tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post3269506138621090129..comments2024-03-28T15:48:48.514-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Is our time in outer space finally at-hand?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger181125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43348788304372724702012-05-10T19:57:28.337-07:002012-05-10T19:57:28.337-07:00onwardonwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58123910042518226142012-05-10T19:57:21.311-07:002012-05-10T19:57:21.311-07:00Doug, terrific comment on making meteorite blades!...Doug, terrific comment on making meteorite blades! What a great story. But good answer SteveO re cavils. Blowing carbon through the melt is clearly crucial. Mad Librarian also. What a group we have!<br /><br />And thanks TimHDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-7251270041493925602012-05-10T19:57:11.682-07:002012-05-10T19:57:11.682-07:00Locumranch is back to normal! Like this incredibl...Locumranch is back to normal! Like this incredible piece of nonsense rationalization:<br /><br />"<i>In the case of meritocracy, the choosing force is ill-defined, conflicted in terms of preexisting authority and ill-equipped in terms of an electorate. In the case of aristocracy, the choosing force is also ill-defined, most often in terms of divine bloodlines, history or an accident of birth. It therefore follows that the difference between meritocracy & aristocracy is largely a matter of perspective."</i><br /><br />Choke sputter cough barf. What utter donkey hockey! The sort of thing that subjectivist cynics like L actually think make sense. Both Postmodernist dolts on the left and far more numerous anti-science trogs on the right do this.<br /><br />In fact, there are many varieties of meritocracy and many of them rely either wholly or partially on objective things to discern ability. Like the performance of standardized tasks to prove skill, or comparative/timed trials in which all candidates take on the same difficult or even insoluble problem. Then there are competitive tests that compare outcomes from simulation games, or teambuilding tests. <br /><br />Or (Einstein again) the ultimate meritocracy of science, being proved right by experimental comparisions against objective reality. <br /><br />"One could argue that Einstein's genius was recognized by historical accident, simply because his theories were proposed at a time of social instability"<br /><br />Yes! One COULD argue that... if one were utterly ill informed and warped by preconceived notions to see only what fit your cynical model. I agree, a smart dope COULD make that argument.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-71146042475295266232012-05-10T18:50:27.760-07:002012-05-10T18:50:27.760-07:00Two browsers I've used on 10.4 systems,
http:...Two browsers I've used on 10.4 systems, <br />http://www.floodgap.com/software/tenfourfox/ based on mozilla code, optimized for PPC. icab.de, based on webkit. One I haven't tried, but read some good comment on, caminobrowser.org, also built on webkit, hope one of these works for you.Tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-49028314947234478152012-05-10T18:04:05.533-07:002012-05-10T18:04:05.533-07:00A fast rundown on what you might expect to find mi...A fast rundown on what you might expect to find mineral-wise, as an asteroid miner (disclaimer, I collect meteorites for a hobby, so I have a working idea if not a comprehensive one):<br />Iron meteorites are mostly iron (duh!), nickel and cobalt, with trace amounts of other metals like germanium, gallium, magnesium, iridium, etc.<br />Stony meteorites are surprisingly rich in free iron; terrestrial rocks are exposed to our oxidizing atmosphere, so most iron is bound as oxides. The stony components are mostly other metal oxides and compounds, appearing as plagioclases and hypersthenes, with the occasional olivine crystal, and a fair porportion of aluminum. Asteroid scientists are still working out compositions, let alone how and why the various things accreted the way they did. Strangely enough, the DAWN mission to Vesta thinks they have found pockets of water ice!<br />The valuable ones are going to be your carbonaceous chondrites, rich in volatiles, carbon compounds, CAI (calcium-aluminum inclusions), and other stuff useful to human habitation.<br />The devil will indeed be in the details. I suspect the next step will be setting up a machine shop in orbit to thrash out processing techniques in zero-gee, once you get an orbiting chunk in easy reach.<br /><br />TheMadLibrarian<br />ndsommen thoples: tiny Gaelic pastries consumed on Midsummer's EveTheMadLibrariannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73185187440800559942012-05-10T14:21:34.357-07:002012-05-10T14:21:34.357-07:00Hey Doug - cool! I'll bet that is beautiful! ...Hey Doug - cool! I'll bet that is beautiful! I'd love to see a picture. I dabble in knife and sword-making my own self.<br /><br />I am trying to put myself into space though. It is hard, because one can't assume anything you can rely on here is going to work. (Which is also why you should take anything I say with a big grain of salt - doin' my metallurgical best to CITOKATE here!)<br /><br />The Wootz-like steel layers you see are a product of gravity and how dentrites form in the presence of convection, along with some density sorting, if I recall correctly. (I chatted with an archeological metallurgist who duplicated the Wootz steel process, but that was a long while ago.)<br /><br />None of that is going to happen in space. You have totally different (actually easier to model, but way different that we are used to) metal kinetics in micro-g. You might, as suggested earlier, centrifuge it, but I have no real idea how that would work on an industrial scale.<br /><br />You need a source of carbon, plus a source of oxygen to burn off the extra carbon (like a BOF) if you want to end up with steel. Being on Earth that is no problem. But that is a big problem up there. And you are going to have to figure how to control the elemental components - variability is the bane of a large-scale project.<br /><br />Anyway, never said it would be impossible, just that it is a lot harder to make steel from the presumed asteroid composition than it would be to make it on Earth.<br /><br />PLUS iron meteors come from a thermally sorted and concentrated source (e.g. Vesta). Our target asteroids are likely going to be a bunch of Al-Si rich regolith - basically basalt. Not too many meteors (or chunks of metal) lying around! (Probably some meteors hit the asteroids, but finding meteors is no way to build a scalable economy.)SteveOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04028435196419643147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87713116615647580642012-05-10T14:06:48.819-07:002012-05-10T14:06:48.819-07:00Hi Paul,
I dabbled a little bit in archeological ...Hi Paul,<br /><br />I dabbled a little bit in archeological metallurgy. (I had a T.J. Watson fellowship to study medieval swords and sword making - fascinating stuff for another time.)<br /><br />Meteorite iron is only good for weapons relative to iron (or "pig iron") or bronze. Primitive steels would have been much better for weapons, assuming they were able to deslag sufficiently. I was able to find this paper where they reported strengths for a forged meteoric Ni-Fe wire in tensile testing: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1970Metic...5...63K They came up with around 60 ksi. Structural steel is about the same. 1090 (good for making swords, easily obtainable using ancient methods) is about twice that at about 122 ksi. Maraging steel is way higher - about 390 ksi. The range of compression strength of 16-60 ksi is worrying, since that is more likely to be a failure point in some sort of space construction.<br /><br />Still, not saying you couldn't use it, but you would face a whole host of unknown engineering issues since Ni-Fe is not a construction material on this planet since you can get better and cheaper steel. If you could refine it somehow, it would actually have some good thermal expansion properties, which would be a critical design parameter for space construction.<br /><br />I don't object to doing that research! I am just saying that when a scientist says, "All these great elements are there - we can build with them and sell them! The engineer can figure out the trivial problems of actually doing so," an engineer somewhere rolls his or her eyes knowing that what to a scientist is "trivial" could be economically or logistically impossible. This is really a "devil in the details" thing. I think I can definitively say that space resource exploitation will not be anything like a no-brainer as Planetary Resources describes.<br /><br />Sintering regolith would make a fine "cinderblock" component - but nobody on Earth is going to pay for rego-bricks. That would be cool for in-situ habitation construction though. Funny how we start at the beginning in a new frontier - back to building with bricks!<br /><br />But don't lose sight of the fact that we have to have an economic reason to build something or it won't happen, at least long term. Apollo being the exception that proves that rule.SteveOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04028435196419643147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-52773589774661026252012-05-10T13:47:53.963-07:002012-05-10T13:47:53.963-07:00Meritocracy is determined often by testing. Such t...Meritocracy is determined often by testing. Such things as civil service examinations would allow people with the specific needed skills to achieve jobs in government or the private sector. It is NOT determined by the whims of a all-deciding benign dictator or the like as you seem to once more be claiming. Also, the "new" is not necessarily better than the "old." <br /><br />You've already stated in your past your preference for anarchy over government structures. Anarchy doesn't work because it inevitably becomes "Might Makes Right" or more specifically "My Might Makes Me More Right Than You." Even fictional anarchistic societies often use some sort of structure; one such example in webcomics has the Anarchist States actually ruled by a nominal Meritocracy (and with a bare minimum of laws, thus it being anarchy) while the state itself is manipulated by an Artificial Sentience that sees all nations as corrupt and needing to be overthrown.<br /><br />So give it up. Anarchy is doomed to failure. Structure is not a bad thing.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-37995227890452146112012-05-10T13:40:58.520-07:002012-05-10T13:40:58.520-07:00As an amateur metalurgist, who's worked with m...As an amateur metalurgist, who's worked with meteoric steel, I don't see the problem if you want to get a workable steel out of a mostly-iron asteroid. Assuming it's composition is the same as most meteorites, we're talking 5-25% Ni, a trace of cobalt, and the remainder iron. <br /><br />For knifemaking use a group of us made steel from one a few weeks ago, melting a low-nickle meteor in a crucible with 10% carbon (charcoal fines) resulting in a nice wootz-like hyper-eutectic carbon steel. While we did this only on a small scale in atmosphere and in a gravity well, I can think of several ways that might work in space. The method we used certainly resulted in a lovely knife. <br /><br />From research on plasma-reduction of hazardous waste, I've read that as part of the recycling process associated with that the researchers use differential condensation to separate out different elements and compounds -- blast the whole lot with 5000 degree plasma until it vaporizes, then run the vapor through a gradually cooling pipe. If they can make a large enough parabolic mirror, no need for a plasma torch, either -- just vaporize it all in a big bag, then start cooling it, separating out the desired elements as they condense on the cooling element. <br /><br />It will be hard. It will be expensive. I would expect the first attempts to fail, go bankrupt, or otherwise turn out to be more of a pain than it's worth. Not impossible, though, and over time, given a few decades of research and development, I expect it would return great yields and profits.Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02388599646624780737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63746717754923877762012-05-10T13:35:37.904-07:002012-05-10T13:35:37.904-07:00That Einstein was a genius, this is indisputable, ...That Einstein was a genius, this is indisputable, confirmed by 20/20 hindsight. That his theories were universally accepted & acclaimed from the moment of their creation, this is yet another myth, the myth being that a stable culture is capable of either predicting, identifying or embracing change.<br /><br />Whereas Aristocracy is defined as a government or rule chosen by birth or heredity, Meritocracy is defined as government or rule by persons chosen for their superior talents or intellect rather than birth.<br /><br />The key word in both definitions is 'chosen'. Chosen by what or whom? <br /><br />In the case of meritocracy, the choosing force is ill-defined, conflicted in terms of preexisting authority and ill-equipped in terms of an electorate. In the case of aristocracy, the choosing force is also ill-defined, most often in terms of divine bloodlines, history or an accident of birth.<br /><br />It therefore follows that the difference between meritocracy & aristocracy is largely a matter of perspective. The meritocracy argues that the metaphorical cream (the best & brightest) will rise to the top, and the aristocracy argues that it represents the metaphorical cream (the best & brightest) because it is already at the top.<br /><br />One could argue that Einstein's genius was recognized by historical accident, simply because his theories were proposed at a time of social instability when an old social and intellectual order was being destroyed & replaced by the new, as in WW1 and WW2.<br /><br />This is the error that proponents of elite scientific or expert rule have made and continue to make:<br /><br />The new must replace the old or the old will stifle the new.<br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-6889054249432371012012-05-10T11:10:58.462-07:002012-05-10T11:10:58.462-07:00Locumranch,
The idea of Einstein as a high-school ...Locumranch,<br />The idea of Einstein as a high-school drop-out, forced to toil in obscurity as a patent clerk, is a myth. He excelled in his first school, when he was ten he was mentored by Max Talmey (then a medical student and friend of the family) in maths and philosophy. Einstein left his German highschool due to its rigid teaching style, and applied to jump directly into university. He was rejected, even though he excelled in his science/maths exams, because of difficulties in other subjects (again due to the crappy German schools), so (on the personal advice of the principle of the university) he applied to an elite Swiss school where he did brilliantly, and when he reapplied at the same Swiss university, still a year below their normal enrolment age, he was accepted. He published his first four papers the same year he received his doctorate, all revolutionary, none rejected. Ten years later, during which he corresponded widely amongst the scientific elite of the era and was considered one of their own, he published his papers on general relativity. Four years later it was independently verified, and just two years later, 1921 (just 16 years after receiving his doctorate) he received the Nobel prize for his work on the photoelectric effect.<br /><br />That's not the story of someone shunned by the "elites" and forced to work in obscurity.<br /><br />The only things that come close to supporting the myth are his dissatisfaction with rigid German highschools, and a couple of years while he was getting his doctorate when he couldn't get a teaching position (which resulted in a friend getting him the patent office job, which freed him up to work on the multiple papers he published in 1905.) Everything else is a genius kid being recognised and supported by almost everyone he met.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-46321114078595144302012-05-10T11:01:32.913-07:002012-05-10T11:01:32.913-07:00I know that at work, we use a lower grade of Firef...I know that at work, we use a lower grade of Firefox than what is currently out there (we do our work on software that utilizes the browser). When a computer accidentally upgrades, we force downgrade the system and then lock out further upgrades to Firefox.<br /><br />You should be able to download a previous version of Firefox, install it, and forbid it from looking for updates.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-28669091263432779452012-05-10T10:56:16.446-07:002012-05-10T10:56:16.446-07:00Argh. Firefox has abandoned me and Safari has gon...Argh. Firefox has abandoned me and Safari has gone twitchy. And I see there is no Chrome for Mac OS 10.4.11<br /><br /> I really want to keep using my PowerPC OS 10.4.11 mac for a while longer.<br /><br />I know I asked this recently... but can you guys recommend a simple backup browser that'd work on my machine, when Safari flakes?David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-90226430092247778222012-05-10T10:15:13.158-07:002012-05-10T10:15:13.158-07:00SteveO,
"With asteroid mining, you must spend...SteveO,<br /><i>"With asteroid mining, you must spend billions, or maybe only multi-millions, before you can even bring back a kilo of ore, or a liter of water. I still can't see a way to get there from here."</i><br /><br />Science. There are "markets" already spending billions on space probes to asteroids/comets and the like. There are more spending hundreds of millions. The market for those who would spend hundreds of thousands is, I'd expect, large. That seems to be the first decade of Planetary Resources' business plan. Built lower-cost science equipment (disposable, by aerospace standards) to make space science affordable for much lower priority research, thus expanding the customer base. Use that revenue to fund the next iteration of the technology, and the next. Eventually, 15-20yrs from now, you have low-cost equipment capable of bringing back small amounts of volatiles, a few kilograms each.<br /><br />Meanwhile, there are other players working on parallel technology. Canadian MDA is leverage its robotic expertise (they built the Canadarm and Dextre) to develop satellite refuelling. They had (but lost) an anchor-client, Intelsat. However, the US DoD has done satellite refuelling demonstrators. And recently NASA included a satellite refuelling experiment on the ISS. (And NASA has long had an internal faction pushing for fuel-depot centric BEO missions, instead of the current ineffective obsession with Big Rockets. They may be starting to make headway.)<br /><br />If Planetary Resources' clients are bringing back small amounts of volatiles at the same time as satellite refuelling (or fuel depots) closes its business case (using fuel launched from Earth), someone is inevitably going to bid to supply the LEO market with non-terrestrial fuel. Meanwhile, refuelable/reusable technology makes asteroid missions cheaper. Which makes asteroid mining cheaper... 'Round and 'round it goes. Virtuous cycle.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-46197366834676133312012-05-10T10:12:49.646-07:002012-05-10T10:12:49.646-07:00SteveO,
"Meteoric iron is not much good unles...SteveO,<br /><i>"Meteoric iron is not much good unless you don't have any other source of [iron]"</i><br /><br />I disagree, meteoric iron has historically been highly valued due to its superior strength and ductility (**). I agree that it's not equal to any engineered alloys, but considering what you can achieve with wrought-iron, a better-than-wrought-iron and cheaper-than-launched-alloys basic bulk construction material would be of great use in space once you are actually assembling structures too large to launch in one piece (or a few self-contained modules).<br /><br />(** and magical properties, one of the big surprises we are in for once asteroid mining takes off... This is how we'll solve the FTL problem, IMO. Abracadabra!)<br /><br />From what I've read of (and been told by) the guys doing in-situ resource utilisation experiments, surprisingly simple processing is required to go from meteorite iron (even as fragments in simulated lunar-regolith, which is their primary interest) to cast structures. Apparently the fragments even allow you to microwave-sinter regolith into bricks/tiles stronger than concrete. The metal filings heat up from the microwaves, the molten iron melts the surrounding grains into a glassy-rock, the mixed materials giving it extra strength and reducing brittleness (teeny tiny threads of rebar.) Likewise, nickel-iron, even impure nickel-iron, should be able to tolerate thermal cycling extremely well (it's basically crude maraging steel.)<br /><br />(The apparent brittleness of meteoric iron from small fragments is supposedly due to heating during reentry. Larger pieces have un-heated cores which are much better for working. The nickel makes it a bitch to work, too strong, requiring a hotter forge (or, as one hobby site put it, "a much bigger hammer"). But the end result is a superior metal to traditionally-forged (that is, historical, not modern) steel.)Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17207624813255308902012-05-10T09:27:55.856-07:002012-05-10T09:27:55.856-07:00You honestly do not listen to yourself, do you.
T...You honestly do not listen to yourself, do you.<br /><br />To quote a certain swordsman from "The Princess Bride," "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."<br /><br />Aristocracy does not train its children. It does not select the best suited as a leader. It states that by right of what family they were born into, and by the dictates of God, they rule.<br /><br />This is not a meritocracy. Do not confuse it with meritocracy. And if you insist on confusing it with meritocracy then I have no idea how you are able to actually use a computer, let alone the Internet.<br /><br />Einstein succeeded in a meritocracy. His ideas did not meet the beliefs of the existing scientific community... but were shown to be accurate and correct and thus through merit he achieved greatness. It does not matter he did not have a doctoral degree when he espoused his theories. It does not matter he was a patent clerk. By Merit he was shown to be a profound scientific mind.<br /><br />Having the "scientific elite" dismiss him because of his lack of credentials would be aristocracy. Not meritocracy. <br /><br />Now let me suggest something: go to the local library and get the largest and newest dictionary that you can. Then read it all the way through and pay particular attention to the meaning of multi-syllable words. Do not let your existing belief on what those words color what the dictionary says. It is more likely correct than you are.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-89527967532678603232012-05-10T09:09:50.892-07:002012-05-10T09:09:50.892-07:00A traditional argument, one that the aristocracy h...A traditional argument, one that the aristocracy has used to justify its own existence.<br /><br />An aristocracy that is predestined to rule trains and educates its children with rulership in mind. Ergo, the aristocracy considers itself the de facto experts -- the cream of the meritocracy -- when it comes to rulership.<br /><br />That's the problem with meritocracy: Who determines merit in a meritocracy? A qualified elite or an unqualified electorate? And, if we allow the elite to determine merit, what is to prevent the elite from giving preference to itself?<br /><br />Only hindsight can determine merit, so those who support a scientific meritocracy commit the same error.<br /><br />Think of Einstein. He was an unqualified patent clerk, unfit to be a bottle washer, who dropped out of school because his theories were thought to be without merit by a qualified scientific elite. <br /><br />Is this the kind of future you want to wish on our children? A future where Einstein is condemned to be remembered as a patent clerk?<br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11413425340692952572012-05-10T07:53:04.896-07:002012-05-10T07:53:04.896-07:00It works a hell of a lot better than basing leader...It works a hell of a lot better than basing leadership on who had sex with who. The concept of the meritocracy suggests that if you train and study hard enough you can achieve power and influence. Thanks to the limited meritocracy of the United States culture, a half-black man raised by a single mother of a middle class family managed to become a millionaire (partly driven through sales of a book on his life) and then the leader of that country.<br /><br />If the U.S. was based off of primogeniture then we'd be led by the descendants of Washington or another Founding Father, Congress would be the House of Nobles, and there would be no real ability for people to shift social classes through hard work and effort.<br /><br />Hmm. I wonder which is better. Let's see... how does the fact someone is the child of a "leader" that has been passed on through various generations make them a worthwhile leader?<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-9032833676744048822012-05-10T07:38:36.807-07:002012-05-10T07:38:36.807-07:00Amazing how different people can look at the same ...Amazing how different people can look at the same data and arrive at the opposite conclusion.<br /><br />An Australia concludes that most Red states are economic underperformers because they are conservative and most Blue states are economic powerhouses because they are liberal, whereas a US Citizen such as myself comes to the opposite conclusion, that the Red states are conservative because they are economically poor and the Blue states are liberal because they relatively rich.<br /><br />I put it to you that relative 'liberality' is a function of wealth. Not the other way around.<br /><br />Also, I see little different between the principle of primogeniture (leadership and/or succession by birth order, royalty & aristocracy) and 'leadership by expertise' wherein the so-called experts are scientifically trained, culled & selected by an exclusive society that values conformity, political correctness and consensus.<br /><br />As if 'Science' can tell a person or a society the best way to live.<br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33731349582175273852012-05-10T06:30:02.416-07:002012-05-10T06:30:02.416-07:00Jumper,
"I see NASA turns up empty on a simpl...Jumper,<br /><i>"I see NASA turns up empty on a simple search for "Cruithne." Maybe I'm doing something wrong."</i><br /><br />Cruithne led me on a wikipedia link chase through Irish systems of inheritance, such as "gelfine", and tanistry, which led to Anglo-Saxon systems which were replaced by primogeniture, at which point things tended to be ugly and brutish. (Gelfine, and its like, are systems when the clan leader would be chosen by a vote of the men in a line of decent from a common grandfather (Or great-grandfather or even great-great-great-grandfather in the case of "indfine".) And in Irish, Scottish and early Anglo-Saxon systems of tanistry/Aetheling, they would alternate the lines of King and Prince-Regent (the Tane) between different lines within the family. So while the Tane was a son of a King, he was rarely the son of the <i>current King</i>, and would be considered the oldest and wisest of the living eligible Princes, as elected by all eligible (male) family members.<br /><br />But it's interesting, with David's theme about the oligarchs being "the true enemy for 6000 years", that for that entire time, and in a myriad ways, societies have been trying to fight against the trend toward the primogeniture of rule. Even when they accepted some kind of elite/nobility, and a need for a single ruler, they still tried to distribute power or succession, even within that system.<br /><br />It's a lesson we keep having to learn over and over and over...Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-62055191102229880032012-05-10T04:06:49.436-07:002012-05-10T04:06:49.436-07:00My speculations are about structural materials mad...My speculations are about structural materials made outside gravity wells for use outside gravity wells. Import / export to and from gravity wells is as I've mentioned before, going to come later. The guys here who are discussing mining are right. Heck, right now you can scoop up very high-quality magnetite sand in Peru. (see Cardero Resources<br /><br />Getting a volume of H2O at a nickel-iron asteroid won't be cheap. I'd find a way to smelt without it. <br /><br />I see NASA turns up empty on a simple search for "Cruithne." Maybe I'm doing something wrong.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-15655905423751685852012-05-10T02:01:53.106-07:002012-05-10T02:01:53.106-07:00David, my calculations assume at least a doubling ...David, my calculations assume at least a doubling in REE demand (and more likely a four-fold or greater increase).<br /><br />Unless they're forced out of the market by environmental regulation, the Chinese producers will likely continue production as long as the market price exceeds their marginal price of production.<br /><br />The US or one of the other major industrialized countries might subsidize space production of REEs for strategic reasons but it'd probably be a lot cheaper to subsidize new REE minesw here on Earth. (In fact there's a bunch of new mining and processing capacity coming on line over the next couple of years meaning we could well end up facing an REE glut. The accountants and MBAs who look over the Planetary Resources busienss plan will factor that risk in.) <br /><br />Additionally, now that manufacturers have worked out how to minimize the REE component of their prodcuts, they aren't going to suddenly switch back to using more of it unless the price drops drasticly. The latest industrial-sized non-Neodynium permanent magnets aren't that much less powerful and are much cheaper. Except wehre weight and.or power is really critical you won;t see a lot of industries shiftign back to Neodynium.)<br /><br />SteveO, yes my $10 billion ballpark figure for the market value of a space-based REE industry has to cover not just the launchers, the orbital transfer system, the in-situ processing and the Earth-return phase it also has to cover the whoel detection process.<br /><br />One bit of good news on that front: about 8% of meterorits are achondrites meaning they resemble Terrestrial igneous rocks. The largest subgroup of achondrites are the HED group, beleived to have originated from impacts on the asteroid Vesta.<br /><br />Vesta is rounded and this together with the igneous nature of the HED meteorities suggests it had a molten core at one stage and the various sugroups of HED suggest it underwent a fairly active geological period early on - so there's a decent chance soem sort of concentration processes have occured.<br /><br />There are also examples of Lunar, Martian etc rocks in meteorites.<br /><br />So I strongly suspect there are millions of tons of reasonably concentrated mineral ores out there - mixed in amongst trillions of tons of other rock and spread out over an almost inconceivable amount of nothing.<br /><br />A few more general remarks: my sloppy figures is based on a space REE industry operating in a vaccuum (yes, I know). In practice, much of the capital cost of the system (like the launchers) will be sread over a bunch of different users.Ian Gouldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04352147295160200128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-49135074896741680532012-05-09T23:13:39.881-07:002012-05-09T23:13:39.881-07:00A study of economic mobility in the US by state sh...A study of economic mobility in the US by state shows a pattern that will probably be all too familiar to readers of contrarybrin:<br /><br />http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-05-09/state-economic-mobility/54866786/1 <br /><br />all the outperformers except Utah (7 of 8) are blue states.<br /><br />all 9 underperformers are red states.<br /><br />So much for the idea of the liberal elite keeping the masses down and so much for the idea that Republican small government and deregulation creates a culture of opportunity.Ian Gouldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04352147295160200128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-19167285477437036232012-05-09T21:11:29.628-07:002012-05-09T21:11:29.628-07:00Sorry - "source of iron" above. Meteori...Sorry - "source of iron" above. Meteoric iron is not in any way steel.SteveOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04028435196419643147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-90407994506460831122012-05-09T21:10:12.012-07:002012-05-09T21:10:12.012-07:00Heh, duncan I am well aware of meteoric iron. I w...Heh, duncan I am well aware of meteoric iron. I was saying that for refining purposes it would be better if they WERE iron oxide. :)<br /><br />I can make steel from iron oxide in one step with a blast furnace and the other raw materials. I have a lot of steps if I start with Ni-Fe-Co and want to end up with something engineered. Meteoric iron is not much good unless you don't have any other source of steel.SteveOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04028435196419643147noreply@blogger.com