Re: Re: Re: starship-design: scoops and sails and something topush against.

["N. Lindberg" <nlindber@u.washington.edu>]

Acttually, a few european colonies have been started for religious
reasons, such as the Puritans, quakers, and later the mormons in Utah.  I
don't know how plausible interstellar pilgrimage is, but I can see the
appeal for some group to leave "babylon" behind and set out for the
promised land.  A large group with a strong vision and strong finances
could do this even prior to more "public" colony projects.
Best Regards
Nels Lindberg

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Steve VanDevender wrote:

> KellySt@aol.com writes:
>  > In a message dated 10/5/98 1:59:07 AM, stevev@efn.org wrote:
>  >
>  > >With our current level of technology and planet-bound economy, I
>  > >can see how it would be hard to imagine how to fund interstellar
>  > >exploration.
>  > >
>  > >When we have an interplanetary economy, with the level of
>  > >technology and access to resources that implies, answering the
>  > >question "Why should we go to the stars?" with "because we can"
>  > >will make a lot more sense.  If we have self-sustaining orbital
>  > >colonies, then the expertise and infrastructure needed to build
>  > >interstellar spacecraft is far more likely to be there, and the
>  > >expense of obtaining the materials and construction labor will be
>  > >far less.
>  > >
>  > >In other words, the culture that goes to the stars will be a far
>  > >different culture than we have now, particularly in the economic
>  > >sense.  This isn't the first time I've had to remind Kelly of
>  > >that.
>  > 
>  > Two problems with that.
>  > 
>  > 1 - such a economy is unlikely to develop to that degree (where interstellar
>  > missions can be aforded as a lark rather then for a valuble purpose) within
>  > the next century or two.
>  >
>  > 2 - within that time period all current sci and tech limits will be invalid.
> 
> I'm willing to concede that; there's no guarantee that by 2050
> we'll have the technology or the willingness as a society to
> stage an interstellar exploration mission.
> 
> Is the original target goal of the Lunar Institute of Technology
> still feasible?  I don't know, but the possibility of manned
> starflight by 2050, without some major adjustments in society and 
> technology, is beginning to look a bit slim.
> 
>  > In other words, yes at some point in the future our technology will bring down
>  > the cost enough, and our our economy will make indeviduals or clubs rich
>  > enough, to pay for a star flight.  Not soon, and they likely will just be a
>  > flight out, a few tourist or research photos, then everyone comes home.
>  > 
>  > Colonies, regardless of the tech, are done for reason of profit and loss.
> 
> That seems to be a very selective view of history, as there are
> plenty of examples of colonization that were never intended to
> bring home a profit (at least when the society in question had
> that concept), such as the people who colonized the South
> Pacific, or for that matter that left Africa a million years ago.
> You seem to be considering only recent European examples of
> colonization.
>