Quote:
Originally Posted by bcj
Replying succinctly to your assertion that humans are unable to cope adequately with sustained acceleration.
What's so hard to comprehend?
Why concentrate solely on planetary destinations when planning the entire world wide space exploration agenda? Too limited.
I propose that more good will accrue by spending at least a fraction of the attention on manufacturing stuff ( 42 [HHGTTG]) in space.
Working out how to set up solar powered fractional distillation from random things already outside planetary reference frames would be preferable in my estimation. |
Again, your first sentence is an incomplete sentence. I'm not trying to be the grammar police. It just gets confusing trying to determine what you are referencing in an incomplete sentence. You know in your mind, but it is confusing on the other end from my perspective.
I reread your former posts, and I get now what you were referencing, and I get your confusion or reason for your response. I distinctly said G's and not a G. Experiencing G's of acceleration, even two or more G's would instantly double your weight like going from 150lbs to 300lbs. Max G on a rocket is around 3G's, but in my hypothetical "fastest reasonable trip", maybe we would do more. Feeling higher levels of G's would be problematic, and then fatal, and then higher still, would leave our bodies putty like a jellyfish out of water.
On your second point, I don't know if this was directed at me and something I said, or if it is a general talking point you just wanted to mention because you don't seem to be referencing something I said directly or your last quote that I was responding to in an effort to now clarify your prior statements, but to respond, I don't think anyone is ONLY trying to go to other planetary bodies, and I don't know that any one company or government is planning "the entire world wide space exploration agenda," so I'm confused by that statement. You even post a link and address the fact that there are other space projects in the works.
The current plans by NASA using US space contractors are intentionally designed to do more than just get us to the moon and back. They are designed to be cheaper, faster and capable of more than a single purpose. This is like building a more complex and expensive building like a hospital (I'm a nurse, so I'm using a personal reference) that is future proof because it is modular and can be expanded upon; it doesn't have to be torn down and rebuilt from scratch when they need to expand its capabilities or size. Similarly, this will be an architecture that is necessary to save money and time, and it will allow NASA and partners to reach Mars and beyond in far more feasible ways under a smaller budget. If someone figures out a better means then I'm sure a company or government will do that.