Space Elevator Update

TheMadReaper writes "The 2005 edition of the Space Exploration Conference in Albuquerque, NM came to a conclusion earlier this week. A large fraction of the conference was devoted to the Space Elevator. Surprisingly, there hasn't been much news coverage of this conference, perhaps because it doesn't have Space Elevator in its name. The most interesting fact I got from the conference is that money is really starting to exist in the space elevator world mainly thanks to the work of Dr. Bradley Edwards at ISR and at Carbon Designs, Inc. The strong nanotube talk was also more promising than last year."

Comments

Re:Money

[cashoutcurse]

avoirducul@aol.com omgzitslogan@gmail.com

Re:Space elevator: really a good idea?

[NanoGator]

You know, most of the timne I use its/it's properly. I also use their/they're/there properly. If I'm going to be nitpicked for occasionally making that mistake, I'd ike to occasionally be complimented when I do it right.

I can understand that

[leonbrooks]

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go do my religion homework. Oops, I meant to say science homework. I have such a hard time keeping those two subjects separate...

Given how sternly Orthodox Materialism is policed within the scientific community, your confusion is easily understood.

WRT the homework, the secret method for achieving clarity is to look for but not be fazed or fascinated by the religious underpinnings, which are always there. You need to be careful to remember that the concept of religion is not to be confused with sacerdotalism. Sacerdotalism is what all of the robes and stained glass is for. Materialism or Strict Atheism is just as much a religion as any form of Supernaturalism, from the world-worshipping Gaia sects who climb Cheops every Solstice and the spectacular demon-deafening funereals in Thailand to the sternest, quietest Quaker enclave, it's just as much religious as the "enlightened" and hard-nosed BMW-driving Rolex-wearing competitionalist YUPPIE or driest, most "rational" paleobiologist struggling to fit "wet" and supple T Rex bones into a 68-megayear timescale because (s)he prefers to believe Orthodoxy than evidence.

First, determine what brand of religion underlies the lessons in your science book. Next, find out if the material makes allowance for any competing memes. If it either refuses to admit that any exist, or if it admits them but then lampoons them with hollow caricatures instead of addressing their very real challenges, first note that this is precisely the method and attitude used by the Church of the Dark Ages, and second realise that what you are facing is no longer science, but religious dogmatism.

Once you detect religious dogmatism, it's much easier to correctly interpret whatever is before you. It doesn't magically make the material complete, but it does alert you to look for the gaps, omissions, and oversights.

You can also turn into squirrel food fairly rapidly by redlining your paranoia and seeing methodological gaps where merely human lapses were the cause. Simply satisfy the innate (if not always acknowledged) human need for controversy with a few manageably small doses of material from a competing ideology, and move on, knowing that your understanding will never be perfect, but that "if you shoot for the stars you may hit the Moon."

Re:I can understand that

[darthdavid]

That was the stupidest thing I've read in a while. I don't know if that was a troll, sarcasm or terminal stupidity but whatever it was you need to stop. If it was sarcasm, learn to convey that better, if it's a troll stop because no one likes you and you'll die lonely if you don't get off the computer and if that was sincere then I suggest sitting down, taking a razor blade, and slitting your wrists. Remember, up the road, not across the street. It's for the good of the gene pool man!!!