement. What is your point?
>You've lived the past forty years in a society that thinks throwing
>rules and laws at every situation will "protect" us; in fact you profess
>to oppose this and call yourself a libertarian in so doing (and probably
>spend a great deal of your time thinking of ways to "bend, fold,
>spindle, and mutilate" the Nanny system we have); yet the conditions you
>would impose upon a lunar colony reflect an over preoccupation on
>'protecting' the colony from itself, keeping them in their 'nest.'
You are a liar or blithering idiot. Either way, DO NOT apply for the
selecition process for the initial colony. Period. PERIOD. *PERIOD*
**PERIOD** ***PERIOD***!!!" Is there any other way to emphasize
***PERIOD!!!*** If so, please tell me, because I want ***PERIOD*** emphasized
in the most emphatic way that ***PERIOD!!!*** has ever been emphasized in the
entire history of the human race. Why? because you must be a liar or a
blithering idiot, that is why. I do not want liars or blithering idiiots in
the initial crew. Period. PERIOD. And so on, let me know if there is any way
to emphasize this any more than I have already done so.
All right. My initial suggestion was that we let the colonists make their own
decisions. We do not send anyone with a history substance abuse, or blithering
idiocy, or lying, in the initial crew. We also send no purpose built alcohol
manufacturing equipment. If they want to ferment things, or distill the
products of said fermentation, they have to do this on their own, with no help
from Earthside launches. Maybe someday this will happen. I hope it takes a
while though, since (a) we will be selecting a very small (b) and very highly
trained and (c) very highly dedicate crew who (d) have a dream. I really wish
I could meet the qualifications of (b).
If we really cannot find anyone else on Earth who will do this, Mac and I
volunteer. If he decides that I would be more of a liability than an asset, I
volunteer to step aside in his favor.
Sean
"LV Poker Player"
<snippins>
> You are a liar or blithering idiot. Either way, DO NOT apply for the
> selecition process for the initial colony. Period. PERIOD. *PERIOD*
> **PERIOD** ***PERIOD***!!!" Is there any other way to emphasize
> ***PERIOD!!!*** If so, please tell me, because I want ***PERIOD***
emphasized
> in the most emphatic way that ***PERIOD!!!*** has ever been emphasized in
the
> entire history of the human race. Why? because you must be a liar or a
> blithering idiot, that is why. I do not want liars or blithering idiiots
in
> the initial crew. Period. PERIOD. And so on, let me know if there is any
way
> to emphasize this any more than I have already done so.
Well, you only said "period" 10 times. When my kids were younger they could
repeat the same word for hours and it would get *really* annoying. On the
other hand my primary school teacher encouraged me to avoid using the same
word more than once unless absolutely necessary. He introduced me to the
magic of thesauri.
Sean
(Do I reprise Sir? PERIOD.)
Engr Bohn
Hail, fadermcgee! We who are about to post salute you.
> "LV Poker Player" <lvpoke...@aol.com> wrote...
>
>>>From: "David M. Silver"
>>
>>>>MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
>>>>WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
>>>>DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
>>>>DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
>>>>SUCCESS.
>>
>>For one thing, WRONG, WRONG WRONG! The lunar night is only 2 weeks, not
>>"MONTHS." :)
>
> Add 'em up and you get "months of complete darkness" :-)
Well, if you're looking at the cumulative "complete darkness", then
someone on Luna would have as much cumulative complete darkness as
someone on Dirt.
[...]
Take care,
cb
--
Christopher A. Bohn ____________|____________
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~bohn/ ' ** ** " (o) " ** ** '
"The commanders of armies are more to be pitied than one would
think. Without listening to them, all the world denounces them,
the newspapers ridicule them, and yet, of the thousands who
condemn them, there is not one that could command even the smallest
unit." - Frederick the Great
fadermcgee
> >From: "fadermcgee"
<ka-snip>
> >Where you say "Carbon dioxide is also needed, and I think that if it is
> >present in the atmosphere in larger amounts than on Earth, this would
> >encourage plants to grow faster," this is a potential pitfall.
> >
> >Increasing the CO2 level in the habitat over the normal 40mm partial
> >pressure is dangerous - the colonists may begin to experience a syndrome
> >called "hypercapnia." The symptoms of hypercapnia include shortness of
> >breath, headache, dizziness, nausea, a feeling of "warmth", and eventual
> >acidosis as carbon dioxide accumulates in the body as dissolved carbonic
> >acid. After acidosis has set in for a while, the body undergoes adaptive
> >changes which may result in permanent damage to the body.
> >
> >A separate greenhouse might solve the problem, workers in the unit being
> >careful to use closed-circuit respirators.
>
> This is another problem that has been discussed before. HOW MUCH can we
> increase the CO2 level? I don't know. Maybe a little , maybe quite a
bit.
> Some Earthside simulation would probably be a good idea. As you say,
> respirators for hydroponics wrokers might be a good idea if it turns out
that
> we really cannot tolerate a high level of CO2 without problems.
> Experimentation, planning, and simulation. THESE ARE NEEDED!.
The literature of technical diving shows that 45 mm (partial) of CO2 is the
point at which experienced divers using rebreather systems (which have a CO2
adsorber in-circuit) start having symptoms associated with hypercapnia. The
literature also admits to a dearth of data regarding the onset of
hypercapnia. In addition, the only long-term data we have on hypercapnia is
in those patients with emphysema or other COPD - I haven't been able to find
long-term data on hypercapnia in healthy volunteers.
We'll need to bring a large supply of lime or another CO2 adsorber for the
life-support system; fortunately, you can bake lime that has absorbed as
much CO2 as possible (capturing the CO2 released to be re-introduced into
the station ecology) and re-use it. It may be possible to have a CO2
absorption system that does this automatically. Ideally, the station would
have enough vegetation that mechanical CO2 absorption is for emergencies
only, the plants taking CO2 in as fast or faster than the humans can expire
it - dynamic equilibrium.
The equlibrium relationship between plants, humans and CO2 in the station
atmosphere will probably impose an upper limit on the maximum CO2 levels -
excess CO2 will be captured by the plants and used to make sugars and other
carbohydrates. We need to do another biosphere experiment with a
closed-cycle atmosphere, this time not "cheating." My prediction is that
there will be an optimum CO2 level close to the 40 mm (partial) Earth-normal
value that a closed cycle with plants and humans will maintain without
adjustment by CO2 adsorbers.
VPF
Howard Berkowitz
> >A separate greenhouse might solve the problem, workers in the unit being
> >careful to use closed-circuit respirators.
>
> This is another problem that has been discussed before. HOW MUCH can we
> increase the CO2 level? I don't know. Maybe a little , maybe quite a
> bit.
> Some Earthside simulation would probably be a good idea. As you say,
> respirators for hydroponics wrokers might be a good idea if it turns out
> that
> we really cannot tolerate a high level of CO2 without problems.
> Experimentation, planning, and simulation. THESE ARE NEEDED!.
I'd suggest turning around the problem a bit. The effects of long- and
short-term exposure by humans to carbon dioxide are well understood.
Let's simply say that I don't believe carbon dioxide is ever added to
breathing mixtures, as it once was, but there may be changes in drugs,
oxygen content delivered, type of respirator used, etc., depending on
physiologic state and several physiological parameters of respiration.
Any textbook on medical physiology will give you the points at which it
will have effects. Without going into a lot of detail, multiple
metabolic factors can be involved, and there are different ways to
measure carbon dioxide blood levels (as opposed, say, to the related but
different bicarbonate ion level).
Earth testing is needed to determine the extent to which increased
carbon dioxide may or may not accelerate growth in the particular plant
mix you've picked for hydroponics. It will depend on the physical setup
-- can significant amounts of carbon dioxide get into the hydroponic
liquid, as well as being absorbed directly by the plant? Carbon dioxide
in water changes its pH. The oxygen-carbon dioxide ratios optimal for
your plants may very well be interdependent on other factors, such as
the nutrient mix in the growth medium
fadermcgee
> >From: "David M. Silver"
>
> >> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks
is
> >> wrong
> >> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
> >> SUGGEST???
> >
> >
> >Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV.
>
> The absolute best idea I have seen in this or any other thread I have seen
in
> quite a while. Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh for quite a while.
> Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh ever. Since I consider the denizens
of
> afh to quite a bit above the average of the average general population,
that is
> saying something.
>
> >It may amaze you
> >how grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most
> >older candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
My analogy between living in a closed artificial environment 250,000 miles
from the nearest fresh air and driving a car is actually strengthened by
this statement. Here in Colorado we've had several tragic and fatal traffic
accidents caused by seventeen and nineteen year-olds who lacked the
necessary judgment to drink and not drive, or drive and not drink.
> Then again, maybe not. Maybe I think a highly dedicated group of
professionals
> with a dream can be more grown up than around 99.999999999999999999999% +
of
> the human race.
I am in total agreement with that. In fact, I think that the people
selected for this job will probably put off making the still for a long
time, simply because the business of building and maintaining a lunar
habitat is a 24/7 task. But LV's idea has great merit. If the grown-ups we
send to the Moon have enough time on their hands and spare parts to make a
still, they probably have reduced the recurring work load at the station to
levels that would permit crew members to work out shifts for drinking.
If you're really careful in crew selection, you can probably find four
people who can hold their liquor among the pool of otherwise qualified
candidates. Probably it would be a good idea to screen out people who are
prone to pathological intoxication (some people have lower levels of ethanol
dehydrogenase than normal and can get drunk on one or two drinks). It's
unlikely that a home-made still would produce enough liquor to create a
severe intoxication problem among four adults with reasonably efficient
carbohydrate metabolism.
> >"We can't expect to keep them in the nest. . . . this country was not
> >built by people who were afraid to go. Ross's great-great-grandfather
> >crossed the mountains in a Conestoga wagon and homesteaded this place.
> >He was nineteen. His bride was seventeen. . . . I would hate to think I
> >had let the blood run thin."
Reminds me of one of my ancestors who landed in New Orleans from Munich just
after the War Between the States as a pre-teen, grew up, married at 18, and
built several homesteads, gradually moving what became a large family even
by 1800s standards halfway across South Louisiana.
> Completely, wholehearted, 100% agreement. No, I MOST DEFINITELY did not
NOT
> *NOT* **NOT** ***NOT*** say 99.99999999999999 + agreement. I said 100%
> agreement. What is your point?
>
> >You've lived the past forty years in a society that thinks throwing
> >rules and laws at every situation will "protect" us; in fact you profess
> >to oppose this and call yourself a libertarian in so doing (and probably
> >spend a great deal of your time thinking of ways to "bend, fold,
> >spindle, and mutilate" the Nanny system we have); yet the conditions you
> >would impose upon a lunar colony reflect an over preoccupation on
> >'protecting' the colony from itself, keeping them in their 'nest.'
A number of us libertarians recognize that rights and responsibilities go
hand in hand. The colonists have a responsibility to the people who
financed the mission to do all in their power to make the mission a success.
This should include some behavioral constraints. TANSTAAFL, you know?
Of course, once the colony becomes self-sustaining, what are we going to do
to them if they break rules set up for them? It seems that the worst we
could do is speak sharply to them. Another incentive to stay on task and
focused - the completion of the colony to the point that it has a
self-sustaining ecology and can elect to do without help and "guidance" from
Earth.
> You are a liar or blithering idiot. Either way, DO NOT apply for the
> selecition process for the initial colony. Period. PERIOD. *PERIOD*
> **PERIOD** ***PERIOD***!!!" Is there any other way to emphasize
> ***PERIOD!!!*** If so, please tell me, because I want ***PERIOD***
emphasized
> in the most emphatic way that ***PERIOD!!!*** has ever been emphasized in
the
> entire history of the human race. Why? because you must be a liar or a
> blithering idiot, that is why. I do not want liars or blithering idiiots
in
> the initial crew. Period. PERIOD. And so on, let me know if there is any
way
> to emphasize this any more than I have already done so.
Well, David occasionally does wonderful things with the truth - the man can
just about debate himself - and what he said was a perfect example of
Clarence Darrow-ism. That being said, I (not having met the man) get the
impression that his more extreme pronouincements are simply reflex courtroom
tactics and not intentional lies. And while David can be surprisingly
parochial in some of the posts I've read, I also get the impression that
he's a pretty knowledgeable and intelligent guy. He just has what Major
Bohn would call "little quirks." But I occasionally learn new things from
his posts, so I try to filter out the politicat rants and focus on the good
stuff.
> All right. My initial suggestion was that we let the colonists make their
own
> decisions. We do not send anyone with a history substance abuse, or
blithering
> idiocy, or lying, in the initial crew. We also send no purpose built
alcohol
> manufacturing equipment. If they want to ferment things, or distill the
> products of said fermentation, they have to do this on their own, with no
help(
> from Earthside launches. Maybe someday this will happen. I hope it takes
a
> while though, since (a) we will be selecting a very small (b) and very
highly
> trained and (c) very highly dedicate crew who (d) have a dream. I really
wish
> I could meet the qualifications of (b).
The eventual colonists will be lucky if all they have to do is not drink or
smoke dope (or tobacco). Apart from the physical constraints on their
lifestyle imposed by living in a teeny-tiny ecology on a dead planet with no
breathable atmosphere, all manner of things could be required of them as a
condition of riding to the Moon on someone else's dime. As I said before,
TANSTAAFL.
Perhaps some of these things will be so objectionable (a "Big Brother" like
goldfish-bowl colony that captures every move they make, all the fights,
petty annoyances, everything) that the next batch of lunar colonists makes
serious efforts to reduce the mission costs - designing re-usable SSTO
spacecraft for instance, or transferring personnel from cheap little
space-planes like Burt Rutan's to lunar landers being assembled in orbit .
In fact, Rutan's X-Prize entry holds tremendous promise, because Rutan has
produced some impressive kit planes. In this century, we could see amateurs
going into space for short hops, then progressively longer hops, and then
Earth orbit. At the same time military technology will trickle down to
hobbyist astronauts and the people who sell them new toys, so that
astronautics becomes regarded as an "extreme sport" and private spaceflight
becomes an unremarkable fact of life.
Remember (in "Methuselah's Children") Slayton Ford's "Joyboat Junior".in
which he escapes arrest for allowing the Howards to escape and just manages
to get onboard their ship? I can see things like Rutan's X-Prize entry
evolving into true spacecraft. Of course, we'll have to put some orbiting
tourist attractions up there - casinos, hotels, independent governments with
convenient banking and marriage laws - to run up demand for commercial
spaceflight.
VPF
Howard Berkowitz
> >From: "David M. Silver"
>
That may not be a good idea. Ethyl alcohol is a valuable solvent and
intermediate in many chemical syntheses that may be within the
capabilities of the colony. For example, making a modern gaseous
anesthetic such as enflurane takes quite sophisticated equipment.
Diethyl ether -- the old-fashioned anesthetic -- can be made fairly
directly from ethanol, usually with sulfuric acid. NOTE WELL:
Precautions need to be taken to prevent the ether from going BOOM, and
they are NOT all associated with keeping flames away from it.
If they are doing any kind of chemical synthesis, they almost certainly
are going to need to be able to do fermentation and fractional
distillation. Aging the distillate is left as an exercise to the reader.
When the colony is small, I simply don't see a need for worrying too
much about substance abuse. You're going to have the same sort of peer
pressure as on a submarine.
I'm not a teetotaler, but, not counting the bottle of beer I used in
cooking my last batch of chili, I may have had one or two beers, and one
or two after-dinner liqueurs, in the last several months. Literally, I
can't think of the last time I was drunk -- it's at least 6-8 years ago,
and never was frequent. I'm not that unusual a person in that respect.
>If they want to ferment things, or distill the
> products of said fermentation, they have to do this on their own, with no
> help
> from Earthside launches. Maybe someday this will happen. I hope it
> takes a
> while though, since (a) we will be selecting a very small (b) and very
> highly
> trained and (c) very highly dedicate crew who (d) have a dream. I really
> wish
> I could meet the qualifications of (b).
There's no question that I would fail to meet the health requirements
for a colony, and I'm not particularly interested in challenging
physical frontiers -- there are enough intellectual ones to keep me
busy. I do, however, have a good range of useful skills, while I'm not
credentialed in many of them. It really seems unlikely that qualified,
motivated, self-disciplined people couldn't be found, whose recreation
is their work.
Howard Berkowitz
<hcat...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
On the other hand, missing periods can cause great consternation. Many
people would rather have a surplus than a deficit.
Howard Berkowitz
<vfri...@rikochet.com> wrote:
> "LV Poker Player" <lvpoke...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20040310042201...@mb-m12.aol.com...
> > >From: "fadermcgee"
>
adsorber in-circuit) start having symptoms associated with hypercapnia.
> The
> literature also admits to a dearth of data regarding the onset of
> hypercapnia. In addition, the only long-term data we have on hypercapnia
> is
> in those patients with emphysema or other COPD - I haven't been able to
> find
> long-term data on hypercapnia in healthy volunteers.
I know it's out there, although I can't instantly lay hands on the data.
As you know, inducing the clinical state of hypercapnia (as
distinguished, say, from respiratory acidosis) will depend on several
physiological parameters.
Capnography (carbon dioxide measurement) capability is becoming part of
many pulse oximeters, including those intended for ambulance or other
field use. There should be a good more data as these clinically useful
capabilities become widespread.
>
> We'll need to bring a large supply of lime or another CO2 adsorber for
> the
> life-support system; fortunately, you can bake lime that has absorbed as
> much CO2 as possible (capturing the CO2 released to be re-introduced into
> the station ecology) and re-use it. It may be possible to have a CO2
> absorption system that does this automatically. Ideally, the station
> would
> have enough vegetation that mechanical CO2 absorption is for emergencies
> only, the plants taking CO2 in as fast or faster than the humans can
> expire
> it - dynamic equilibrium.
While lime or other absorbers (IIRC, lithium hydroxide is used in subs)
can be regenerated, I wonder if fractional distillation of air from the
hydroponic area, or in the base generally, might require less materials
in the long term.
LV Poker Player
>> >> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks
>is
>> >> wrong
>> >> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
>> >> SUGGEST???
>> >
>> >
>> >Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV.
>>
>> The absolute best idea I have seen in this or any other thread I have seen
>in
>> quite a while. Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh for quite a while.
>> Maybe the best idea I have seen in afh ever. Since I consider the denizens
>of
>> afh to quite a bit above the average of the average general population,
>that is
>> saying something.
>>
>> >It may amaze you
>> >how grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most
>> >older candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
>
>My analogy between living in a closed artificial environment 250,000 miles
>from the nearest fresh air and driving a car is actually strengthened by
>this statement. Here in Colorado we've had several tragic and fatal traffic
>accidents caused by seventeen and nineteen year-olds who lacked the
>necessary judgment to drink and not drive, or drive and not drink.
We have had this in Nevada too. Probably in all 50 states, for that matter.
I think you will find very few people who would identify themselves as
libertarians or Libertarians who favor prohibition of alcohol. I think you
will also find very few of these people who favor letting people drink and
drive. Very few of these people would favor a wide open substance use policy
in the early days of lunar colonization too.
I really hope that we do not import a substance abuse problem in the beginning
due to harsh, dangerous conditions where any mistake is all too likely to fatal
to one (or more) people, not necessarily lmiited to the person who made the
mistake. I also hope that we never import the war on drugs. By the time we
have stills, marijuana plants, coca plants, meth labs, and so on, I hope we
also have conditions conducive for their use, as long users do not drink and
drive, or do the lunar equivalents.
>> You are a liar or blithering idiot. Either way, DO NOT apply for the
>> selecition process for the initial colony. Period. PERIOD. *PERIOD*
>> **PERIOD** ***PERIOD***!!!" Is there any other way to emphasize
>> ***PERIOD!!!*** If so, please tell me, because I want ***PERIOD***
>emphasized
>> in the most emphatic way that ***PERIOD!!!*** has ever been emphasized in
>the
>> entire history of the human race. Why? because you must be a liar or a
>> blithering idiot, that is why. I do not want liars or blithering idiiots
>in
>> the initial crew. Period. PERIOD. And so on, let me know if there is any
>way
>> to emphasize this any more than I have already done so.
>
>Well, David occasionally does wonderful things with the truth - the man can
>just about debate himself - and what he said was a perfect example of
>Clarence Darrow-ism. That being said, I (not having met the man) get the
>impression that his more extreme pronouincements are simply reflex courtroom
>tactics and not intentional lies.
The first time he misrepresented what I posted, maybe. The second and all
subsequent misrepresentations, after I pointed out his "mistake," were
intentional lies.
LV Poker Player
Ok, maybe I went a little overboard. If nothing else, I really hope that I got
across the idea that I am fed up with David Silver's lying.
LV Poker Player
>Earth testing is needed to determine the extent to which increased
>carbon dioxide may or may not accelerate growth in the particular plant
>mix you've picked for hydroponics. It will depend on the physical setup
>-- can significant amounts of carbon dioxide get into the hydroponic
>liquid, as well as being absorbed directly by the plant? Carbon dioxide
>in water changes its pH. The oxygen-carbon dioxide ratios optimal for
>your plants may very well be interdependent on other factors, such as
>the nutrient mix in the growth medium
All very true. In deciding how much plant life we need, at least two things
need to be considered. How much do we need to keep the colony fed without
sending food up out of that expensive gravity well, and how much do we need to
keep the air mixture in balance? I am hoping that these two come to about the
same amount. If not, we need to design the colony with this imbalance in mind.
The good news is that if we need extra oxygen, it is readily available as a
byproduct of smelting operations (43% of the lunar crust is oxygen by weight).
If the food requirements mean that CO2 is going to be short, carbon is present
in the crust at the rate of 100 PPM. We might need to send a little extra
carbon from Earth until we find a way to extract it.
Pete LaGrange
> In article <20040310000002...@mb-m28.aol.com>,
> lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
>
> [snip screed]
>>
>> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks
>> is wrong
>> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
>> SUGGEST???
>
>
> Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV. It may amaze you how
> grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most older
> candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
>
> "We can't expect to keep them in the nest. . . . this country was not
> built by people who were afraid to go. Ross's great-great-grandfather
> crossed the mountains in a Conestoga wagon and homesteaded this place. He
> was nineteen. His bride was seventeen. . . . I would hate to think I had
> let the blood run thin."
>
> You've lived the past forty years in a society that thinks throwing rules
> and laws at every situation will "protect" us; in fact you profess to
> oppose this and call yourself a libertarian in so doing (and probably
> spend a great deal of your time thinking of ways to "bend, fold, spindle,
> and mutilate" the Nanny system we have); yet the conditions you would
> impose upon a lunar colony reflect an over preoccupation on 'protecting'
> the colony from itself, keeping them in their 'nest.'
I'd agree. While you've (LV) done an admirable job of laying out /how/ to
go, I think you may have lost sight of /why/ to go. If all we're gonna
have is another episode of "Gov't knows best" we might as well stay home.
--
Pete LaGrange
"Also. I want to see this shit become real during my lifetime. Fuck what's
economically wise, I'm all about what's going to accelerate the pace.
Never mind fancy propulsion systems, we all know what rockets really burn:
money. The more you burn, the faster they go." --Aleecia McDonald
Pete LaGrange
> (Do I reprise Sir? PERIOD.)
Nice.
--
Pete LaGrange
fadermcgee
"Howard Berkowitz" <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-1960B5.1...@text.giganews.com...
I dated a girl in college who had a surplus of periods... caught up with her
20 years later and it seems she finally missed a few - happily married and
with kids.
VPF
fadermcgee
LV Poker Player
>> All right. My initial suggestion was that we let the colonists make
>> their own
>> decisions. We do not send anyone with a history substance abuse, or
>> blithering
>> idiocy, or lying, in the initial crew. We also send no purpose built
>> alcohol
>> manufacturing equipment.
>
>That may not be a good idea. Ethyl alcohol is a valuable solvent and
>intermediate in many chemical syntheses that may be within the
>capabilities of the colony. For example, making a modern gaseous
>anesthetic such as enflurane takes quite sophisticated equipment.
>Diethyl ether -- the old-fashioned anesthetic -- can be made fairly
>directly from ethanol, usually with sulfuric acid. NOTE WELL:
>Precautions need to be taken to prevent the ether from going BOOM, and
>they are NOT all associated with keeping flames away from it.
>
>If they are doing any kind of chemical synthesis, they almost certainly
>are going to need to be able to do fermentation and fractional
>distillation. Aging the distillate is left as an exercise to the reader.
All right, we send no purpose built beverage alcohol manufacturing equipment.
Fair enough?
LV Poker Player
>>> I would STILL like to find out what David Silver or anyone else thinks
>>> is wrong
>>> with the above, and even more importantly, WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO YOU
>>> SUGGEST???
>>
>>
>> Treat them as if they were responsible grown-ups, LV. It may amaze you how
>> grown up seventeen and nineteen year olds so treated, let along most older
>> candidates for the tasks your colony will require, will act.
>>
>> "We can't expect to keep them in the nest. . . . this country was not
>> built by people who were afraid to go. Ross's great-great-grandfather
>> crossed the mountains in a Conestoga wagon and homesteaded this place. He
>> was nineteen. His bride was seventeen. . . . I would hate to think I had
>> let the blood run thin."
>>
>> You've lived the past forty years in a society that thinks throwing rules
>> and laws at every situation will "protect" us; in fact you profess to
>> oppose this and call yourself a libertarian in so doing (and probably
>> spend a great deal of your time thinking of ways to "bend, fold, spindle,
>> and mutilate" the Nanny system we have); yet the conditions you would
>> impose upon a lunar colony reflect an over preoccupation on 'protecting'
>> the colony from itself, keeping them in their 'nest.'
>
>I'd agree. While you've (LV) done an admirable job of laying out /how/ to
>go, I think you may have lost sight of /why/ to go. If all we're gonna
>have is another episode of "Gov't knows best" we might as well stay home.
>
Pete, I am fed up with you and Silver. Totally. That does not surprise me
with Silver. He is a compulsive liar, as he has shown in the past. It does
surprise me with you. Why are you lying about what I posted? If you believed
Silver's lies, why are you a gullible moron?
I'm getting tired of explaining "Don't ask, don't tell, don't help" (DADTDH).
Go back through this thread if you missed the umpteen times I did explain it.
While you do so, how about if you look for any post where what I advocate is
"another episode of 'Gov't knows best?'", liar?
Does anyone remember one of the fundamental principles of this colony? One of
the fundamental principles is that it is incredibly expensive to ship things
out of Earth's gravity well. Anything that can be built on the moon out of
lunar raw materials should be built there, in preference to shipping said item
from Earth.
For this reason alone, the colonists should be on their own when it comes to
making beverage alcohol, since, as others have pointed out, it is not all that
difficult to do and does not require all that much in the way of equipment,
none of it complex beyond the abilities of the colonists. Never mind safety,
never mind morality, never mind government, never mind anything except the
consideration that since they can build it themselves, they SHOULD build it
themselves due to the expense of shipping from Earth.
Pete LaGrange
>>From: Pete LaGrange
>>I'd agree. While you've (LV) done an admirable job of laying out /how/ to
>>go, I think you may have lost sight of /why/ to go. If all we're gonna
>>have is another episode of "Gov't knows best" we might as well stay home.
>>
>>
> Pete, I am fed up with you and Silver. Totally. That does not surprise
> me with Silver. He is a compulsive liar, as he has shown in the past. It
> does surprise me with you. Why are you lying about what I posted? If you
> believed Silver's lies, why are you a gullible moron?
I don't think I'm lying. I really don't care about the still, aside from
the fact that one will be built. I'd much rather the parts came out of
designated stores that be stolen from some needed equipment. I do take
issue with the orders from on high about procreation and I think much of
the tone of your proposal smacks of paternalism. I find it surprising,
comming from you as you've stated many times that your aim is anarchy. It
just seems we're following the age-old pattern where the biggest
"leave-me-aloners" become the worst "do-what-I-sayers". I'm sorry if you
can't see it or don't like it but that's how I feel. Maybe I am a moron.
--
Pete LaGrange
LV Poker Player
Lessee here. It's still on my hard drive. I have not revised the revision
yet, although there are a few things I intend to revise. Here is what I
initially posted in regard to pregnancy, and Jeanette has convinced me that I
probably should revise it. If you have input on whether or not it should be
revised, and if so how I should revise it, I am listening.
<begin quoted material>
I envision this as a permanent colonization effort, not just an outpost.
At some point, babies will be born. Once we know the colony can survive, women
should be encouraged to have babies. We should try to have medical staff and
facilities on hand before this delightful event occurs. As to exactly when
medical staff, equipment and supplies are sent, this has to be considered. The
initial colonists will probably have to get by with their own first aid
efforts, and whatever first aid supplies can be sent early. If we can find a
doctor who also has a needed skill such as electrician or metal worker or
welder or something like that, it would be fantastic. <Hey Chuck, if you want
to be the CMO of Luna City, learn something along these lines. J>
<end quoted material>
Now, if you can see anything in the above that concerns "orders from on high
about procreation" or "smacks of paternalism" or that I have become a
"do-what-I-sayer" (all your words) then how about if you diagram the sentences,
look up the words, and so on, then explain in words of one syllable exactly how
you reached your conclusion?
Notice one qualification. We should wait until we know the colony can survive,
or at least until we have reasonable assurance of this (actually "knowing" it
will be impossible for a long time). I think it would be incredibly cruel to
get pregnant in the first few weeks, have the baby, then when the baby is an
infant we find out that we overlooked something and that long term survival is
impossible, and that the infant is now doomed to starve or suffocate or
otherwise die gruesomely. Also, when the colonists are living in landers
because they do not have a habitat built yet, a pregnant woman is too much of a
liability. Even after the first small habitat is built, we need to use some
judgement as to just when we can afford a pregnancy, keeping in mind that we
probably will not have maternity designed pressure suits, so she will be
confined to the indoors once she outgrows her suit.
If that smacks of "paternalism" and all that...so be it. My response is "Nyet,
realist."
As for the still, I don't think the parts should come out of designated stores
OR from needed equipment. I think it should come from parts mined, smelted and
manufactured out of lunar ore. I think that anything whatsoever that can be
made this way should be made this way. No mention of alcohol or other drugs is
made in the initial text file. Let's look at my initial comment in this
discussion, to be found at : http://makeashorterlink.com/?U3D112EA7
Here is my post that started this campaign of lying by David Silver, and now
joined you and a few other liars or gullible morons. Sorry, but I am past the
point of being polite about this.
<begin quoted material>
>From: "fadermcgee"
>Good point about the intoxication issue, though - I wonder how
>big the colony would have to be before drinking - by ones and twos -
>could be tolerated in the colony. Ideas?
See my reply to Howard concerning the issue in general. If we do not send them
any mind altering substances, and do not send anything purpose built for
fermentation and distillation, and send people who have NO history of substance
abuse, perhaps it can be allowed about the time they have set up fermentation
or distillation facilities on their own. Since we have screened them so
carefully, we can hope that (a) it takes them a while to get around to doing
this due to a lack of desire and (b) they keep the drunken binges under VERY
tight control once they do have their homebrew available.
<end quoted material>
Now, once again, I would like you to use sentence diagrams, word definitions,
and such, to tell me in words of one syllable exactly how the above translates
into being "paternalistic" "do-what-I-say" or "orders from on high."
Here is the lie Silver made up in reply:
<begin quoted material>
> >From: "fadermcgee"
> >Good point about the intoxication issue, though - I wonder how
> >big the colony would have to be before drinking - by ones and twos -
> >could be tolerated in the colony. Ideas?
>
> See my reply to Howard concerning the issue in general. If we do not send
> them
> any mind altering substances, and do not send anything purpose built for
> fermentation and distillation, and send people who have NO history of
> substance
> abuse, perhaps it can be allowed about the time they have set up fermentation
> or distillation facilities on their own. Since we have screened them so
> carefully, we can hope that (a) it takes them a while to get around to doing
> this due to a lack of desire and (b) they keep the drunken binges under VERY
> tight control once they do have their homebrew available.
The same approach works marvellously well with children, LV. Keep them
from wine and beer all through their juvenile years, and the first time
they get a chance, they binge. "Just say no!" and the problem will go
away. Works just as good with sex and drugs too! Just ask Nancy.
<end quoted material>
At that point, I made the mistaken assumption that Silver had misinterpreted
what I posted. Given his past history of lying, this was a mistake on my part,
and one that I should not have made. So I tried the following response:
<Begin quoted material>
From: "David M. Silver"
>> >Good point about the intoxication issue, though - I wonder how
>> >big the colony would have to be before drinking - by ones and twos -
>> >could be tolerated in the colony. Ideas?
>>
>> See my reply to Howard concerning the issue in general. If we do not send
>> them
>> any mind altering substances, and do not send anything purpose built for
>> fermentation and distillation, and send people who have NO history of
>> substance
>> abuse, perhaps it can be allowed about the time they have set up
fermentation
>> or distillation facilities on their own. Since we have screened them so
>> carefully, we can hope that (a) it takes them a while to get around to doing
>> this due to a lack of desire and (b) they keep the drunken binges under VERY
>> tight control once they do have their homebrew available.
>
>
>The same approach works marvellously well with children, LV. Keep them
>from wine and beer all through their juvenile years, and the first time
>they get a chance, they binge. "Just say no!" and the problem will go
>away. Works just as good with sex and drugs too! Just ask Nancy.
Bullshit. Did I say that they should never take a drink in their entire lives
until they get to the moon? Did I David? No I did not.
I specified no history of substance abuse. Not the tiniest hint of a history
of substance abuse. It is entirely possible for an adult to have experience
with alcoholic beverages, but NOT abuse them, EVER. In fact, I just might
prefer the guy who likes a beer or two while watching the Sunday afternoon
game, as long as it stops there, over a teetotaller, pretty much for the
reasons you stated.
What is your suggestion? Send up some homebrew equipment and supplies
(homebrewing is becoming more popular and these are commonly available)? Send
them a still as well maybe?
I say send the people who can get along without the stuff for a while, because
are not and never have been heavy drinkers. Send the people who think building
a telescope is more interesting than building a homebrew setup and then
consuming the results.
Then, people being people, some genius will figure out how to coax the
hydroponics products into fermenting, then possibly into distilling the
fermentation results. Once again, I do kind of hope these are the type of
people who will make this a low priority, behind things like telescopes and
nitrogen extraction and looking at ways to cut down on outgassing and such.
Still, alcohol production is not exactly complex or high tech, and no doubt the
materials needed can be improvised. These people have to mechanically
inclined, so if they really want to it probably won't be all that hard.
So, no, I am NOT saying we should prohibit alcohol consumption in the colony.
We just don't need to encourage it either, or send colonists who have gone
through AA multiple times trying to dry out.
Out of a population of 6 billion or so, I think it should be possible to find 3
or 4 who can meet the criteria of no history of substance abuse, rarely if ever
get falling down drunk, and can put off the brewery and still for an indefinite
period because they WANT to build telescopes, they WANT to conduct chemical
experiments in hard vacuum, they WANT to build a brand new habitat that can be
used exclusively as a laboratory, they WANT to explore the surface, they WANT
to dig holes other than the colony excavations just to find out what is down
there. Work on setting up the brewery? Umm, not today, number 3 telescope is
not tracking properly and I need to find out why.
<end quoted material>
The liar did not respond to the above directly. Instead he has just been
sniping at things later, and continuing his campaign of lies. I have been
pointing the lies. Until now, I have tried to be reasonably polite about doing
so, but the gloves are coming off. Silver is a liar, and anyone who believes
his lies is a gullible moron. If the shoe fits, Pete Lagrange, I never thought
that I would ever call you either a liar or a gullible moron. Up unitl this
discussion I have had very high respect for, whether or not we actually agreed
on any given issue. No more. I am calling you a liar and/or a gullible moron,
unless you can show me how a reasonable person with a good command of the
English language can reach the conclusions you reached.
Hey Silver, still reading this? If so, why won't you answer the questions I
have been asking all the way through this discussion? Afraid it would show you
up as a liar?
Oh yeah, you did answer. You said that we should treat the colonists as
responsible adults. THAT HAS BEEN MY SUGGESTION RIGHT FROM THE START, LIAR.
It still is.
Dave Schrader
>
> >From: "David M. Silver"
> Dave Schrader <kor...@tbc.net> wrote:
> >> MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
> >> WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
> >> DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
> >> DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
> >> SUCCESS.
>
> For one thing, WRONG, WRONG WRONG! The lunar night is only 2 weeks, not
> "MONTHS." :)
Of course it's wrong. It's a recruitment ad for an expedition to the
Antarctic posted by Sir Ernest Shackleton. He had no shortage of
volunteers for his 1914 expedition.
I posted it to point out that the basic description isn't all that
different, and more than enough signed up. Recruitment really won't be
a problem, sorting through all of the applicants will. I honestly
expected to see a chorus of responses along the lines of "Yes, we know
that, but..."
I'll try not to be so obscure in the future.
Dave Schrader
LV Poker Player
>> >> MEN WANTED: FOR HAZARDOUS JOURNEY. SMALL
>> >> WAGES, BITTER COLD, LONG MONTHS OF COMPLETE
>> >> DARKNESS, CONSTANT DANGER, SAFE RETURN
>> >> DOUBTFUL. HONOUR AND RECOGNITION IN CASE OF
>> >> SUCCESS.
>>
>> For one thing, WRONG, WRONG WRONG! The lunar night is only 2 weeks, not
>> "MONTHS." :)
>
>Of course it's wrong. It's a recruitment ad for an expedition to the
>Antarctic posted by Sir Ernest Shackleton. He had no shortage of
>volunteers for his 1914 expedition.
Oops, didn't realize that. :)
>I posted it to point out that the basic description isn't all that
>different, and more than enough signed up. Recruitment really won't be
>a problem, sorting through all of the applicants will.
When it comes to me, you are preaching to the choir. When it comes to that
liar David Silver, he has made up his mind (or whatever he uses for one) and he
is not about to let anyone confuse him with any inconvenient facts.
I hope not too many people got suckered in by his lies, and I hope the ones
were so gullible that they got suckered in are now starting to realize that he
is nothing but a liar.
Pete LaGrange
>>From: Pete LaGrange
>
>>>>I'd agree. While you've (LV) done an admirable job of laying out /how/
>>>>to go, I think you may have lost sight of /why/ to go. If all we're
>>>>gonna have is another episode of "Gov't knows best" we might as well
>>>>stay home.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Pete, I am fed up with you and Silver. Totally. That does not
>>> surprise me with Silver. He is a compulsive liar, as he has shown in
>>> the past. It does surprise me with you. Why are you lying about what
>>> I posted? If you believed Silver's lies, why are you a gullible moron?
>>
>>I don't think I'm lying. I really don't care about the still, aside from
>>the fact that one will be built. I'd much rather the parts came out of
>>designated stores that be stolen from some needed equipment. I do take
>>issue with the orders from on high about procreation and I think much of
>>the tone of your proposal smacks of paternalism. I find it surprising,
>>coming from you as you've stated many times that your aim is anarchy. It
>>just seems we're following the age-old pattern where the biggest
>>"leave-me-aloners" become the worst "do-what-I-sayers". I'm sorry if you
>>can't see it or don't like it but that's how I feel. Maybe I am a moron.
>
> Lessee here. It's still on my hard drive. I have not revised the
> revision yet, although there are a few things I intend to revise. Here is
> what I initially posted in regard to pregnancy, and Jeanette has convinced
> me that I probably should revise it. If you have input on whether or not
> it should be revised, and if so how I should revise it, I am listening.
<snip>
Look, I know you've put in a lot of effort and are rightfully protective
of this proposal, but that doesn't make me a liar or a moron because I
disagree with a few points. Your very reply gives a good indication of
what kind of base we would end up with. "My way or the Highway" might be a
good motto for your colony. I think that those who go should make the
decision to get drunk or pregnant, you want rules. If you can't admit that
you're following the pattern laid down in the dim mists of history and
followed by almost everyone from the church to nearly every government
since, I'd say you might want to take a more objective look at what I've
posted. I've not attacked you, yet you continue to brand me with
pejoratives. I don't think I'd like to live in any colony you had a hand
in setting up.
To reiterate: I think those who go and risk all should make the decisions
concerning their fate. Does this make me a moron, a liar, an idiot or a
jerk-off? According to you, (the anarchist) it does. Somehow I think
you're a closet authoritarian.
--
Pete LaGrange
Most anarchists lack the ability to understand their position. They want
total freedom for themselves but they require that others be controlled so
as to not infringe on their paradise. This never worked and governments
were instituted as a result. The anarchist becomes annoyed because his
freedom is limited and others become more free. It's basically a
child's desire.
charles krin
<h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
>In article <404f3...@omega.dimensional.com>, "fadermcgee"
><vfri...@rikochet.com> wrote:
>
>> "LV Poker Player" <lvpoke...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:20040310042201...@mb-m12.aol.com...
>> > >From: "fadermcgee"
>>
>adsorber in-circuit) start having symptoms associated with hypercapnia.
>> The
>> literature also admits to a dearth of data regarding the onset of
>> hypercapnia. In addition, the only long-term data we have on hypercapnia
>> is
>> in those patients with emphysema or other COPD - I haven't been able to
>> find
>> long-term data on hypercapnia in healthy volunteers.
>
>I know it's out there, although I can't instantly lay hands on the data.
>As you know, inducing the clinical state of hypercapnia (as
>distinguished, say, from respiratory acidosis) will depend on several
>physiological parameters.
while there should be no problems with the level of N2 in the system,
CO2 stress would initially be noticed when the folks breathing the
atmosphere hit an arterial partial pressure of around 45 mmHg...but
folks can tolerate up to a PaCO2 of 50 over time without major
problems...
considering that we are planning to run a predominant nitrox mix at a
substantially lower than 'normal' atmospheric pressure (IIRC, we
wanted to maintain a fairly normal partial pressure of O2 of around
160 mmHg, and mostly reduce the partial pressure of N2 (normally
around 600 mmHg)- so figure around 400 mmHg total or about 40% O2),
which puts the max dose of CO2 at something less than 10% *in the
habitat areas*...the greenhouse can bit a bit higher.
>
>Capnography (carbon dioxide measurement) capability is becoming part of
>many pulse oximeters, including those intended for ambulance or other
>field use. There should be a good more data as these clinically useful
>capabilities become widespread.
That will help, but there will be the problem with comparisons...
>>
>> We'll need to bring a large supply of lime or another CO2 adsorber for
>> the
>> life-support system; fortunately, you can bake lime that has absorbed as
>> much CO2 as possible (capturing the CO2 released to be re-introduced into
>> the station ecology) and re-use it. It may be possible to have a CO2
>> absorption system that does this automatically. Ideally, the station
>> would
>> have enough vegetation that mechanical CO2 absorption is for emergencies
>> only, the plants taking CO2 in as fast or faster than the humans can
>> expire
>> it - dynamic equilibrium.
>
>While lime or other absorbers (IIRC, lithium hydroxide is used in subs)
>can be regenerated, I wonder if fractional distillation of air from the
>hydroponic area, or in the base generally, might require less materials
>in the long term.
considering how easy it will be to remove CO2 by chilling, I doubt
that the lime or LiOH trick would be needed except in extreme
cases...CO2 condenses at or about -80 deg C (193K), a temp easily
obtained in the lunar shade....use a counter current flow to condense
out the water for recycling first, and to prevent excessive heat loss
from the habitat, and have a fluid sump about mid way along the
condensing loop...voila`, your nitrox mix is returned, and you can
increase the amount of CO2 in the hydroponics up to the tolerance of
your gardeners...
ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)
LV Poker Player
No, you are a liar or moron because you made false statements concerning what I
posted. Since you did not even bother to quote what I posted in an attempt to
refute your false accusations, I guess that means you intentionally lied. Why?
>Your very reply gives a good indication of
>what kind of base we would end up with.
It does, huh?
> "My way or the Highway" might be a
>good motto for your colony.
"Liars such as Pete Lagrange and David Silver, STAY HOME!" would be a far
better motto.
> I think that those who go should make the
>decision to get drunk or pregnant, you want rules.
QUOTE ANY POST WHERE I HAVE EVER ADVOCATED ANY RULE CONCERNING THESE, LIAR. Oh
that's right, you don't quote. You just make up your lies and expect everyone
to believe them. Well, like I said liar, the gloves are coming off. I've had
it. Maybe my idea is a good one, maybe it isn't, but if people start
misrepresenting it, I'm going to call them liars. If you don't like it, start
quoting posts to back up your statements.
>. If you can't admit that
>you're following the pattern laid down in the dim mists of history and
>followed by almost everyone from the church to nearly every government
>since, I'd say you might want to take a more objective look at what I've
>posted.
Huh? I've taken an objective look at the lies you and Silver made up. Why
should this result in me "admitting" something that is an outright, blatant
lie.
I mean, I specifically state that I don't want rules. I state it in the
initial text file, I state it when you and Silver fraudulently claim that I do
want them, I continue to state that I don't want them. I will continue to do
so every time either one of you makes fraudulent claims .
I do think some guidelines and common sense would be a good idea. That is not
the same as rules, but it looks to me like you are not intelligent enough to
understand the difference.
>'ve not attacked you, yet you continue to brand me with
>pejoratives. I don't think I'd like to live in any colony you had a hand
>in setting up.
You've made false accusations. Calling you a liar is not a pejorative. It is
just a statement of fact. Note that I did not do so until I attempted to
correct your false claims, you refused to accept the correction and just
repeated your false accusations.
We are agreed on one thing. You MOST DEFINITELY do not go to any colony I have
any say in setting. No liars allowed.
>To reiterate: I think those who go and risk all should make the decisions
>concerning their fate.
To reiterate: THAT HAS BEEN MY POSITION ALL ALONG. As long as you and Silver
lie about that, I will call you liars.
>. Does this make me a moron, a liar, an idiot or a
>jerk-off? According to you, (the anarchist) it does.
All of the above. Only a moronic, idiotic jerkoff would lie about what someone
has posted on Usenet.
> Somehow I think
>you're a closet authoritarian.
Somehow, I think you are a liar.
David M. Silver
lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
> Hey Silver, still reading this? If so, why won't you answer the questions I
> have been asking all the way through this discussion? Afraid it would show
> you
> up as a liar?
>
Why should I respond to the rational posts that you occassionally reply
with?
> Oh yeah, you did answer. You said that we should treat the colonists as
> responsible adults. THAT HAS BEEN MY SUGGESTION RIGHT FROM THE START, LIAR.
> It still is.
Well, then contrast that point with the seemingly inflexible points you
sometimes maintain. Frex, somewhere elsethread you've maintained that
mechanically it should never be possible that one person can open both
doors of an airlock at the same time. Good rule, seemingly.
"Hal, please close the outer door so I can pressurize and open the inner
door of the airlock."
"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that."
You saw what Dave had to do, didn't you?
Hal doesn't have to be a malignant computer, poorly programmed. All he
needs to be is the other guy, gone round the bend on Dave, and therefore
malfunctioning, even only temporarily -- you see, by treating him as
irresponsible by imposing rules ("just temporary ones," mind you) you've
challenged Hal to defeat your rules -- and since he did it in secrecy,
he enjoyed the fruits of his secret defiance, his little still, by
destroying the evidence before you could discover it -- he drank all the
booze he made in his first run up at one time -- then washed out and
racked the non-purpose built utensils and tools he mis-used to do so;
and now he's drunk and he won't open the airlock for Dave. So sober and
unrebellious Dave, out there, dies when the air runs out of his suit.
Inflexible rules, in my experience, inevitably meet an extreme,
unanticipated situation over time that gets people, good people,
rule-abiding people, dedicated people, killed.
To like effect, you've maintained in several posts to 'we should not
send up "purpose-built" equipment capabile of distilling or fermenting
drinking alcohol, as if it made some difference. Goodness gracious, what
in the world does that mean? No Acme Handy-Dandy Still Kits? You don't
need a special kit -- ask anyone who's even made drinking alcohol from
anything organic, or "pruno" as they call it in jails or prisons. Ask
any eleven year old Boy Scout who's crushed rotten apricots into an
earthware pot, covered it with muslin, and waited a few weeks to strain
and pour its results through a dish tower into a bottle. Don't need
apricots or fruit. You can make it with bread, or crackers, or stale
cheerios.
Your rule sounds like what it is: a mere fig-leaf. Yet you fixate upon
these things, as if they were important.
The tot of grog (half watered rum) served daily kept crews of pressed
seamen, and some of them were substance abusers, from grabbing the
eleven-year-old pipsqueaks called midshipmen by the officers and
"snotties" by the seamen, and tossing them over the stern, or down under
the heads, during nightwatch on voyages that lasted years out of sight
of anything the crew considered civilization; and it also kept them
generally from doing worse, for hundreds of years.
Doctors prescribed alcohol in moderate amounts, for hundreds of years,
to relieve the same sorts of stress.
A sanely-run colony would 'prescribe' the same, daily when necessary, or
whenever a responsible person felt it required or expedient or not
tactically prohibited. "Siddown, Hal, and, here, have a beer. The
station commander said the Sutler's store is open from 8 to 9 tonight.
That was one hell of a tough job you did this afternoon, getting the
sunscreens repaired and repositioned. Damned uncharted meteor shower!
I'm exhausted."
All that nineteen-year-old and his seventeen-year-old wife who crossed
the Rockies needed when they got to Oregon was a kettle, some tubing,
heat, and grain and water. I'd wager a good many of them made drinking
liquor as soon as, if not before, the first crop was harvested. And in
subsequent harvests, as soon as the work was done, daily, after dinner,
Ma and Pa Kettle had a wee sip. Then they went to bed and were up again
at four in the morning, getting in the rest of the harvest. They didn't
need a 'purpose-built' anything. Just a kettle, some coil, corn mash,
and heat. Probably the same copper kettle Ma Kettle heated the water for
the Saturday night bath. Stop fixating, and concentrate on what's
important -- I agree with Pete that you've done a lot of hard, good work
-- but you're dissipating it with obsessiveness and, if you cease doing
so, I'll stop pointing it out occassionally when I think your tone of
writing and expression is obsessively restrictive.
"Zero tolerance," which is what I keep hearing behind the rules that you
and others spring up with in this thread, is a product of zero
intellect. You repudiate it on some occasions, yet you evidence to a
suspicious reader -- and I'm certainly a suspicious reader -- a tendancy
to 'camel-nose,' it back every time you start citing a rule as dogma.
But, as you've said, I'm a liar or an idiot, so LV, you can just go on
obsessing to someone's amusement -- not mine, mind you, for I think it's
a waste when you do so.
--
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88
Pete LaGrange
> No liars allowed.
It'll be empty.
--
Pete LaGrange
Pete LaGrange
> No, you are a liar or moron because you made false statements concerning
> what I posted.
PPOR, I've not made any false statements. I've only made my opinion clear,
trouble is you don't like my opinion and can't think of a better argument
than name calling.
Why don't you address my point? Again, I think those who go and take the
risk should make the decisions concerning their future.
--
Pete LaGrange
fadermcgee
"Pete LaGrange" <oldma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.03.11...@hotmail.com...
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 23:44:33 +0000, LV Poker Player wrote:
>
> >>From: Pete LaGrange
<snip>
> To reiterate: I think those who go and risk all should make the decisions
> concerning their fate. Does this make me a moron, a liar, an idiot or a
> jerk-off? According to you, (the anarchist) it does. Somehow I think
> you're a closet authoritarian.
Why? Because he wants his project to have the best possible chance of
succeeding? It's not like the colony team members can flap their arms and
get to the Moon - they will (unless they're billionaires as well as athletes
and potential Nobel laureates). They need financial backers, spacecraft
designers, avionics (astronics?) engineers, hydrologists, botanists, guys
who pump rocket fuel for not enough money... all sorts of people are going
to have to invest huge amounts of time and money into this thing before the
countdown starts.
No bucks, no Buck Rogers. That's what it comes down to.
So our explorers will have to accept some limits to their behavior - at the
very least, nothing that would increase the risk of a catastrophic accident.
It's not a matter of whether or not forbidding use of alcohol or other
intoxicants on the colony is an affront of those steely-eyed brave explorers
and pioneers - it's a matter of maximizing the likelihood of a colony even
existing and trying to minimize death or injury to the crew.
And even moderately intelligent people can grasp this. When an airline
pilot goes to work drunk, it makes the evening news because we, the people
don't care about treating airline pilots like intelligent adults. We treat
them like adults who have undertaken a grave responsibility - flying an
aircraft full of unsuspecting people around with due regard for their
safety. If they deliberately fail to meet that responsibility, they have no
business flying aircraft.
The lunar colony LV is describing isn't a social experiment. It is a
terribly dangerous science experiment involving live human beings. Just
being inside the colony habitat is something that will require maximum
competence and situational awareness. We can't afford for those people to
say "Oops!" if they're dealing with a life-support critical system.
Anyone who feels that he or she needs to drink booze in order to feel like
an intelligent adult should probably pursue other employment opportunities.
TANSTAAFL - Having hitched a ride to the Moon on someone else's spacecraft
to go live in someone else's lunar habitat, would an intelligent,
responsible adult to object to restrictions on your behavior intended to
help save your life and those of the other people onboard?
It's not contradictory at all for a libertarian to object strongly to
conduct which endangers a billion-dollar investment AND several people's
lives unnecessarily - libertarianism places high value on the sanctity of
human life and private propterty rights.
I haven't noticed the people who are bellyaching about lunar explorers being
denied the opportunity to get loaded on LV's proposed colony making positive
contributions to his proposal. In fact, all they've contributed is a load
of crap about the right to get drunk on a high-risk space mission.
VPF
charles krin
wrote:
I missed this one the first go around...
>
> I envision this as a permanent colonization effort, not just an outpost.
>At some point, babies will be born. Once we know the colony can survive, women
>should be encouraged to have babies. We should try to have medical staff and
>facilities on hand before this delightful event occurs. As to exactly when
>medical staff, equipment and supplies are sent, this has to be considered. The
>initial colonists will probably have to get by with their own first aid
>efforts, and whatever first aid supplies can be sent early. If we can find a
>doctor who also has a needed skill such as electrician or metal worker or
>welder or something like that, it would be fantastic. <Hey Chuck, if you want
>to be the CMO of Luna City, learn something along these lines. J>
Chuckle..In addition to being qualified in about 90% of the medical
techniques you'll need up there (I need to brush up on surgery a bit,
but I've had training in EMS, wilderness, Aerospace and Dive medicine,
as well as plenty of OB, peds and internal medicine)...I'm a better
than fair hand at cooking, wrench bending, chemistry, microbiology,
entomology, and geology as well as a passable baritone for the
barbershop quartet...not much on programming (my only language is
PL/1, but that can be fixed), however, I can wire tight and fairly
neat, sweat solder liquid and gas tight, drive a clean bore in wood,
metal and concrete, sew a button on that will stay, etc, etc, etc (no,
I never made Eagle Scout, but that's another story)....I even learned
to hover a Huey one fine February afternoon at Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin
when we needed to burn off a couple of hours prior to a tail rotor
repack...
I would, however, argue that sending the material to make
pharmaceutical grade ethanol, with the expectation that a certain
ration per person would be available for 'recreational
consumption'...even at a fairly early stage of developement...will
prevent a substantial number of problems, simply because 'forbidden
fruits are sweeter'...so if we make a tot of booze available on a
legitimate basis, folks are much less likely to make 'squeeze' (with
the concomitant problems with 'fusil oils' and inedible
alcohols)...and as others have pointed out, Ethanol is a nice
feedstock for a variety of chemical synthesis reactions...not to
mention the starting point for acetic acid, acetone, diethyl ether,
and a bunch of others...only water, benzene, and nitric and sulfuric
acids would be more important to start a chemical industry on Luna.
someone else has pointed out that fiber class Cannabis is quite low in
delta9 THC, grows quite fast, and provide a high quality of fiber as a
basis of clothing (fibers almost as soft as high quality cotton, if
about as coarse as linen with fibers are that about the strongest
carbohydrate fibers available) as well as paper, and the seeds do
yield an edible oil which, IIRC, can be used as a feedstock for
plastics as well...Add in bamboo, and you have a nice basis for a nice
non metallic composite material (strips of bamboo as oriented strands
between layers of tightly woven hemp canvas, saturated with a hemp oil
based plastic....shaped and formed before setting, add more hemp
canvas as needed, and you have the makings of some comfortable Swedish
Modern furniture for your living quarters...
anything else you want to know?
Dr. Rufo
fadermcgee wrote:
< big ole snip >
>In fact, all they've contributed is a load
> of crap about the right to get drunk on a high-risk space mission.
In an earlier posting of today's date, Mr. Silver used the expressions
"a tot of grog" and "a wee sip."
Neither of these is capable of glossing into your description:
> the right to get drunk on a high-risk space mission.
Further, I believe the gist of what David was saying is that a "zero
tolerance" or "general prohibition" of alcoholic consumption is the
moral and ethical equivalent of commanding the waves to stop.
Elsethread the comment was posted that there are times when it is better
to be silent than to utter an order that you know will not be obeyed.
Pax,
Rufe
Howard Berkowitz
"Dr. Rufo" <bay...@mindspring.com> wrote:
It's worth noting that in the case of submarines, orders not to use
mind-altering substances aren't the main deterrent. One's shipmates, who
don't want someone whose mind is altered responding to a sudden leak or
fire, enforce it. It's not an authoritarian situation.
At some point, the colony would be large enough that there's less likely
to be catastrophic failure if an off-duty person doesn't respond
automatically. Speaking of "large", I refer to "Gentlemen, Be Seated."
David M. Silver
Howard Berkowitz <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
> In article <grR3c.32757$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> "Dr. Rufo" <bay...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > fadermcgee wrote:
> >
> > < big ole snip >
> >
> > >In fact, all they've contributed is a load
> > > of crap about the right to get drunk on a high-risk space mission.
> >
> > In an earlier posting of today's date, Mr. Silver used the expressions
> > "a tot of grog" and "a wee sip."
> >
> > Neither of these is capable of glossing into your description:
> >
> > > the right to get drunk on a high-risk space mission.
> >
> > Further, I believe the gist of what David was saying is that a "zero
> > tolerance" or "general prohibition" of alcoholic consumption is the
> > moral and ethical equivalent of commanding the waves to stop.
> >
> > Elsethread the comment was posted that there are times when it is better
> > to be silent than to utter an order that you know will not be obeyed.
> >
>
> It's worth noting that in the case of submarines, orders not to use
> mind-altering substances aren't the main deterrent. One's shipmates, who
> don't want someone whose mind is altered responding to a sudden leak or
> fire, enforce it. It's not an authoritarian situation.
>
And Mr. Konski, the chief steward for the job, former sandhog back on
earth, would (1) down tools, start a "safety meeting," and file a
grievance the minute someone tried to beef up any "guidelines" that
induced excess peer pressure against non-teetotlers to turn those
"guidelines" into any outright blanket prohibition; while (2) parting
the hair, with a wrench, of anyone so intoxicated that he caused a
problem on duty or off.
> At some point, the colony would be large enough that there's less likely
> to be catastrophic failure if an off-duty person doesn't respond
> automatically. Speaking of "large", I refer to "Gentlemen, Be Seated."
You keep wanting there to be an absolute magic number before you'll
allow such a thing as an off-watch (but still on duty -- nobody is ever
off duty in a ship underweigh, and no one is even off duty in a space
colony, under the dome, until death, furlough away, or discharge)
status, Howard. I think that's silly. Two is large enough in most
situations. One to be off watch (not off duty), sip his prescribed tot
of rum to help get to sleep, and one to be on. If one isn't enough to
handle the situation, then neither goes off watch until the problem is
solved, if -- and only if -- staying on watch can solve it; and, if not,
ultimately you'll get "Sky Lift" (in _Menace From Earth_) for both,
whether either or none survives. Numbers never make things fail-safe. If
it got down to one, then to preserve his or her sanity, there'd have to
be off-watch times. "Sign off now and go have a stiff drink or two,
Colonel Briteis. Don't sign back on until 0800. That's an order."
Finally, the same Mr. Konski would "be seated" just as quickly whether
he'd already had his tot celebrating the end of his shift, or not.
Mr. Konski is an adult, and perfectly capable of ensuring that his
co-workers are adults, including the supervision up through the
paymaster, as well, when necessary, by among other things "calling
safety meetings," and treat each other as such.
Mac
<BravoOscarH...@cis.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>Good morning,
>
>Hail, Mac! We who are about to post salute you.
> Oh, yes!
> Army also!
> And, especially Night-Shifts!
> Hmmmmmmmmm?
> For those of us who prefer to work Nights, it would be appreciated if
> the Cubic provided is not only secure, but "sound-proof"...
> And, when on duty, how are we going to handle the coffee issue???
***********************
>Jiminy Cricket! I used to prefer night shifts (and, yes, by the 10th or
>11th hour, my caffiene intake went up markedly). Frankly, though, I'd
>prefer to avoid night shifts at Luna Base -- by the twelfth or
>thirteenth Earth-day, I don't think even Juan Valdez' finest would keep
>me awake! <g>
>Hmm... Columbia coffee is supposed to be really good because it grows in
>the thinner air of the mountains (I think it's because this forces the
>growth cycle to slow down). We could artificially reproduce this
>situation and create a truly premium coffee bean... and have Luna's
>first export (with prices artificially elevated Dirtside due to the
>scarcity of "Luna Coffee".
>Take care,
>cb
**************** *************
I'm one of the strange ones in that I seem to be constitutionally made
for Night-Shift.
I refuse to work day-shift.
Have also preferred Night-Shift AND weekends.
And, working in hospitals, that was great.
My second choice is PM-shift --- from report, then coffee, and then
begin treatments, soon Managers were gone!
When in Denver I had some Jamacian Blue Mountain.
I like it.
Given the initial space (cubic) constraints, and how manual the
harvesting might be, I wonder if coffee would be a crop anytime soon
for Luna?
I wonder if The Corporation would hire construction personnel to come
and construct a specific habitat or four and then, bring up a crew of
4-10 who would then finish off these, and work out the elements of the
labs and farms in the caverns the construction crew, under specific
instructions, set up and put in place... might take as much as a dozen
to twenty shipments to get the foundation of the Colony there and
constructed, and then the Gang leaves and the initial colony people
arrive and begin...???
If that is done, how soon could expansion happen?
Or, is it practical to pay for construction crews to come up for a
certain period of time, with some pre-fab, and with explosives to
handle more of the cavern and tunnel work already targeted by other
crews who have sited the location for the caverns?
Might take 1-3 years but the Colony infrastructure might be more
helpful to a crew coming up to stay for a longer period of time, and
doing science work?
IF so, perhaps the leap-frogging can help expand the habitat and
increase the size of the colony?
---Mac
Kullervo Nurmi
A mix with 40% O2 in it is a problem in itself: _greatly_ increased
risk of fire & prolly other probs -- we are _quite_ used to the mix &
pressure we have...
>>>
>>> We'll need to bring a large supply of lime or another CO2 adsorber for
>>> the
>>> life-support system; fortunately, you can bake lime that has absorbed as
>>> much CO2 as possible (capturing the CO2 released to be re-introduced into
>>> the station ecology) and re-use it. It may be possible to have a CO2
>>> absorption system that does this automatically. Ideally, the station
>>> would
>>> have enough vegetation that mechanical CO2 absorption is for emergencies
>>> only, the plants taking CO2 in as fast or faster than the humans can
>>> expire
>>> it - dynamic equilibrium.
>>
>>While lime or other absorbers (IIRC, lithium hydroxide is used in subs)
>>can be regenerated, I wonder if fractional distillation of air from the
>>hydroponic area, or in the base generally, might require less materials
>>in the long term.
>
>considering how easy it will be to remove CO2 by chilling, I doubt
>that the lime or LiOH trick would be needed except in extreme
>cases...CO2 condenses at or about -80 deg C (193K), a temp easily
>obtained in the lunar shade....use a counter current flow to condense
>out the water for recycling first, and to prevent excessive heat loss
>from the habitat, and have a fluid sump about mid way along the
>condensing loop...voila`, your nitrox mix is returned, and you can
>increase the amount of CO2 in the hydroponics up to the tolerance of
>your gardeners...
Now that's a neat idea.
Heat management as a whole is also an issue: two weeks of night is a
bit long, and the people better keep warm even during that time -- oil
tankers are not an answer.
Kultsi
---
The space below is reserved for the .sig of
kullervo dot nurmi at pp dot inet dot fi
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/kultsi/
No parking allowed. Spammers will promptly end up in bit bucket.
---
Howard Berkowitz
M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote:
> In article <hcb-5802F9.2...@text.giganews.com>,
> Howard Berkowitz <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <grR3c.32757$aT1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> > "Dr. Rufo" <bay...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> > > fadermcgee wrote:
> > >
Frankly, I had dropped out of this discussion, as it seems to have so
focused on the alcohol issue that it's gotten away from many more
significant issues in what was an interesting discussion about an
austere lunar base. I probably shouldn't be doing this, but I am taking
a point of personal privilege to respond to what I believe to be an
inaccurate rephrasing of my remarks.
I have been as critical of saying "don't import alcohol-making
equipment" as "restrict substance abuse," speaking as a one-time chemist
and microbiologist. There is too much ordinary and necessary laboratory
equipment, especially with easy access to vacuum and cryogenic cooling,
that there would be no need to import such things.
> > >
> >
> > It's worth noting that in the case of submarines, orders not to use
> > mind-altering substances aren't the main deterrent. One's shipmates,
> > who
> > don't want someone whose mind is altered responding to a sudden leak or
> > fire, enforce it. It's not an authoritarian situation.
> >
>
> And Mr. Konski, the chief steward for the job, former sandhog back on
> earth, would (1) down tools, start a "safety meeting," and file a
> grievance the minute someone tried to beef up any "guidelines" that
> induced excess peer pressure against non-teetotlers to turn those
> "guidelines" into any outright blanket prohibition; while (2) parting
> the hair, with a wrench, of anyone so intoxicated that he caused a
> problem on duty or off.
Chief steward? I think it would be a long, long time before a space
colony would be unionized enough to have sitdowns. A more pertitnent
analogy might be the senior chief/sergeant major/etc. in a military
unit, who consciously is there to provide an alternate line of
communications, often for morale issues.
I'm most familiar with medical situations, and I don't know an on-call
physician, especially one who does invasive procedures, that will touch
a drop when they are on-call, as opposed to being totally on their own
time and getting called in for a specialized or mass casualty emergency.
>
> > At some point, the colony would be large enough that there's less
> > likely
> > to be catastrophic failure if an off-duty person doesn't respond
> > automatically. Speaking of "large", I refer to "Gentlemen, Be Seated."
>
> You keep wanting there to be an absolute magic number before you'll
> allow such a thing as an off-watch (but still on duty -- nobody is ever
> off duty in a ship underweigh, and no one is even off duty in a space
> colony, under the dome, until death, furlough away, or discharge)
> status, Howard.
I'd say you are putting words in my mouth when you say I'm looking for a
number that is absolute or magic. There are very different manning
levels, for example, on commercial and military ships, fundamentally due
to the need for extra hands for damage control. There are differences
between surface ships and submarines, due to the speed at which an
accident can propagate in a sub, and the sheer space restrictions that
limit submarine crew size.
>I think that's silly. Two is large enough in most
> situations. One to be off watch (not off duty), sip his prescribed tot
> of rum to help get to sleep, and one to be on.
Watch-and-watch is not sustainable over a long period of time. Even
surface ships go to modified general quarters in an alert situation,
because there is routine maintenance to do, people need to eat and
sleep, etc. The usual figure for manning a military command post, where
you need people sharp at all times, is 5 people for billet -- that's the
rule at the National Military Command Center. You certainly can get by
with less, but 2 doesn't fly in any situation of which I'm aware.
>If one isn't enough to
> handle the situation, then neither goes off watch until the problem is
> solved, if -- and only if -- staying on watch can solve it; and, if not,
> ultimately you'll get "Sky Lift" (in _Menace From Earth_) for both,
> whether either or none survives. Numbers never make things fail-safe. If
> it got down to one, then to preserve his or her sanity, there'd have to
> be off-watch times. "Sign off now and go have a stiff drink or two,
> Colonel Briteis. Don't sign back on until 0800. That's an order."
You know, David, while I've never been a teetotaler, I can't ever
remember craving a stiff drink after a hard day. I don't think I'm
unique in that. I drink in some social occasions, or as part of a meal
because the taste complements what I'm eating. I remain unconvinced
that in a small, select population, alcohol will be as critical a
lubricant to life as you appear to believe.
>
> Finally, the same Mr. Konski would "be seated" just as quickly whether
> he'd already had his tot celebrating the end of his shift, or not.
>
> Mr. Konski is an adult, and perfectly capable of ensuring that his
> co-workers are adults, including the supervision up through the
> paymaster, as well, when necessary, by among other things "calling
> safety meetings," and treat each other as such.
Again, you are describing a union-oriented work structure that would be
extremely unlikely in an austere colony. In some cases, it isn't even
impairment that would affect rules on some substances. If, for example,
someone wanted to use their personal weight allowance on snuff, fine.
Personal health decision.
But before I'd allow ANY smoking of ANY substance, I'd want a detailed
engineering analysis of the effect the products of combustion would have
on the air filtration systems. Airlines have consistently mentioned, in
the aviation trade press, that much more maintenance is needed on the
filters of smoking flights -- the "tar" gums them up.
In like manner, submarines are quite restrictive of aerosol cans,
because many aerosol propellant gasses can screw up the air system.
This is especially true of chlorofluorocarbons, which are generally
being replaced.
Engr Bohn
Hail, Kullervo Nurmi! We who are about to post salute you.
> charles krin <ck...@bayou.com> wrote:
[...]
>>considering that we are planning to run a predominant nitrox mix at a
>>substantially lower than 'normal' atmospheric pressure (IIRC, we
>>wanted to maintain a fairly normal partial pressure of O2 of around
>>160 mmHg, and mostly reduce the partial pressure of N2 (normally
>>around 600 mmHg)- so figure around 400 mmHg total or about 40% O2),
>>which puts the max dose of CO2 at something less than 10% *in the
>>habitat areas*...the greenhouse can bit a bit higher.
>
> A mix with 40% O2 in it is a problem in itself: _greatly_ increased
> risk of fire & prolly other probs -- we are _quite_ used to the mix &
> pressure we have...
No, 40% O2, in of itself, does not increase the fire risk. It's the
partial pressure of oxygen that presents the fire risk. In 760 mmHg
total pressure, 21% O2 corresponds to 160 mmHg partial pressure of O2.
Similarly, 100% O2 at 160 mmHg total pressure does not present a greater
fire risk than 21% O2 at 760 mmHg total pressure. If you're not
convinced that it's the partial pressure and not the mix, take it to an
extreme -- 100% O2 at 0.00075 mmHg total pressure (the approximate total
pressure at 100 km above the Earth's surface, albeit not 100% O2) ...
now try to light a match.
[...]
Take care,
cb
--
Christopher A. Bohn ____________|____________
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~bohn/ ' ** ** " (o) " ** ** '
"Airmen ... have demonstrated that dominance in air, space, and
cyberspace yields decisive combat results."
- Gen John Jumper, July 2003
charles krin
actually, we have quite a body of evidence that it does not...40% O2
is quite common in long term diving habitats, as part of the measures
to reduce the toxicity of Nitrogen, and other problems associated with
high concentrations of Helium...in the Lunar colonies, a high
percentage of Nitrogen will have other problems...mostly associated
with the need to *transport* the gas. Anybody recall what Skylab, Mir
and Freedom have used/will used? IIRC, it's not 'standard' air at
standard pressure...
and since reducing the air pressure in the habitat will a: reduce the
amount of gas needed to fill the habitat, b: reduce the inevitable
losses due to leaks, c: [specifically referring to reducing the
partial pressure of nitrogen] reduce the chances of 'the bends' in the
event of a less than totally catastrophic loss of pressure, and d: can
be expected to be well tolerated by the folks up there (it's more the
over all hypoxia that causes problems with altitude sickness, rather
than the lower pressure)...I suspect that the lower pressures overall
will be acceptable.
one of the things that need to be remember is that each human on site
is also the equivalent of at least a 100 watt heat source...24/7...the
recycling plants would also provide some heat as well...
with a decent insulation set up, and placing the initial colonies near
the poles (yes, that would involve more delta V, but would pay off in
the long term) I suspect that heat balance will end up being
relatively low on the totem pole...
charles krin
speaking of aerosol cans...most of those in space will probably be
replaced with a bladder in a can, with pressure on the bladder to
provide the spray...
this is for a couple of reasons...first and foremost, terrestrial
systems of pumps and standard aerosols require gravitational settling
to get the fluid to the pick up tube...
second, the pressure on the bladder style cans is easy to manage...the
others require something on the order of CFCs, propane, butane or
nitrous oxide...all gases which have a relatively low condensation
pressure/high condensation temperature and which have many fluids
which they are at least miscible with...
but none of them are the kinds of gases that you want floating around
in a closed circuit habitat...
LV Poker Player
>No, 40% O2, in of itself, does not increase the fire risk. It's the
>partial pressure of oxygen that presents the fire risk.
From online research, you are only partially right. The nitrogen in air cools
and slows a fire. The stuff we breathe is about 3 PSI O2 and 12 PSI nitrogen
(with some other things in trace amounts). Take out that nitrogen, and leave 3
PSI of O2 only, and fires will burn hotter and faster than they do when the
nitrogen is present.
When you have high pressure pure O2, such as in Apollo 1, then you are looking
at a serious risk, as they found out.
LV Poker Player
>> Oh yeah, you did answer. You said that we should treat the colonists as
>> responsible adults. THAT HAS BEEN MY SUGGESTION RIGHT FROM THE START,
>LIAR.
>> It still is.
>
>Well, then contrast that point with the seemingly inflexible points you
>sometimes maintain. Frex, somewhere elsethread you've maintained that
>mechanically it should never be possible that one person can open both
>doors of an airlock at the same time. Good rule, seemingly.
Possibly...
>"Hal, please close the outer door so I can pressurize and open the inner
>door of the airlock."
>
>"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that."
>
>You saw what Dave had to do, didn't you?
Yes. Did not involve opening both airlock doors simultaneously.
>Hal doesn't have to be a malignant computer, poorly programmed. All he
>needs to be is the other guy, gone round the bend on Dave, and therefore
>malfunctioning, even only temporarily -- you see, by treating him as
>irresponsible by imposing rules ("just temporary ones," mind you) you've
>challenged Hal to defeat your rules -- and since he did it in secrecy,
>he enjoyed the fruits of his secret defiance, his little still, by
>destroying the evidence before you could discover it -- he drank all the
>booze he made in his first run up at one time -- then washed out and
>racked the non-purpose built utensils and tools he mis-used to do so;
>and now he's drunk and he won't open the airlock for Dave. So sober and
>unrebellious Dave, out there, dies when the air runs out of his suit.
For one thing, you have not described a situation where one person needs to
open both airlock doors simultaneously.
Far more importantly, if Hal or any other crewmember is secretly making and
consuming alcohol, WE PICKED THE WRONG CREW. The place to solve this or any
similar problem is on Earth, with a crew selection process that will be tougher
than the selection process was for the Mercury 7 (we probably want 3 or 4
rather than 7).
Professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream.
Professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream.
Professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream.
Another way to put this is "the right stuff."
Repeat that until the concept finally sinks into that thick skull of yours. Or
repeat it until you die of old age, whichever comes first.
THOSE are the rules I want imposed, liar. The rules that say that we treat
these people as responsible adults, because on Earth we bloody well made 100%
certain they were responsible adults before sending them on the mission.
Responsible adults don't build secret stills. They sit down and discuss what
they should do next, now that hydroponics is functioning at full level. They
reach a concensus decision (probably consulting with mission control on Earth)
then implement that decision. If the decision is that it is time to build a
still, fine, they build it. I still maintain that a small, professional highly
dedicated crew with a dream is going to make that a low priority. Not because
mission rules say so, BUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE OTHER PRIORITIES.
You will ignore this and just keep right on fraudulently claiming that I want
to impose rules, right? You are a goddam liar.
As for the airlock policy (planned ahead of time on Earth, in consultation with
the responsible adults who will constitute this professional, highly dedicated
crew with a dream, the people who have "the right stuff"), extremes should
probably be avoided. I don't like the idea of a big red button with the label
"Open both airlock doors simultaneously." Some clumsy oaf with Asperger's
Syndrome might stumble up against and "WHOOSH" instant vacuum. Of course, that
clumsy oaf with Asperger's Syndrome probably can't get past the selection
committee, but still, accidents do happen to the best of us. The other
extreme, posted by someone else, is to make it pysically impossible to ever
open both doors at once. Well, doing so would certainly be an unusual event,
but you never know. I still think two person release control is a good idea.
If it is possible for one person to open both at once, it should be very hard,
a multi step process that can only implemented on purpose. Is it possible to
construct a hypothetical situation where the only way to save the colony is to
instantly open both doors, and the roadblocks I have put in the way of doing so
dooms the colony? Possibly. You pays your money and takes your chances. What
do the members of this professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream think?
Let's listen to them.
>To like effect, you've maintained in several posts to 'we should not
>send up "purpose-built" equipment capabile of distilling or fermenting
>drinking alcohol, as if it made some difference. Goodness gracious, what
>in the world does that mean? No Acme Handy-Dandy Still Kits?
Yes, I would say it means that. I would rather send equipment needed to
extract nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon and helium. I would rather send a few decks
of playing cards. I would rather send a blowup doll of Paris Hilton. I would
rather send telescope tracking equipment. I would rather send whatever Chuck
requests to help out in the birth of the first lunar baby. I would rather send
the seismic monitor designed and built by the USGS. I would rather send the
electronic heart of the radio telescope, since the colonists have built the
dish out of lunar materials but electronics are still beyond them. I would
rather send electronics manufacturing equipment so that manufacturing future
electronic components will be within their capabilities. I would rather send
chemistry equipment that is needed, whether or not it is something that could
easily be converted into a still. What is your point?
>You don't
>need a special kit -- ask anyone who's even made drinking alcohol from
>anything organic, or "pruno" as they call it in jails or prisons. Ask
>any eleven year old Boy Scout who's crushed rotten apricots into an
>earthware pot, covered it with muslin, and waited a few weeks to strain
>and pour its results through a dish tower into a bottle. Don't need
>apricots or fruit. You can make it with bread, or crackers, or stale
>cheerios.
PRECISELY the reason I keep insisting that we don't need to send this stuff out
of Earth's gravity well. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
Are you saying we should reverse this policy? Are you saying we should send
the stuff that they could build themselves, in preference over the stuff that
can only be built on Earth?
>Your rule sounds like what it is: a mere fig-leaf. Yet you fixate upon
>these things, as if they were important.
WHAT RULE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, LIAR?
The one and ONLY rule I have advocated is that we send a small, professional,
highly dedicated crew with a dream. If you think we would be better off with a
crew of yahoos who will build secret stills as soon as they have hydroponics
going, I would be interested in your reasoning.
If you are claiming that I have advocated any other rule, QUOTE THE POST LIAR.
>The tot of grog (half watered rum) served daily kept crews of pressed
>seamen, and some of them were substance abusers, from grabbing the
>eleven-year-old pipsqueaks called midshipmen by the officers and
>"snotties" by the seamen, and tossing them over the stern, or down under
>the heads, during nightwatch on voyages that lasted years out of sight
>of anything the crew considered civilization; and it also kept them
>generally from doing worse, for hundreds of years.
Invalid analogy. There is no comparison between a crew of a wooden sailing
ship and the professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream that we will
send. If I were a member of that crew, I think I would be insulted by the
above. If I wanted to a member of that crew, I would KNOW that I had just been
insulted. Since I do want to be a member of that crew, I consider the above to
be an insult. Guess it is what I should expect from a liar.
>Doctors prescribed alcohol in moderate amounts, for hundreds of years,
>to relieve the same sorts of stress.
These guys (or guys and gals, or gals) have to be able to handle stress. Part
of the selection process will be stress tests on the same scale as whatever
those Mercury applicants went through. If anyone cannot handle it, he is
weeded out of the program as soon as this is realized. You know, that "small,
professional, highly dedicated crew with a dream" concept.
>A sanely-run colony would 'prescribe' the same, daily when necessary, or
>whenever a responsible person felt it required or expedient or not
>tactically prohibited. "Siddown, Hal, and, here, have a beer. The
>station commander said the Sutler's store is open from 8 to 9 tonight.
>That was one hell of a tough job you did this afternoon, getting the
>sunscreens repaired and repositioned. Damned uncharted meteor shower!
>I'm exhausted."
A sanely-run colony will consist of people who can handle the above, with or
without alcohol.
>All that nineteen-year-old and his seventeen-year-old wife who crossed
>the Rockies needed when they got to Oregon was a kettle, some tubing,
>heat, and grain and water. I'd wager a good many of them made drinking
>liquor as soon as, if not before, the first crop was harvested.
Once again confirming that the still should be made on the moon out of lunar
raw materials, not sent from out of Earth's gravity well.
>top fixating, and concentrate on what's
>important --
I agree. I guess the lies themselves did not bother me all that much. Some,
but not all that much. What bothers me a lot more is gullible idiots such as
Pete Lagrange who believe your lies. If he and maybe a few others would stop
believing your lies, then I would probably stop obsessing about the lies.
> is a product of zero
>intellect.
Lying about what someone has posted is a sign of zero intellect.
>. You repudiate it on some occasions
I have attempted to repudiate it every single last time you told the lie.
>yet you evidence to a
>suspicious reader -- and I'm certainly a suspicious reader -- a tendancy
>to 'camel-nose,' it back every time you start citing a rule as dogma.
If I ever start citing rules as dogma, we can discuss the issue, liar.
>But, as you've said, I'm a liar or an idiot, so LV, you can just go on
>obsessing to someone's amusement -- not mine, mind you, for I think it's
>a waste when you do so.
Lying about what has been posted is a waste of time and bandwidth. It is also
idiotic since anyone with a minimal amount of intelligence (anyone except Pete
Lagrange, perhaps) can go back and check what I have actually posted, if they
have any doubts.
LV Poker Player
>> No, you are a liar or moron because you made false statements concerning
>> what I posted.
>
>PPOR, I've not made any false statements. I've only made my opinion clear,
>trouble is you don't like my opinion and can't think of a better argument
>than name calling.
>
PPOR that I have ever called you names, liar.
Opinions are one thing. Outright, blatant lies are another matter entirely.
>Why don't you address my point? Again, I think those who go and take the
>risk should make the decisions concerning their future.
The only way I see to address this point is to agree totally, 100%, and call
you a liar when you claim otherwise.
Why don't you address the point? Why don't you quote any post of mine where I
have said anything else? Is it because you are a liar, and know that no such
post exists?
LV Poker Player
Hehehe. Well, it might be a while before we need Huey hovering skills, since
even if we do figure a way to get an atmosphere we also need a way to keep it
there. Overall, it sounds like you would be a better colonist than I would be.
The "jack of all trades" is definitely what is needed, the guy who can do just
about anything and figure out the stuff he does not know how to do offhand.
You know, kind of the opposite of me.
Ok, so far our crew consists of Mac, you and me. You and Mac had better get
together and make a consensus decision about whether or not you would consider
my presence an asset. I will accept your decision on this.
David Silver, I think your theory about "no one will go" is going down the
tubes.