[FlamingCobra]

I see no point. Most of the winners of the contest are variations of the Stanford Torus. We already have 3 designs that should work. Colony design isn't a problem.

The biggest problem is financing. The second biggest problem, imo, is launch systems. Of course, it would be a lot cheaper (and require less launches) to construct colonies from secret soviet moonbase solaris using the bootstrap principle.

So why don't we tackle those two obstacles first, hm?

[Polpolion]

The problem with financing will be solved when we have a requirement that the space habitat would fill that the ISS doesn't. Launch systems and station fabrication are much more interesting problems, and will probably solved depending on the particular design and financing available. (more cold wars notwithstanding)

[FlamingCobra]

The problem with financing will be solved when we have a requirement that the space habitat would fill that the ISS doesn't. Launch systems and station fabrication are much more interesting problems, and will probably solved depending on the particular design and financing available. (more cold wars notwithstanding)

Um.... permanent residential area for people, since the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

[Polpolion]

The problem with financing will be solved when we have a requirement that the space habitat would fill that the ISS doesn't. Launch systems and station fabrication are much more interesting problems, and will probably solved depending on the particular design and financing available. (more cold wars notwithstanding)

Um.... permanent residential area for people, since the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

The optimal population in space is zero.

(ed well not exactly but for the near future it might as well be)

[LordPomposity]

I wonder what moon rock tastes like.

[Nuke]

there are salvagable nuclear reactors in orbit around earth. i say we do something with them, such as drop them on flaming cobra's house.

[AtomicClucker]

there are salvagable nuclear reactors in orbit around earth. i say we do something with them, such as drop them on flaming cobra's house.

Since he did mention colonies, how about a Colony Drop, Gundam style?

[FlamingCobra]

there are salvagable nuclear reactors in orbit around earth. i say we do something with them, such as drop them on flaming cobra's house.

Since he did mention colonies, how about a Colony Drop, Gundam style?

I think I'm going to ignore that comment.

We can't recycle materials forever. Eventually we will need a new source of raw materials.

[Aardwolf]

the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

I agree, but by golly the solution is not to expand. We should reduce the total population to 3 billion. We don't even need mass-murder. Just stop breeding faster than we're dieing. Free contraceptives for everybody, and nobody gets to have more than two kids (simultaneously?), until the population is down to 3 billion. Anybody who tries for at third gets sterilized.

But nobody will agree to that, unless everyone agrees to it.

[Nuke]

the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

I agree, but by golly the solution is not to expand. We should reduce the total population to 3 billion. We don't even need mass-murder. Just stop breeding faster than we're dieing. Free contraceptives for everybody, and nobody gets to have more than two kids (simultaneously?), until the population is down to 3 billion. Anybody who tries for at third gets sterilized.

But nobody will agree to that, unless everyone agrees to it.

what we need is a nuclear war or a new plague, maybe a small asteroid. even a conventional world war would help.

[Polpolion]

We can't recycle materials forever. Eventually we will need a new source of raw materials.

This is precisely why it's a terrible idea to have a residential space station. Also I'd rather see humanity consume all available resources and then die off in a nuclear war. But that's just me, and there's hardly room for an objective take on humanity's goals.

[Mikes]

what we need is a nuclear war or a new plague, maybe a small asteroid. even a conventional world war would help.

Shortsighted, as it would just kickstart the same rampant expansion again that is the problem in the first place.

This is precisely why it's a terrible idea to have a residential space station. Also I'd rather see humanity consume all available resources and then die off in a nuclear war. But that's just me, and there's hardly room for an objective take on humanity's goals.

Yup... let humanity as it is right now would act very much like a cancer if it had the means to let itself lose on the galaxy: Grow for growths sake until infinity or collapse... 

[Nuke]

what we need is a nuclear war or a new plague, maybe a small asteroid. even a conventional world war would help.

Shortsighted, as it would just kickstart the same rampant expansion again that is the problem in the first place.

not if you're thorough. besides people dont want solutions that make sense. they want to do the most psychologically unsound solution presented to them.

[The E]

I see no point. Most of the winners of the contest are variations of the Stanford Torus. We already have 3 designs that should work. Colony design isn't a problem.

The biggest problem is financing. The second biggest problem, imo, is launch systems. Of course, it would be a lot cheaper (and require less launches) to construct colonies from secret soviet moonbase solaris using the bootstrap principle.

So why don't we tackle those two obstacles first, hm?

Because, as usual, you are missing the point. This contest isn't about providing a new, revolutionary design for a space station (although that's a nice bonus), it's about stimulating people into thinking about space colonization. Specifically, people young enough to be inspired by working on such a project. It's an effort to create a base of people NASA might eventually recruit from.

[newman]

Because, as usual, you are missing the point. This contest isn't about providing a new, revolutionary design for a space station (although that's a nice bonus), it's about stimulating people into thinking about space colonization. Specifically, people young enough to be inspired by working on such a project. It's an effort to create a base of people NASA might eventually recruit from.

Exactly. Never underestimate the importance of stimulating young minds towards becoming the sort of quality work force you'll eventually recruit. There's this kind of thing everywhere. Car design contests that are geared towards identifying talented young designers, and generally don't end up with a serial production car. A bit like this:

there are salvagable nuclear reactors in orbit around earth. i say we do something with them, such as drop them on flaming cobra's house.

It's not actually realistic to expect this will happen, but just fantasizing about it it thinking about ways to do it will inspire a generation of young minds. Incidentally, maybe we could have a vote on this and suggest it to NASA if the results are good enough?

[StarSlayer]

Drop a version of this with multiple chainsaws and flamethrowers:

[z64555]

Drop a version of this with multiple chainsaws and flamethrowers:

-snip-

wat? no Beamz? 

[newman]

wat? no Beamz? 

Beams are too clean. I hereby give my complete support to Slayer's suggestion. Curiosity-style house incineration, yeah!

[MP-Ryan]

the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

I agree, but by golly the solution is not to expand. We should reduce the total population to 3 billion. We don't even need mass-murder. Just stop breeding faster than we're dieing. Free contraceptives for everybody, and nobody gets to have more than two kids (simultaneously?), until the population is down to 3 billion. Anybody who tries for at third gets sterilized.

But nobody will agree to that, unless everyone agrees to it.

I'm curious where you two are getting this 3 billion figure.  Demographers are fairly united in predicting the population will have peaked, then dropped and stabilized by 2025 as development continues in the nations primarily contributing to the population boom, but the last stabilization figure I saw was in the neighborhood of 8 billion.

[LordMelvin]

the optimal population on earth would be about 3 billion people.

I agree, but by golly the solution is not to expand. We should reduce the total population to 3 billion. We don't even need mass-murder. Just stop breeding faster than we're dieing. Free contraceptives for everybody, and nobody gets to have more than two kids (simultaneously?), until the population is down to 3 billion. Anybody who tries for at third gets sterilized.

But nobody will agree to that, unless everyone agrees to it.

I'm curious where you two are getting this 3 billion figure.  Demographers are fairly united in predicting the population will have peaked, then dropped and stabilized by 2025 as development continues in the nations primarily contributing to the population boom, but the last stabilization figure I saw was in the neighborhood of 8 billion.

And before that they were saying that we'd be bound to stabilize at about 6 billion, and before that they were saying that we'd stabilize at about 4, and before that 1, and before that, we actually were pretty nearly stable, compared to the exponential thing we've been doing since industrial agriculture kicked off. We're just gonna keep kicking Malthus in the giblets until we, as a species, get tired of it (and lemme tell ya, that never gets old ).