Colonization of space

Originally posted by jaywill
Astronauts and and man-made satellites are more and more in danger of being struck like a bullet shot from space trash. They are keeping track of some of the space junk that is dangerous.

That may become an issue before a killer asteriod or meteor becomes one.[/b]

It already is an issue, but for very different (and much less lethal, unless you're on the ISS) reasons than an asteroid strike would be.

BTW, a meteor is an asteroid. Or rather, most are. An asteroid is an object circling our Sun which isn't a planet or a planet's moon; a meteor is an object coming from outer space and hitting the Earth. Most of the latter, AFAIAA, once were the former, and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time - i.e., in the Earth's orbit when the Earth was passing.

Some people are asking "Where are we going to store all this dangerous waste, which will be 100,000 years old before its safe ??" Are the "zealots" too ruining progress ?

We'll store it on the moon, of course. There's nothing there to endanger.

I think the Hubble Space Telescope was a great idea.
I think it was probable a version of a US spy satellite telescope turned around the other direction. But I don't know that for sure. I suspect it.

Almost certainly not. It would be useless turned on Earth - it's very much a long (loooooooooong) distance scope.

[quote]Another thing going on, if enemies get the high ground they have an automatic advantage.

To project warfare into outer space is of course one of the first things a country would consider. [/quote]

Almost certainly, but I don't think outer space can be considered "high ground" for normal warfare purposes. Yes, you can shoot down from it, but you can't charge. And it's expensive. For the next century at least, I'd be more worried about ICBM strikes or subs on your coasts than about orbit-delivered anvils Reveal Hidden Content.

Richard

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
It already is an issue, but for very different (and much less lethal, unless you're on the ISS) reasons than an asteroid strike would be.

BTW, a meteor is an asteroid. Or rather, most are. An asteroid is an object circling our Sun which isn't a planet or a planet's moon; a meteor is an object coming from outer space and hitting the Eart ...[text shortened]... it-delivered anvils [hidden]and hello to any passing Monk[/hidden].

Richard

It's not falling anvils that would be coming down, just gigawatt lasers, you get about 50 milliseconds to react, of course you can't because it's coming in at the speed of light. There are even systems now that can compensate for atmospheric distortion and deliver megawatts spot on a target. You better have good shielding for that. You could shoot down aircraft with that kind of weapon and just keep on shooting, real star wars stuff. Anvils? So 20th century.....

Originally posted by sonhouse
It's not falling anvils that would be coming down, just gigawatt lasers, you get about 50 milliseconds to react, of course you can't because it's coming in at the speed of light. There are even systems now that can compensate for atmospheric distortion and deliver megawatts spot on a target. You better have good shielding for that. You could shoot down airc ...[text shortened]... kind of weapon and just keep on shooting, real star wars stuff. Anvils? So 20th century.....

Same problem. You can shoot, but you can't charge. If you want to conquer a country you'll still have to go there; and if all you want to do is depopulate it, nukes are still cheaper (and, ironically, less controversial).

Richard