Yay! We're going Asteroid mining, boys!
- Thread starter lukep
- Start date
Fuck, didn't they learn enough when they tried to mine unobtanium? giant blue monkeys are real yo
Keep thinking about this part of the news here... If they lay out the infrastructure for us... Water, materials, energy, eventually even shelter & air... What is that going to enable us to do that we can't do otherwise? The mind reels...
Take the moon for instance. It's still not what you'd call good real estate. No plumbing, no electricity grid, no roads, no sewer, no air even... But once PR gets up there and starts a base that they use for mining at first, then they'll CREATE good real estate sure enough.
I could see (at least the billionaires, if not the multi-millionaires) buying lunar real estate within our lifetimes. Oh man what a bunch of new profitable industries that will start!
Personally, I think they're going about it the wrong way.
The best way is to create self replicating satellite robots that mine raw materials -> create a duplicate of itself with mined rare metals -> back to mining (or traveling to new mining spots) until a threshold is met then fly 1/2 the herd back to a docking station where they're melted down and transported back to earth.
Involving people only complicates things
The best way is to create self replicating satellite robots that mine raw materials -> create a duplicate of itself with mined rare metals -> back to mining (or traveling to new mining spots) until a threshold is met then fly 1/2 the herd back to a docking station where they're melted down and transported back to earth.
Involving people only complicates things
I think their end-game is to prove that they can harvest ore in space so that they can secure the financing to develop / build a space elevator. That'll dramatically lower the cost / risk of space mining.
Let's remember that without the government funded socialist NASA program, these private companies wouldn't have received the hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts they needed to develop the technology to get off the ground at all.
Von Neumann machines to "complicate" things too.
None for me thanks, I saw that whole season of stargate where the replicants were threatening to come down to Earth.... Not what I'd call easy to contain.
Although I agree they'd prefer to do it all upstairs; I doubt they'd be highly considering a space elevator in their plans... No one has even put together a single millimeter of nanotubing yet so 300 miles of it might not prove feasible in our lifetimes.... And even then we don't know that it can be woven together to make a string strong enough for holding a platform in deep orbit.
Umm... GET THE FUCK OFF MY INTERNET!
Just registered AsteroidMinesReviews.com and just in case it goes local ChicagoBestAsteroidMiners.com
Very, very difficult though. Creating self replicating robots in a controlled science lab on earth is a huge undertaking, let alone doing it on an asteroid that's screaming through space at 90,000 kms/hour.
Nonetheless, I can't wait for a couple years, to see what these guys accomplish. Exciting stuff! They're taking a huge risk, but if they manage to prove a model, you can expect absolutely MASSIVE investments into space almost overnight from... well... everywhere. It will completely transform every aspect of our lives, and more than likely, for the better.
Oh, and personally, I can't see a space elevator in our future. Not feasible. If anything, we'll see new energy sources and propulsion technology before that happens. That will be one of the run-offs from this project. If someone is going to create an amazing new energy source, there's a decent chance it's going to be these guys.
Time will tell!
Meet Amun 3554 is worth a project like this.
20$ trillion rock.
http://mashable.com/2012/04/26/planetary-resources-asteroid-mining-trillions/
20$ trillion rock.
http://mashable.com/2012/04/26/planetary-resources-asteroid-mining-trillions/
Ain't gonna happen unless disclosure happens first. Google "ufo" and there are currently 234,000,000 results. Why do you think Ron Paul is so strongly opposed? Cut the Fed budget in half and take the troops out of Afghanistan and you're cutting into the vast majority of Black Ops funding...
I'm pretty sure an implementation of HAARP-like technology can create a tightly focused standing wave that acts as something of a reentry corridor once objects get close enough to earth, like an EM elevator of sorts, but it would take megamassive energy to execute.
Dude, you don't know the first thing about people here... I doubt there are any with over 500 posts that have watched the news in the last year or two. Mattseh isn't on one continent long enough to become a slave to the local news stations anyway...Keep watching the news. The MSM loves you
Occam's Razor is something you need to get better acquainted with indeed. Here, I'll help:
Which of the two following scenarios are more likely:
A. The military industrial complex (proven to exist and spoken about by presidents Ike and JFK openly) are greedy bastards that have been lobbying our politicians hard since the 1950's to cause more warfare than is needed...
Or
B. Alien intelligence has been found on the far side of the moon and fought over by secret black ops government organizations that the public can't be trusted to know about, and that's the real reason that we're racking up trillions in military spending. This option of course assumes that an alien race so advanced as to travel interstellar distances would be such fuckups that they'd leave something behind on the moon worth fighting for.
Or
B. Alien intelligence has been found on the far side of the moon and fought over by secret black ops government organizations that the public can't be trusted to know about, and that's the real reason that we're racking up trillions in military spending. This option of course assumes that an alien race so advanced as to travel interstellar distances would be such fuckups that they'd leave something behind on the moon worth fighting for.
Anyone who chooses option B needs to be forcibly checked into an insane asylum.
I'll choose A, because the scenario you've outlined in B clearly shows you haven't done a damn bit of research on the subject. You can't seriously spend the energy you do on Ron Paul without remotely considering the possibility of a larger context.
You brought up the moon; would you like to explain why:
1. It doesn't rotate
2. It's composed of materials older than and foreign to earth
3. It's completely covered with craters, presumably from objects too big to have burned through the earth's atmosphere, while the earth isn't
4. Glass domes and other structures have been found on the dark side of the moon, the sea of tranquility and on Mars
5. When there is a solar eclipse, the moon is the exact same size as the sun
6. When the apollo 13 discarded its lunar module, it's impact with the moon caused it (the moon, not the module) to ring for hours on end (as if it were hollow)
7. That we haven't been back in 40 years despite significant advances in technology in all aspects of life.
And that's just the moon.
Not saying that there are alien bases on the moon (I readily acknowledge there could be nothing there) but to say there isn't anything strange about it would be rather myopic.
There's being open minded to the point your brains fall out your ears, and then there's being closed minded to the point that you're walking around crosseyed from the blinders. You want fall somewhere in the middle, no?
All I'm saying is that if I'm investing gazillions of dollars into a kind of venture like asteroid mining, I'd want to do my damn research with both an open and skeptical mind.
Wouldn't you?
Here's what wikipedia has to say about Occam's Razor:
The razor asserts that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate.
Again, "the simplest available theory need not be the most accurate."
You guys are the ones that brought it up. Lolz.
The razor asserts that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate.
Again, "the simplest available theory need not be the most accurate."
You guys are the ones that brought it up. Lolz.