jump to navigation

Repost from LJ: 28440000 joules per pound January 30, 2006

Posted by electricaloratory in Technology.

It costs 28440000 joules of energy to move a pound of matter into space. (Unit discrepancy, I know. Bite me.) That will never change. It is the number written on the toll booth that is our gravity well. We sit on one side of this invisible barrier, built by the very laws of physics. It is this number that keeps us from finding the stars.

We can’t change that number, so all we can try to do is find better ways to apply that much energy to the stuff we want to send into space. It’s a lot of energy. The best way we can figure out to defeat this number is to strap a very tiny amount of matter on top of a giant explosion and cross our fingers. To our credit, we’ve gotten pretty damn good at it. From this layman’s perspective our rocketry skills are fairly spiffy. But that’s still what we’re doing.

When that tiny amount of matter is an instrumentation package or a satellite, we pretty much own the show. But when it’s a human – a smart, brave, fragile human body – it all still seems so far away. Air. Heat. Food. G-forces. These are things we either need, or need to avoid. Solving every one of those problems adds weight. More energy. Bigger explosion. Harder problem.

There is this wonderful, young, hopeful part of me that says that we should be going into space as fast as humanly possible. Human footprints on the dirt of Syria Planum. Human eyes watching the sun rise from Europa. Space stations glowing from the reflected beauty of Saturn. It’s part of what we do, part of who we are. It requires smarts, and determination, and bravery, and I refuse to believe that any of these are in short supply amongst the human race.

But I’m not entirely that person anymore. I’ve gotten older and more cynical. I have (if nothing else) an elementary knowledge of economics that only really serves to depress me. What is on the moon that warrants a permanent human settlement? Why are we even trying to go Mars while the moon is such a tremendous hurdle? Why why why? Everything I wrote in the previous paragraph seems hollow in the face of the realities of it. Money. 1 billion for NASA? Drop in the bucket. A real functioning moonbase, not some proof-of-concept bullshit that can’t do anything useful, may require a trillion.

What warrants that expenditure? Nothing yet. The optimist can say that we don’t know what’s there until we go. We’ll never know unless man lives on the moon and can experiment. But as long as the tickets are so expensive few can go. And experimentation will not flourish unless it is cheap. Lower the barriers to entry and human creativity will explode. It’s been seen time and time again. If there is a reason to be on the moon, we’ll find it. But we have to be there, many of us, first. Some will die. More will fail. So many lives must cross into the frontier before we will understand even a hint of its wonders. And it’s so expensive. The only way this works is if it gets cheaper.

The optimist, then, responds by saying that it *will* get cheaper. If we keep at it. We’ll solve the problem. Then I think about the Space Shuttle. The promises of which have gone utterly unrealized. It never got cheaper to operate, never was the revolving door through which man would routinely enter orbit. A launch a month? Please. Not even close. And how many billions were poured into that project? Why should I feel any confidence in this next multibillion speculative venture?

Depressed, again. The optimist takes one last swing at things. The problems are solvable. We have the creativity and the will. But NASA can’t do it. They’re hidebound, bureaucratic. Not suited for the 21st century. The answers are there, we just have to change for how we look at them. In which case, Bush should be ripping our entire space program apart. Start from scratch. Move in several different directions, all of them new, and see what works. We’re 5 years away from even having an organization that could oversee this massive endeavor. More from going back to the moon. Easily more than a decade from going to Mars.

None of these things are happening. A tiny amount of money, for a dubious venture, to an unreliable organization. Why should I have hope? Why should I cling to dreams that have been dead for so long? The Well looms overhead, and it has never seemed taller or more daunting.

28440000 joules per pound. That’s what it takes.


Why This Site Didn’t Exist January 27, 2006

Posted by electricaloratory in Meta.
1 comment so far

I think the first person who ever told me to write more is my friend A., in regards to a bit of fiction I wrote for a role-playing game I ran back in college. It’s never that I thought I was particularly bad at it, just that I never saw it as exemplary. Everyone writes, so the thinking goes. You have to just to get by. Applying a bit of hindsight, such a view seems narrow-minded. I work (and play) on computers, and games not withstanding, the way you interact with a computer is by writing at it.

TV, movies, and theater – all basically start with a text (at least, the stuff I live – reality TV and more “performance” oriented art is wasted on me). It’s probably not an uncommon viewpoint, for folks in my profession or just in the world in general, that strings of words form the basis for damn near everything. Even life can be thought of with only four letters – A, C, T, and G. Everything after the spelling is a consequence.
I mean, I know there are writers out there. Journalists and authors, technical editors and bloggers. Screenwriters, playwrights, copy editors. Folks who make their living with words. I know a few of them, and I greatly admire that kind of ability. People who can make something out of words, conjure reality from ephemera.

But it didn’t seem like a particularly good path for me. The world is full of failed writers – novelists who couldn’t sell their first (and last) opus, screenwriters pawning 100 pages of brilliance to every production company in L.A., folks who decided that they would turn their homebrewed campaign setting into The Greatest RPG Ever. Some succeeded. Most didn’t. In my life, I’ve found Sturgeon’s Law to be pretty damn reliable, especially when it comes to creative endeavors. Why contribute to the pile of wasted words on the Internet, given that chances are what I’m writing is garbage, just by sheer weight of statistics?

Plenty of people do, and some are successful. Hell, I’ve got over 50 blogs in Thunderbird and I’d consider most of them to be worthwhile. So to start walking this path in the face of Sturgeon’s Law, there are only a couple of options. Don’t know, or don’t care. Well, I can’t excise the knowledge from my brain (and wouldn’t if I could, because I still consider it an important yardstick for any sort of media or pop culture). Which leaves not caring, something I’m generally not any good at. I care very much people’s opinion of me, and of my work. Better to remain silent, and all that.

And yet here I am, having plugged the phrase “Electrical Oratory” into WordPress less than an hour ago. I can’t say I’ve stopped caring. All I can say is that I’m trying to care less. To take risks. For something to be good, it first must just be.

This blog is going to be for long-form posts focused on a number of particular topics. More about the subject matter than me. I already have a LiveJournal, and I’m quite happy with it. There will be a link to there from here, but not yet the other way around. I’d prefer to let this site just be words for now, rather than strongly referring to the author.