[ditpiler]

Economic systems aren't going to change within 5 to 10 years. A little thing called the GFC is going to restrict any fanciful spending for quite a while and unfortunately people like Bill Gates are too interested in saving African kiddies...

While we can be sure the laws of physics are not going to change, we can not be sure of politics and economics.

[Greapyjeory]

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1238/1

gives a run-down on this kind of idea.

[Theateetetuig]

While we can be sure the laws of physics are not going to change, we can not be sure of politics and economics.

That's a nice throw away line but in reality it's not going to change the fact the world is in a financial mess and it's going to take at least 5 to 10 years to get over it, especially now that Europeans are electing anti-austerity governments...

[Saduyre9de]

No...I'm referring to changing political and economical systems, that isn't going to change in five years either. look at what difficulties the eurozone is in plus russia and the US isn't going to good either. it'll be more than 5 years for a turnaround.

[Paladin]

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1238/1

gives a run-down on this kind of idea.

If you imagine a very large Amex card...

[tickerinet]

While we can be sure the laws of physics are not going to change, we can not be sure of politics and economics. no one says they wont. we just say they wont in the next 5 years.

[tigoCeree]

If you imagine a very large Amex card... forget the gold go for the unobtanium one.

[orison]

that isn't going to change in five years either. look at what difficulties the eurozone is in plus russia and the US isn't going to good either. it'll be more than 5 years for a turnaround.

You don't really know that...just supposition.
Interesting link also...But we all know, you can get as many links pointing out the present unfavourable political and economical situations for large projects, and I can find just as many far more optimistic links that urge these projects to go ahead.
Like the example I gave earlier up there somewhere, How many "learned" people were decrying the Snowy Mountains project when it was proposed, and probably continued decrying it until it was completed.

Any large project will always face the usual pessimistic "it can't be done" approach.

The project is imaginative, innovative and challenging. Just what we need to get our minds on furthering human exploration of the solar system.

It's only ever been worthwhile projects and discoveries like this that has seen shifts in humanity's outlook and destiny.
It's all 199% going to happen eventually, so why not make a start now.

[SarkisPioute]

You don't really know that...just supposition. not many analysts believe otherwise though. so if one is to credit the experts in this field then one would have to say the world's economic situation isn't going to turn around in 5 years.

[jarsbars]

so why not make a start now.

10 to 25 % unemployment, multi-trillion dollar debts, higher priorities, political will...

[Chooriwrocaxz]

Our Space Problem
Space, the final frontier …

Since the spectacular Apollo moon landing in 1969 we have lost our way when it comes to big projects for putting humans into space. Some let down was inevitable. After all, the moon landing was one of the greatest achievements in human history. It’s just awfully hard to top that. After the Apollo missions we built the space shuttle, which was impressive, but in the end it was pretty much a magnificent space-truck to move people and cargo into earth’s low orbit. In terms of inspiration, the shuttle program was lacking compared to the feat of landing men on the moon and returning them safely to earth.

We built some space stations too, first Skylab, and lately, in collaboration with other nations, the International Space Station or ISS. But these have been yawners and perhaps not worth the money spent. The average person is left wondering why we are spending billions of dollars to build and maintain these fragile habitats. There is just not much inspiring about them, and they haven’t mattered much for advancing science either. The ISS may cost over $100 billion before its final days, and one must wonder what better space exploration projects could have been funded in its place. Aboard the ISS there is no gravity, living quarters are cramped, you sleep floating in space – even using the toilet is comical and primitive. We are still stuck in the 1960s in many ways when it comes to putting human beings into space.

As the second decade of the 21st century rolls along – isn’t it time to expect something much grander for our human endeavors into space? Isn’t it time for something that will truly inspire us again while at the same time definitively giving humanity a sustainable, permanent presence in space?

If we are going to spend hundreds of billions of dollars putting humans into space, including visiting other celestial bodies like the moon and Mars, it’s time to get past the mentality of one-shot space missions. America is an affluent nation with 27% of the world’s GDP. We can afford to dream much bigger. Doing a one-shot mission to Mars makes no sense given its high cost and that all of the equipment used in the mission will be discarded or put into museums. A one-shot mission to Mars is really just a souped-up version of our first one-shot mission to the moon. Once the Mars feat is done, the party is over, just like it was soon over after we landed on the moon. So after a one-shot Mars mission we will be back to scratching our heads trying to figure out how humans will ever get firmly established in space. As incredible as it would be to see humans walking on the surface of Mars as part of a one-shot mission, we have to wonder if there is a better way to tackle the challenge of human space exploration.

So instead of a one-shot space project to get humans to Mars for a limited visit, we need to think in terms of a sustainable human presence in space. From this point of view, a mission to take humans to Mars would simply fit into our human-supporting infrastructure in space where humanity has a permanent presence. Thus we need a space strategy that will completely eclipse the Apollo-style programs of rocketing humans to other places as one-shot affairs.

So let’s think outside the box. What would be a much bolder vision for human space exploration? We need a profoundly different strategy. And in fact there is something entirely different to consider – and it’s sitting right in front of us – inspired by our science fiction. You might call it Visions of Enterprise.



http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/our-space-problem


Except of course, it should/will be done on a global effort.

[bushomeworkk]

not many analysts believe otherwise though. so if one is to credit the experts in this field then one would have to say the world's economic situation isn't going to turn around in 5 years.

But are they Engineers...

[mikefertynnz]

To infinity, and beyond!

[VQdeochratis]

To infinity, and beyond!

Well as far as we can get anyway...I mean why stagnate on this fart arse little blue orb, living, eating, shitting becoming rich and dying.
Thank goodness we will always have visionaries.

[chuviskkk]

What's the point in calling people pessimists for pointing out the obvious reasons that this isn't going to happen in the timeframe specified? Even you know it wont happen, B.C., admit it.

If everyone suddenly decided that this was the "one true goal" of our civilisation, I have no doubt it could be done. But that will never happen with real humans, and even if it was to be achievable, we should be aspiring to so much more than constructing a star trek replica.

A generation ship would be big, ugly conglomeration of modules, all with a purpose. No sleek, aerodynamic lines.

What is the state of play in regards to shielding an inter-stellar ship from high velocity dust, rocks, etc.?

[Hamucevasiop]

Thank goodness we will always have visionaries. we want sensible ones though. like clarke, asimov, verne et al.

[grubnismarl]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.5318

Organizing and financing interstellar space projects

[18holesin]

Roddenberry was a soap opera writer, more than a scientific visionary.

[Scukonahuy]

What's the point in calling people pessimists for pointing out the obvious reasons that this isn't going to happen in the timeframe specified? Even you know it wont happen, B.C., admit it.


If everyone suddenly decided that this was the "one true goal" of our civilisation, I have no doubt it could be done. But that will never happen with real humans, and even if it was to be achievable, we should be aspiring to so much more than constructing a star trek replica.

A generation ship would be big, ugly conglomeration of modules, all with a purpose. No sleek, aerodynamic lines.

What is the state of play in regards to shielding an inter-stellar ship from high velocity dust, rocks, etc.?

I have NEVER really argued time frames in any of my predictions or future advancements boxy.
And what would yo u like me to admit too?
Of course I'm only arguing against the pessimists that are saying it cannot be done...
Please read all the thread.
Again and as I have already said, I'm not too concerned about a "Star Ship replica"...please read back.
Good to see you agree though that it can be done.

With the shielding, I'm not sure but I think protection against small hits is viable...not 100% sure though, but again as I have pointed out, there will be far more expertise working on such a project if it got off the ground, then you could poke a stick at.
It's a problem of some concern, but like radiation it can be overcome to some extent.

[satthackacibe]

Roddenberry was a soap opera writer, more than a scientific visionary.

As distinct from Clarke, and Asimov you mean?