Dream Big. Grow Up.

Economics as science in the climate change discussion

2011-09-03T10:03:00.000-07:00

I've been studying the variety of skeptical arguments people use when arguing against the evidence and theory behind anthropological climate change. This has led over the last several months to a summary study of economics and economic philosophy and even political philosophy. This effort has given me an opportunity to fill my bookshelves with interesting and new (to me at least) books and subscribe to a new group of podcasts expanding the horizon for me again. Fun stuff.

I haven't gone through the effort of categorizing all the skeptical arguments like the work done at Skeptical Science. There is no need for duplication and they do a fine job. What I have been working at is grouping the arguments into broad families and looking at how they approach the scholarly divisions between climate science, economics, and politics. I'm beginning to understand that some people object to the political consequences of a remedial policy and fight against any of the supporting arguments for the policy. That means a political objection could turn into a science skepticism even though there is no other connection between them than the fact that a science projection is used to advocate the policy.

I'm doing this because of a discussion I've had with friends that the science is in decent shape and offers good support for the conclusion that humanity is responsible for the most recent warming of the Earth. There is enough good science done to conclude that the correlation between recent human economic output and recent warming is actually a causation. This discussion has led to descriptions of what science actually is (Popper, Kuhn, etc) as distinguished from the dogma that is taught by most teachers who focus upon what science has learned. That finally led me to read F. A. Hayek and see the political distinctions he and others draw between classical liberalism, modern liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism (in a number of forms) and so on. The last 18 months or so has been a journey for me and I've met many people and heard many opinions along the way.

I don't know that shining a light on the groupings of skeptical arguments will make much of a difference, but it has been an interesting effort for me. I will generally argue that a climate skeptic should attack the thing they actually dislike, but since policy advocacy is about winning a negotiation position by forming a large voter block and not about being academically correct I'm probably urging a political impossibility. Democracy is what it is, after all.

Changes in the US manned space program

2010-03-24T17:59:00.000-07:00

Change is coming to the US manned space program. At last! Real, dramatic, tangible, believable changes in the course and the results created will finally steer us to this nation's future we dreamed of decades ago.

The time for change is long past due. What we have been doing in human space flight in the US since Apollo has been a failure of epic proportions. Many will defend the status quo and express anger over the upcoming changes proposed by the Obama Administration, but the national track record for manned space flight demonstrates a past that is more about jobs programs, Congressional pork, and broken promises. Defenders of the past are left protecting many billions of dollars spent flying some stuff around in circles, employing a work force that has had no appreciable effect on any grand vision we hold for our national future, and quietly agreeing to accept the myth that they all are doing something useful.

At the risk of heresy, consider any rational measure of the NASA operated human spaceflight program since Apollo. How many promised milestones have been achieved regarding flight rates, payload costs, access for regular people, and science? The unmanned space program HAS managed to accomplish quite a lot with respect to science, but even they are held back by the high costs of accessing space. The original promises for the Space Shuttle spoke of weekly flights, ten dollars per pound ($22 per kg) to orbit, and low operational costs of a mundane service. Instead we were doing great to get five flights a year, purposely obfuscated costs for payloads, and $1,000 Million spent on each flight. We have a standing army employed to accomplish those flights and not a mundane service crew. This is an epic failure considering just the Space Shuttle alone! Consider the $1,000 Million spent on the X-33 that failed to be good enough to even leave the hangar and other attempted transportation projects since Apollo and it becomes abundantly clear that NASA human space flight expenditures weren't about successful space goals. The only measure of success by which they pass is the funneling of money to Congressional districts.

The background of repeated failures in our nation's human spaceflight program must be kept in mind when we judge the changes coming from the White House. These changes focus on Earth to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) transportation plans and how they can be provided by commercial sources. NASA proposes (at the White House's encouragement) to hand over this role to commercial space firms. They propose to buy transportation as a service. At the moment, the announcement is from the NASA Press Office, so a dose of skepticism is a good defense against yet another promise dashed by pork politics. This time, however, the White House is behind the message. We can dare to hope (audaciously so!) that we will break the circular self gratification huddle of our old ways and go somewhere else. More importantly we will go somewhere else in a way that lets us do it again, and again, and again. This time, 'we' will mean more than NASA's employees. It will mean us too. How can it? Those commercial providers will want to make money to increase share holder value (as they must) and that means they will want to sell other flights. That is where 'we' get our vision of the future.

NASA will have to make changes. It can no longer see itself as the Emperor of all things in space. It has done this in the past and failed to deliver. The agency simply cannot get it right when it comes to building their own launch systems, let alone operating them. They cannot be both a government agency and a profitable company. It is time they stopped trying and accept their successes elsewhere while relying upon the free markets to deliver the other services. They succeeded with Apollo because they had an achievable set of goals and didn't have to act like a corporation competing in a free market. They can let the taxi and trucking services go to those who want to deliver them now.

For example, California's SPACEX from its creation through its first successful orbital flights and all the industrial tooling and facilities to support them spent far less than the $445 million NASA has on the recent flight of the Ares 1-X mockup. That mockup didn't even make it to orbit. The Dragon capsule on a Falcon 9 from SPACEX is projected to cost a fraction of the Ares and Orion systems proposed by NASA. We know in which direction NASA's cost projections trend over the life of their programs of the last few decades and must remember that SPACEX has managed to put things in orbit. Orbital Sciences Corp is in a similar position with it's Taurus vehicle and projects similar cost savings over the smoke and mirrors that is Ares/Orion.

Even if one feels less that secure in betting on NewSpace firms, it is important to realize that some of the large traditional companies are adapting old systems to carry payloads and people into orbit to serve commercial customers and yes... even the International Space Station. Atlas V and Delta IV have flown many times (infinitely more than Ares/Orion in terms of percentages) and the Boeing/Bigelow crew capsule under development will cost a fraction of that needed for Orion. This isn't smoke and mirrors as Bigelow already has experience in orbit too. NASA's exploration job need not start at the launch pad anymore. The gate to their part of the frontier has moved up and out into orbit

None of this will happen if the old politics and the old players win the day, but we are on the proverbial edge of a bright new frontier. We can not rationalize wasteful spending that leads us around in circles and employs bright people to accomplish nothing of great value. Access to orbit can be made more mundane, but only by unleashing the free market to do what it does best. NASA can achieve higher goals of exploration and science, but only by unleashing the power of free enterprise to deliver goods and services NASA fails to deliver to itself. The Obama Administration is proposing (through NASA) to do exactly that.

And so the battle is joined. In a dose of historical irony, many who fought so long the wasteful spending and years of great talent lost in the human space flight program in the US find ourselves standing with the current agency leaders like Charlie Bolden and the Obama Administration to fight for this new vision. Those of us who loved the early NASA and what it did for a generation of engineers, scientists, and dreamers fought back tears of anger and frustration for years over what they did next, but now we can join them in a defense of their new plan that makes rational sense. It is about time.

Dare we hope again?

Do we have the audacity?

(Thanks Rick!)

Last Moving Truck

2010-01-16T15:48:00.001-08:00

I hope anyway. 8)

The family move to southern California is almost done and the new job is going well. I'm doing Remedy work still, but my new employer needs ITIL is a much bigger way than my last one and they know it. I'm going to have to learn to call it ISO 20000, though. I'm beginning to think of these standards as job security for guys like me.

We've used two 26 foot trucks and two 17 foot trucks from U-Haul now. This last 17 footer won't be full, so we probably could have done it with three 26 foot trucks. That's how much... uhmm... history... I am tracking around with me. Obviously I need some help getting rid of old stuff. It's much more fun to just acquire new stuff.

We arrived last night with typically foggy weather where it's not exactly safe to drive the highways at full speed. Of course, people DO drive the highways at full speed. I've lived in the central valley for about 26 years now. I won't miss this fog.

We have fit almost everything into a smaller house. I expect it to burst at the seams any day now. One more truck load should do it, though, like an after-dinner mint. It's wafer thin.

Rocket Racer prototype progress

2009-08-06T17:46:00.000-07:00

Rocket Racer prototype video from XCOR last year. Oshkosh show. Note the re-ignition capability and what the pilots are NOT wearing. 8)

Energy and water linkage

2009-08-04T18:39:00.000-07:00

It sure looks like clean water will get easier to deliver to people and that reduces the energy demand on our systems that do the delivery. Clean drinking water is big deal.

ACES and ACELA research

2009-07-03T10:49:00.000-07:00

The distorted energy bill is through the House now and on it's way to the Senate. It doesn't have an S number yet, but there is good evidence the Senate will consider a different bill, so we will be at this for quite a while. I have to wonder if they can get anything done by the time the Copenhagen meeting rolls around this winter, but truth be told, I'd rather they did something good than something rushed.

This activity is on my list of things to learn about and track through the year, so I'm going to keep a few research links posted here.

The Energy Collective - Other 92%

ACES - 2009

Scare tactics effectiveness

2009-06-29T11:54:00.000-07:00

We do it in politics, finance, education, and many other areas. When we want to motivate someone to do what we ask, we can argue with logic and we can argue with fear. We can bribe with money or we can threaten with harm. Each of these motivators requires that we pay some attention to what moves our audience and what the consequences of their use are.

Some in the climate change community use fear. While I am inclined to agree that there are many possible scenarios we want desperately to avoid, I think there is a problem with the use of fear in this regard. It works best if the audience understands the danger. I'm reminded of the various torture techniques used long ago by the Inquisition. The first level simply involved showing the person the implements that would be used and how they worked. A persons imagination can carry on from there much of the time since personal pain is pretty easy to understand. I don't see anything similar in the fear tactics being used to motivate better climate policy. Why should a person be scared if polar bears go extinct? Why should they be fearful if many people on the other side of the world are displaced from their homes and farms? Without that understanding, I think there is a technical flaw in the plan for those who would use scare tactics. With that flaw, the motivators have to fall back to the traditional brow-beating used by many liberals when we say others are behaving in a 'less moral' fashion than we are? Where is your compassion for the displaced after all?

The effectiveness of a technique can't be proven or improved unless one requires that success criteria be defined and measured. If a technique isn't working, it takes some thought and a willingness to change to achieve the actual goal.

too much fun

2009-04-19T12:34:00.000-07:00

Sometimes these jokes work for us. Judging by the view count for this You-Tube video for the LHC someone deserves an award. 8)

This is going to get ugly

2009-03-17T22:57:00.000-07:00

AIG execs
with contracted bonuses
emptied our wallets

Commercial Resupply of ISS

2008-12-25T15:27:00.000-08:00

Not very many people will get excited about the big change going on at NASA, but this one is rather important. With the looming retirement of the Shuttle, NASA has problems with supplying the ISS. There choices are to build their own rocket and fly it, pay some other nation to do something similar, or turn to the commercial world and buy resupply services. They have opted to go with the last option after trying the first. You can read about it at Space Daily and Space Today.

Liberalism's classic trap

2008-11-05T21:04:00.000-08:00

Barack Obama has swept most of the United States into his serious and hopeful vision of our future. In doing so he earned his chance to serve and lead us all as President. His campaign was masterful. His oratory was inspiring. He even managed to promise to be honest in a way that convinced huge numbers of voters. That is no simple task with a normally cynical electorate.

I voted for him, but not for his warm and fuzzy message of change. I watched Obama talk to the media concerning Rev. Wright a while back and was stunned by a man who spoke to me as though I was intelligent enough to parse his carefully worded position. He made it clear he could respect a man while still disagreeing with his actions and beliefs. As if that wasn't enough, he went on to talk about race relations and how things weren't as rosy as we would like to believe this many decades after Lincoln's emancipation proclamation and the end of the Jim Crow era. This discussion was necessary to his explanation of Rev. Wright's anger and pointed out the continuing inequalities we tolerate in society through budgetary techniques for schools and social services. He explained that the anger made sense and he was dead right. His words said it, his tone said it, and his body language nailed it. I've met people who can speak and inspire, but I had yet to meet someone who could do it in a way that demonstrated a strong intellect AND a willingness to work with others and lead them past their pain. He won my vote on the day I watched that video. He kept it by running an excellent campaign that will receive a lot of attention over the many years to come as an example of how best to do it.

The history of the United States will start a new chapter with this election. What gets written in this chapter remains to be seen, but I am optimistic for us all. I don't expect magic or instant fixes for problems we face, but I do expect they will get recognized for what they are and added to the list of tasks that need to be addressed.

There is a looming trap ahead of us, though. I think it is worth describing it in order to avoid it. Many already know of it, but inspired newcomers probably don't. It is a mental trap many liberals stumble into without any thought at all. It can be summed up with the simple phrase 'Not Good Enough.' I saw it starting with election coverage last night on MSNBC when they discussed voter results in the deep south. I've seen more of it here in California among those who opposed the proposition that stripped same-sex couples of a right to marriage. We liberals tend to have a dogmatic view regarding justice and can be very hard on those who see the world otherwise. I've seen comments indirectly aimed at African-Americans asking how they could vote for a black man as our President and vote to strip gay people of a right to marry. The most pleasant way they ask is 'Can't you see the similarities?' while the harshest use the term bigot. 'Not Good Enough' is a trap. We pronounce it from our high horse much like the social conservatives do when they foam at the mouth over family and religious values. Do WE not see the similarity?

Righteous indignation is as addictive as any opiate and our dogmatism alienates the people who would otherwise be our allies. In this trap, we self-destruct and waste another generation of talented people.

Let us avoid this trap as best we can this time. Let us recognize that we didn't get everything we wanted, but we DID get quite a lot. Let us thank those who do not see the world our way for coming part way into our world. Let us thank them for what gains we have made toward a more just society for it didn't happen without their help. Never think otherwise.

Let us also recognize that it is their fear of change that discourages them from going farther. Change is simultaneously exhilarating and frightening. Can we not recognize that they need our help as much as those we champion from our high horse? At the present rate of change in our world, we can ill afford to slow our pace. We risk falling on our face if we try. Let us, therefore, address their fears like we would others we support. Let us do so with open eyes and the expectation they will expand their horizons a little every day as they learn to see their fears as illusions.

Raise the shields Scotty

2008-11-05T11:26:00.000-08:00

Researchers have found a potential way to shield people and equipment on long space trips from solar radiation hazards. Not so surprisingly, the idea reads like science fiction. I'm sure this will add to the confusion some suffer in distinguishing fiction from fact, but it's still worth it.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/04/mars-radiation-shield.html

Falcon 1 made it to orbit

2008-09-29T22:41:00.000-07:00

SpaceX made it to orbit with their latest vehicle. Yay!

http://spacex.com/multimedia/videos.php?id=30

Too big to fail

2008-09-23T19:49:00.000-07:00

Can a company get too big for us to afford to have it fail? I have no doubt people suffer when any economic entity fails. The upheaval in incomes and supply/demand paths can affect far more people than those directly employed. At some level, the suffering gets large enough and we are tempted to have our governments intervene to prevent it. What that level is varies from person to person, but I have no doubt it exists for all of us.

Is government intervention designed to prevent company failures in our markets less damaging than the consequences of not intervening? I have no doubt there are incompetent methods for intervention that do a lot of damage, but smart/experienced advisers would avoid them if they are properly motivated to give the best advice. At some level, we cannot know what the actual consequences of intervention will be due to the complexity of the markets. Even macro-economic predictions may prove difficult. However, we should be able to make some probabilistic statements if the advisers are given the time and the mandate to produce them.

If we accept the notion that no company is too big to fail, then for probabilistic reasons we should never intervene. This belief implies that the risk of harm from the intervention is worse than not acting.

If we accept the notion that some companies are too big to fail, then for probabilistic reasons we should take steps to ensure they never get that big OR we should take steps to prepare for future interventions.

Trust busting activities help to avoid a company getting too big to fail. Supporting these activities implies we are recognizing the risk of harm from an intervention later and preferring to intervene a little less at an earlier time.
Bailout activities occur at the last possible moment for an intervention. Supporting these activities implies the harm done by trust busting is worse than the increased cost of the last minute bailout.

I suspect there is no simple, definitive answer to what is best. I suspect a game theory approach would reveal some interesting details. However, so many of us are wrapped up in our pet theories for how economies work that our vision is clouded. Politics tends to make mush of our minds. I wish I knew what we should do, but I don't. I am suspicious of any who say they do.

Under-appreciated Issue #1: Students and absentee ballots

2008-09-16T22:40:00.000-07:00

In the upcoming US election there are many students who won't get around to voting. Some are away from home and have an option of registering where they go to school or registering at home and getting an absentee ballot. If you are such a student, please consider where your vote will have the most impact. If the people or issues you care most about are going to win in one location even without your vote, consider registering for the other location and putting your vote in there. Those of you in school have this option. Please consider it.

If your choice requires an absentee ballot to make it work, ask for it early and make sure you get it sent in on time. It is easy to procrastinate, but sending it in early means you get to avoid the political phone calls just before election day by telling them you've already voted absentee. 8)

Building the Airship II

2008-09-07T10:31:00.000-07:00

Laying out a model for the airship has its uses, but we must also plan for how to actually build it. That means some thought must be given to the building/hangar and the structures need to support the construction and operation of the airship.

Hangars for airships face a definite challenge that drives up the cost of building them. The roof must be relatively high AND wide yet have no support columns except at the walls. Airplanes face similar issues, but they are generally a little smaller and the wing plan permits some interior support for a room if the airplane is pulled out the same door it enters. Airships tend to be tall and wide at all points, so supporting a roof can be problematic. Supporting a door is also a big issue, but that is no different for airplanes. Add it up and an airship hangar can be a little bit more expensive to build than one for a large airplane.

We also face the issue that an airship is a bouyant structure. When deflated, only the rigid airships maintain their shape. We don't intend to build one of those, so our load envelope will sit on the floor when not filled. That changes the loads on the trusses within the airship significantly. One can design for this fact, but the components added are likely to be dead weight once the airship is actually in flight and that limits payload masses, flight durations, and increases power requirements for movement.

One way around adding extra components to survive sitting on the floor is to avoid sitting on the floor. Hanging the truss structures from the roof places them in a situation not unlike what they face while in level flight. The deflated envelope may still reach the floor, but the trusses will be supported from above and not inclined to be torqued out of alignment.

What I've drawn up in Second Life is a sketch of a hangar structure that would allow this approach withing actually using the roof for the support. The hangar is tent-like, so all loads are transferred to poles/masts along the walls. Cables passing across the span would support winches. Exactly how this is done doesn't matter much to me, but I want to represent it this way in order to help figure out the possible costs and construction complexities.

The version I'm working with now uses a long axle at the top of the masts. It need not be contiguous, I suppose, though I have modeled it that way. My picture shows the axle on the exterior of the wall, but the one I've actually modeled is interior and hanging from the support plate in order to lower the roof and simplify the walls. Some kind of winch would be needed to monitor and maintain tension on the spanning cables while others would be needed for the drop cables themselves.

In-hangar operations would occur with the airship 'tied up' to the drop cables. We can probably even bring power to some subsystems nearest the air duct trusses by bring it down along-side the drop cables. This will help us un-clutter the hangar floor, but we must go too far in this direction for it will drive up the costs for building the hangar.

On a side note, the airship model is now located on the Space Island sim in Second Life. Feel free to drop by, have a look, and kibitz. I'll spend more time on the hangar and related structures next and then return to the lift systems on the airship itself later.

ITAR blast

2008-09-01T22:01:00.000-07:00

Yes! Finally!

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11965352&fsrc=rss

If you don't know what a disaster ITAR has been for space innovation in the US, you could read this for a quick review.

Building the Airship

2008-08-12T23:44:00.001-07:00

Over the last few weeks, I've managed to build up an airship model, tear it down again, and put it back up while running the documentation scripts and taking pictures along the way. I'll post some of them now working from the inside to the outside.
The load bearing structure inside is basically a ring with two wings. Extra bits of truss poke out in various directions to support engines and a connection to a mooring mast.
Vertical truss sections contain the ducting and some power conduits. Rather than place each individual piece, I've bundled things nearest these duct trusses into one linked group. Battery boxes, controllers, vent fans and other things get located in these bundles in order to manage temperature and air pressure in a somewhat centralized manner. The vertical truss sections coincide with the load envelope segment baffles.
Many other units get added that are hard to see in the overhead picture. They include lift gas reserve tanks, fuel tanks, communications systems and antennae. At this point, the load bearing structure is largely filled. Lots more detail will appear later for each unit, but I probably won't duplicate it all to each position on the airship unless we decide to buy a SL sim/island.
Lastly, the trusses get covered/skinned. This allows us to manage air temperatures near equipment without having to move air around in the bigger chambers. We can also keep sharp objects away from the gas cells and manage static and RFI by playing games with the skinning fabric.

In the next post I'll get to the larger parts of the airship and then a few thoughts about hangars and how one would build such a thing with the kind of real money investors care a great deal about. 8)

Defense Trade Overview

2008-05-16T07:58:00.000-07:00

The US State Dept gets to have quite a say in this industry, so it is important to know the rules as well as the goods and services to which they pay attention. This next doc is an overview of their interaction.

defense trade overview 2006 - Upload a doc

More export control lists

2008-05-06T22:59:00.000-07:00

Group 6 relates to lasers and sensors

CommerceControlList-Partial6 - Upload a doc

Group 7 relates to avionics and navigation

CommerceControlList-Partial7 - Upload a doc

Export Control

2008-05-05T11:57:00.000-07:00

I'm going to start attaching some of the necessary documentation someone in my business has to have and know to stay legal. Read it if you like, but it might cause your brain to explode if you aren't a lawyer. Don't say I didn't warn you.

The first is about the control lists. A lot of tech related to space and aerospace is controlled at the federal level in order to prevent the 'bad people' from being able to use it/build it. While I have personal opinions regarding the entries on these lists and on the value of secrecy as compared to transparency, I also recognize the futility of pissing into the wind.

CommerceControlList-Partial - Upload a doc

Ugh

2008-05-01T08:43:00.000-07:00

Still sick. This one starts in the throat and makes it near impossible to swallow. That prevents proper breathing for me (diagnosed sleep apnea last summer) which eliminates most of my decent sleep.

Ah the joys of age. 8)

sick day

2008-04-28T21:58:00.000-07:00

Argh.
I really don't like being sick.

I especially don't like it when it lands on my anniversary.

Argh.

Expelled Exposed

2008-04-21T19:17:00.000-07:00

Any movie that wants to be an anti-science propaganda film deserves some ridicule. This kind of crap reminds me of those creationism museums and folks who lead tour groups through regular natural history museums to point out what doesn't match with their creationism views.

Check out the site that shows what happened behind the scenes of the stinking pile called Exposed and save yourself the stomach acid of having to come up with a good defense of science yet again. After that, use a little peer pressure with anyone you meet who likes the movie or it's views to let them know what we really think of their crap.

http://www.expelledexposed.com/

Electricity Industry Fundamentals Class

2008-04-16T13:04:00.000-07:00

I'm learning about fundamentals today. Generation, transmission, and distribution stuff involves the technical and some financial side. Market concepts comes tomorrow.

We are pricing the wrong thing. We buy and sell power and bill energy, but prices reflect reliability, flexibility and congestion. The market isn't set up right.

airship model work again

2008-04-03T08:52:00.001-07:00

Still too blunt on the front, but a lot of details are coming together.

If you've got a real space/rocket project that would benefit from improved communications within your team, you should have a chat with 'Rocket Sellers'.

Carry On

2008-03-20T23:20:00.000-07:00

I'm not going to say much on this. Other's have done a far better job.

relative closeness

2008-03-18T10:43:00.000-07:00

When I was young I remember my parents being able to see their parents and siblings every couple of years. My father was in the Air Force so it wasn't a simple thing to visit us. Phone calls shortened the time a bit, but sacrificed the face-to-face interaction and the potential for a number of them being together.

My brother and sisters are spread out too, though not as far as the distances my parents dealt with. I, however, can chat with them every week by simply hoping on-line at the agreed upon time. We could do it more often, but haven't found a reason to do that yet. What we chat about isn't any more amazing than other families talk about, but we can do it cheap and often and have begun to do so. I suspect we will rig up the cameras and microphones on our machines before long too and open the communication window a bit more like we have when we are face-to-face.

Our communities are changing rapidly with our new world, but I think some of us are returning to the closeness we used to have long ago when families stayed in the same basic area. These tools enable us to do it and our need for community drives us. That means our sense of family is being re-engineered again.

SL model work

2008-03-09T16:09:00.000-07:00

I've been working on something to replace napkin sketches. This turned out to be fairly easy to do and didn't have the big learning curve some modeling applications have. Of course it will have to be handed over to someone trained to use the real thing, but it's better than napkins.

Neice's birthday party today

2008-03-09T16:06:00.000-07:00

Off to a bounce house place for a birthday party. There should be a bunch of happy, noisy five year olds. Good thing I don't have a hearing aid yet. 8)

Typhoon winds near here

2008-01-04T15:32:00.000-08:00

What a day. I get to repair a fence now. It's not the one I thought was most vulnerable, though. I won't be able to get a look at it until I get home today.

I was happy to note earlier when I came into work that several drivers were taking it very carefully when they tried to pass the bigger trucks. The cross-winds on US 50 were fierce enough to throw us over half a lane even when we paid close attention. Hopefully everyone did. Today was not a day for neglectful commuting.

Proof the world does change

2007-12-28T18:51:00.001-08:00

I heard today that more people on this planet suffer from obesity and related problems than from malnutrition. Not to belittle any of these problems, but if that doesn't kick you in the pants what would?

So... when was our golden age?

Hah!

Slogging away

2007-11-22T11:57:00.000-08:00

Multiple designs, vendor options, and price lists are what my space life is all about right now. If this is what it takes to open the frontier I'm no longer surprised we enthusiasts are having such a time doing it. It isn't the glamorous world we imagine in the grand vision.

Cynicism and its place in the New Space Community

2007-02-06T14:55:00.000-08:00

Shubber Ali has me thinking about how we sell our dreams of an open frontier in space to ourselves and the next generation. Those of us who know how to do it realize the techniques must be a little different as the youngest listeners weren't alive for Apollo landings and first arrivals to a particular planet.

When I sell the dream to someone my age, it mostly comes down to whether they remember the excitement of the earlier age. If they do, they've likely suppressed it somewhere after childhood in order to get along with their lives. It reawakens with little effort. The only hard thing is to help the person figure out a way in which they can do something useful with whatever level of education they happen to have at the moment. From a sales perspective it is like having someone walk up to you, state how much they are willing to spend and then ask for advice on what to buy. Simple enough if the dollar value in the transactions isn't too large. When they get large, their natural skepticism kicks in and you have to be a better salesman with a better plan. There are many in our community that can close this kind of deal and raise anywhere from a few thousand dollars to a few hundred thousand dollars. There are many more who can close the variation that leads someone to help put in free labor on a specific project.

When I sell the dream to someone a little younger I usually have to pitch it as part of a path down which we obviously must walk. There are many ways to do this including Limits to Growth arguments, global catastrophe risks, and so on. I never pitch it as a humans vs robots kind of thing as they all know there won't be much distinction after a few more decades. If those fail my fall back tends to be 'What new thing are YOU going to do while alive?' The younger generation tends to have a little less money, but they have proven time and again to be willing to put in time as long as they are learning something interesting that might be useful in some other arena too. This dual purpose attention probably makes them the most sensible of all of us.

Am I a snake oil salesman to try to sell this dream when I know full well that it is going to be very hard (maybe impossible) to turn into plans that lead to reality? Am I guilty of fashioning a smoke and mirrors fantasy that cannot pass from phantasms to reality?

I learned how to give this pitch from academics. When you pursue a PhD you strive to solve some interesting problem for which there is no known solution. You don't pick just any problem, though. When you enter school you might have an idea of the subject you wish to pursue. With time, though, you prove your skills against some kind of tests and then apprentice yourself to your master (graduate advisor). It is really their area of interest that is going to become yours because they won't take you on if your interests diverge too much from theirs. The Master you choice is often the one who makes the best pitch to you. The details of that pitch concern your chances of success in research and your success beyond. Things don't always work out though. Potential careers can be wrecked if the master agrees to a research problem that is too hard (or easy), a time-line that is too aggressive (or not enough), or a plan that is not well thought out (or overly detailed). Pitfalls abound. If the team does not work well, whether it be a duo or a orchestra involving other students and collaborations with other masters, everything crashes and the accusations begin to fly. Grant money can be at risk. Are the scientists guilty of fashioning fantasies? Are we measured on the same scale?

Science is known to have unsolvable problems mixed in with very difficult problems. The harder a problem is to solve, the more credit a researcher tends to get to finding a way to do it. The advancement of Science requires us to take the risk of failure when we don't recognize the unsolvable from the merely difficult. Careers crash and burn and people with high intelligence and great potential for society have their egos crushed to the point where they accept minimum-wage employment to hide from the pain.

Does the opening of the space frontier require the same level of risk from us? How many young minds is it worth sending to crash against the rocky shores of unsolvable problems to get a reasonable chance of succeeding on the merely difficult shores around them? Many concede the risk is worth it to some degree for Science because new discoveries can vastly improve all our lives. Do we concede it for the space frontier too? Should we take more risk or less? What do we do for the people who manage to crawl ashore all broken and battered from their attempt? I suggest we build a monument to them and ensure the ones who don't make it don't fail in vain.

More Smoke and Mirrors

2007-02-06T14:51:00.001-08:00

One person creates a fantasy and then speaks of it as though it is real.

Another person hears and believes.
They add their desires to the fantasy and speak as though it is real.

Others hear it and believe.
They speak of it as though it is real.
They begin to act together on their shared belief.

Still more hear it and believe.
They speak and act together on their shared belief.
They begin to trade real things with others who see value produced by the actions of shared belief.
They give their people a group name.

Talk of fantasy is replaced by the value of actions.
Talk of belief is replaced by team membership.
New members and new actions are assumed to create value.

Talk of membership is replaced by employment.
Value is measured by market capitalization.

Is the fantasy now real?

Was anyone a fraud?

Snake Oil Sales

2007-01-31T18:03:00.001-08:00

On a recent show, David Livingston (The Space Show) interviewed Shubber Ali for over two hours. For the first time, I think I can see where Shubber is coming from. I can't say I agree with his cynicism, but I think he laid it out clearly enough that I could see his point and respect it. I feel the need to write a response, but I want it to be as reasoned and transparent, so I shall give it some thought tonight.

Post Hole Digging

2007-01-20T22:53:00.000-08:00

After working in the yard today removing agapanthas from the front yard the hard way with shears and a pick I got a chance to see a better way. The Masten Space System team has a spiffy technique for digging holes and I'm wondering now about blackberry bushes and other hard to remove pest vegetation. Hmm...

http://masten-space.com/blog/?p=95

Relearning History

2006-10-29T15:52:00.000-08:00

Today I will snap my fingers and my team will suddenly become knowledgeable about all the engineering details of all previous space flight projects.

[snap]

Did it work? Do I get to avoid repeating history now? Do I get to avoid spending money building a competent engineering team that gives me an edge over my competitors?

[sigh]

I guess not. It looks like I am doomed to repeat history and learn how to do what's been done before including many of the mistakes. My only choice to avoid that fate appears to be option to do nothing since I could then wait for the teams that do have that experience to open the space frontier for me. What's that I hear? They don't have the engineering experience either? Those engineers are dead or in retirement? How can we have reached such a sorry state?

Jeffrey Bell is at it again at Space Daily. Some people just don't get it when it comes to operating an engineering team and trying to innovate. There is no magic except for the power of a functional team over a group of individuals. You can read his rant about the XPrice Cup event if you want to here.

Trip to Wendover

2006-10-21T21:23:00.000-07:00

I got a chance to visit Wendover UT/NV last monday and see the sights. [ahem] Yup.

Wendover is not ideal in the economic sense since the nearby town stays afloat on a weak trickle from casino money, but the ideal sights for my airship project are priced way out of my range. Cities like Tustin have exactly what is needed, but their tax needs trump and there are no clear areas nearby.

The airport on the Utah side is actually quite interesting if you are thinking of flying things that need wide open spaces. The field at Wendover is essentially what it was from it's old days as a WWII training base. Much of the base itself has collapsed due to neglect, but don't blame the folks running the airport for that. The base was used to help train heavy bomber crews for the European conflict and later for the atomic bombing missions over Japan. The B-29 hangar at the east end of the apron used to house the Enola Gay.

The flats to the south and east are essentially clay. Get them wet and they make for a very sticky, clingy goo. You can't walk in the stuff without loosing your shoes and without them you'll wear yourself out walking a few yards. If you have to go out on it while it is wet, you have to bring the equivalent of snow shoes. Most people just won't do it. I'm told the salt layer starts further east, so it get's even more unpleasant if that is possible. Having said that, though, that is our ideal for testing airships. In the summer when it is baked hard as rock you can drive on it in any direction and not harm a thing. If you have problems, you set down and wait for help to arrive. The Black Rock playa in northwest Nevada isn't quite big enough for that and doesn't have the amenities Wendover has. I'm going to have to learn to love the gooey clay.

Visited States Map

2006-09-06T11:45:00.000-07:00

I might have visited some of the NE states when I was very young, but I don't remember anymore.

create your own visited states map
or check out these Google Hacks.

Pluto Nonsense

2006-08-28T22:37:00.000-07:00

Hmpf! Anyone who knows their planetary astronomy takes one look at Pluto and recognizes that it should never have been classified as a planet. Bye Bye! (Finally!)

Maybe a few grade school science teachers will take up this opportunity to teach a bit more than the basic memorization line. There is a lot of stuff out there besides the planets all zipping this way and that. The kids would probably love it. Think of the opportunities to learn how to pronounce strange names and tie in to less well known myths and mythologies. Show them how to identify a comet and they may want to get one with their own name on it. What a thought!

Visited Country Map

2006-08-21T00:04:00.000-07:00

create your own visited countries map
or vertaling Duits Nederlands

Private Enterprise Space Flight

2006-08-10T13:05:00.000-07:00

On occasion I see others express an article of faith concerning the notion that space flight is too complicated and costly for private enterprise to take on yet. Of course, my faith happens to say that is not true and that difference makes the statements of others jump out at me. The latest one I've read is over at John Gog's Exploration blog (gogexplore). He has written it up with a professional manner, so I want to take it apart in a similarly rational manner if I am capable.

The third problem he raises actually goes like this.

Space flight is too complex and costly to succeed as a private enterprise project at this point. Corporations in competition do not share research and engineering resources, leaving each one to reinvent the wheel (or use old technology).

I will admit that my first reaction involved a snicker. Not very nice, I know, but I know from experience that many of the IT companies born out of the computer industry do indeed cooperate. By day I am a software engineer and I know that many companies will cooperate in order to create a community standard as it reduces their costs. The success of some of the open source and free software code bases is one demonstration of this effort. Look up the project history for Apache for an excellent example.

Would the same thing happen for space flight companies, though? Are there standards from which we would benefit if we took the trouble to cooperate long enough to set them up? From this perspective I should not snicker as these are open questions. I'm pretty sure there are issues where we should cooperate regarding regulatory advice to the AST (yes... they do actually ask for it), sharing of information regarding political and legal hurdles we all face, and in giving the appearance that we can distinguish between credible business entities and the wanna-bees who make up a good web site and stir up some temporary excitement.

It remains to be seen whether we all reinvent the wheel or cooperate with each other to avoid the repetition. If there are enough of us, I imagine we will cover the range of possibilities. Lack of resources will knock some of us out, but a distinct product or service might save someone too. I have my fingers crossed, but it would seem that my faith is that we will win through in the end.

Lastly, my thought regarding the complexity and costly nature of space flight is that it can't be all that hard. We aren't faced with the same political risks we faced decades ago, so there IS room for failure and experimentation. There is no doubt that orbital speeds require a lot of energy, but I know the numbers. Energy isn't the issue. The difficulty comes from trying to deliver all of it in a few short minutes to reduce gravity losses. It is the high power numbers that are costly and complex. We can work very hard on the engineering limitations, or we can work hard at lofting feather-weight systems, or we can suck it up and accept the gravity losses. I know what I prefer and our numbers suggest the technique should work, but all those options are available to someone willing to explore them.

GO Corp Education Process

2006-08-09T15:13:00.000-07:00

COGS and BOM lists are filling out nicely. I used to think NASA lived too much by acronyms, but now I can see that we all extend the language as we need it. I wish I had learned these notions earlier. How can one run a business without this basic training?

More Training

2006-08-09T11:30:00.000-07:00

Yawn. More structural stuff today, so the material is newer to me. That doesn't make it exciting, but it is important stuff to learn. Chaining, paralleling, and other organizational tricks make the difference between the apprentice and the journeyman.

Sitting in Training Class

2006-08-08T12:42:00.000-07:00

There is nothing quite like sitting in a training class. I'm learning Actuate's eRD-Pro today. I recognize a lot of concepts from other applications I've learned, so the exercises are going fast so far. I'm making use of the old terms for association labels as best I can.

This has got me thinking about how people learn again. That's what is special about training classes. Everyone in the room is free associating and it is such a quiet process.

The Wisdom of Faith

2006-07-01T22:10:00.000-07:00

I am great and powerful because many believe in my strengths. Do you?

I can defeat the greatest problems because many believe in my process. Do you?

I can adapt with each generation because the new believe what the old teach. Do you?

Unlike small individuals I know what must be done to feed you, clothe you, and reduce your fear. Do you?

Unlike small individuals I have no personal agenda as I am made of many great minds. Are you?

Give to me control of your assets, your money, your lives, and your children's lives.

Do not worry. Do not think. Do not use your great mind as I already have far better.

Find faith in me once again.

The Wisdom of Kings

2006-06-24T17:48:00.000-07:00

I am old and wise and know better than you how to use the resources of the kingdom to benefit all.

Give to me control of your assets, your money, your lives, and your children's lives.

Unlike all the others I know what must be done to feed you, clothe you, and reduce your fear.

Unlike all the others I will not confuse personal gain with my responsibility to you.

For I know I must benefit in order to be there to provide to you my wisdom.

Trust me once again.

2006/06/21

Smoke and Mirrors

2006-06-24T17:45:00.000-07:00

One person creates a fantasy and then speaks of it as though it is real.

The next person hears it and believes. They add to the fantasy their desires and speak like it is all real.

Others hear it all and believe. They speak of it all like it is real. They also act together on their shared belief.

After some time, there is always someone who hears it, believes it, and acts on the belief.

Is the illusion now real?

Was anyone a fraud?

2006/05/19