From a scientific point of view it makes a lot of sense to set up a base in this region as it provides the nearest possible base to home that could start to explore the dynamics and weather systems of gaseous planets — which are quite common in our Universe — and how such planets impact on their moons — as potential locations for off-earth colonies and industrial bases. It bears consideration that only two other moons in our outer solar system are of requisite size to have a gravitational field similar or greater to that of our Moon — namely Saturn’s Titan and Neptune’s Triton — so the Galilean moons demand attention.

The first difficulty to consider is the intense radiation from Jupiter, which is far stronger than the Earth’s Van Allen radiation belts. Although proper shielding normally protects living organisms and electronic instrumentation, that from Jupiter is whipped up from magnetic fields 20,000 stronger than Earth’s, so shielding would become difficult. It has been considered that such radiation would be the greatest threat to any craft closing within 300,000 km of the planet. At 420,000 km from Jupiter, Io is the closest of the Galilean satellites. With over 400 active volcanoes, from which plumes of sulphur and sulphur dioxide regularly rise as high as 400 km above its surface, it is considered the most geologically active object in the solar system. The activity could be viewed as a source of heat/energy.

Unlike most satellites, it is composed of silicate rock with a molten iron or iron sulphide core, and despite extensive mountain ranges, the majority of its surface is characterized by extensive plains coated with sulphur and sulphur dioxide frost. One can perhaps disregard its extremely thin sulphur dioxide atmosphere as an inconvenience, though is in too close proximity to Jupiter and its extensive magnetosphere even for occasional mining expeditions from the other moons. In this regard one would have to rule out Io and any resources there completely from consideration for such as base. Onto the other options…

At 670,000 km from Jupiter, the intriguing ice-world of Europa is a much more interesting proposition. Under the ice surface it has a layer of Water Ocean surrounding the planet thought to be 100 km thick. One of the first dilemmas of setting up a base on Europa would be not to contaminate any primitive life that may already have a foothold there. Often considered a strong candidate for extra-terrestrial microbial-type life, if life was found there it could render Europa off-limits for colonisation on the grounds of ethics due to the possible contamination/destruction of a delicate ecosystem. Discounting this concern — with an unlimited supply of water — and by extraction, unlimited oxygen and hydrogen also — we have the most important ingredient to support a colony at our disposal here.

The main drawback for Europa — other than high radiation levels from proximity to Jupiter — could be the inability to mine other materials — though these could be attained from other nearby moons, and of course the extreme cold surface temperature — at approx. 100K.

Further out at just over 1,000,000 km we have Ganymede, the most massive of the Galilean moons, and hence with the strongest gravitational field. Composed of silicate rock and water ice in roughly equal proportions, it also is theorised to have a saltwater ocean far below its surface due to salts (magnesium sulphate and sodium sulphate) shown in results from the Galileo spacecraft, which also detected signs of carbon dioxide and organic compounds.

Ganymede is also thought to have a thin oxygen atmosphere, including ozone and perhaps also an ionosphere — although all again in trace amounts, and a weak magnetosphere. Whilst the atmosphere could be considered negligible in terms of the needs for a colony, it is still far more suited as an industrial base than Europa — as not only has it an ample supply of water/ice, it also has abundant resources in silicates and irons for mining and construction.

And last — but by no means least — we have Callisto — furthest out at almost 2,000,000 km, also composed of equal amounts of rocks and ices, it is different from the other Galilean satellites in that as it does not form a part of the orbital resonance that affects the three inner Galilean satellites, and therefore does not experience appreciable tidal heating. Despite this it enjoys a mean surface temperature of 135K and up to a maximum 165K – still very cold – but not as cold as the other Galilean satellites. Like Ganymede, it also has an extremely thin atmosphere, in this case composed mainly of carbon dioxide and molecular oxygen and may have a subsurface of liquid water — the likelihood of which has raised suggestions in the past that it could harbour life. Callisto has long been considered the most suitable place for a human base for future exploration of the Jupiter system since it is furthest from the intense radiation of Jupiter (http://www.nasa-academy.org/soffen/travelgrant/bethke.pdf). HOPE — Human Outer Planet Exploration — as in the above linked 2003 NASA presentation explores some of the objectives and requirements for such a pilot mission, where Callisto was selected — not surprisingly — as the most appropriate mission destination.

HOPE surface operation concepts where vehicle and robot system concepts were explored to achieving a successful first phase, and the division of tasks between crew and robotics, including the exploration of all these satellites, and it concluded a roundtrip crewed mission between 2–5 years is feasible — with significant advancement in propulsion technologies.

The 100,000 Stars Google Chrome Galactic Visualization Experiment Thingy

Zoom in & out of interactive galaxy, state, city, neighborhood, so to speak.

It’s humbling, beautiful, and awesome. Now, is 100, 000 Stars perfectly accurate and practical for anything other than having something pretty to look at and explore and educate and remind us of the enormity of our quaint little galaxy among the likely 170 billion others? Well, no — not really. But if you really feel the need to evaluate it that way, you are a unimaginative jerk and your life is without joy and awe and hope and wonder and you probably have irritable bowel syndrome. Deservedly.

The New Innovation Paradigm Kinda Revisited
Just about exactly one year ago technosnark cudgel Anthrobotic.com was rapping about the changing innovation paradigm in large-scale technological development. There’s chastisement for Neil deGrasse Tyson and others who, paraphrasically (totally a word), have declared that private companies won’t take big risks, won’t do bold stuff, won’t push the boundaries of scientific exploration because of bottom lines and restrictive boards and such. But new business entities like Google, SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, & Planetary Resources are kind of steadily proving this wrong.

Google in particular, a company whose U.S. ad revenue now eclipses all other ad-based business combined, does a load of search-unrelated, interesting little and not so little research. Their mad scientists have churned out innovative, if sometimes impractical projects like Wave, Lively, and Sketchup. There’s the mysterious Project X, rumored to be filled with robots and space elevators and probably endless lollipops as well. There’s Project Glass, the self-driving cars, and they have also just launched Ingress, a global augmented reality game.

In contemporary America, this is what cutting-edge, massively well-funded pure science is beginning to look like, and it’s commendable. So, in lieu of an national flag, would we be okay with a SpaceX visitor center on the moon? Come on, really — a flag is just a logo anyway!

Let’s hope Google keeps not being evil.

[VIA PC MAG]
[100,000 STARS ANNOUNCEMENT — CHROME BLOG]

(this post originally published at www.anthrobotic.com)

There is one last mistake in physics that needs to be addressed. This is the baking bread model. To quote from the NASA page,

“The expanding raisin bread model at left illustrates why this proportion law is important. If every portion of the bread expands by the same amount in a given interval of time, then the raisins would recede from each other with exactly a Hubble type expansion law. In a given time interval, a nearby raisin would move relatively little, but a distant raisin would move relatively farther — and the same behavior would be seen from any raisin in the loaf. In other words, the Hubble law is just what one would expect for a homogeneous expanding universe, as predicted by the Big Bang theory. Moreover no raisin, or galaxy, occupies a special place in this universe — unless you get too close to the edge of the loaf where the analogy breaks down.”

Notice the two qualifications the obvious one is “unless you get too close to the edge of the loaf where the analogy breaks down”. The second is that this description is only correct from the perspective of velocity. But there is a problem with this.

Look up in the night sky, and you can see the band of stars called the Milky Way. It helps if you are up in the Rocky Mountains above 7,000 ft. (2,133 m) away from the city lights. Dan Duriscoe produced one of the best pictures of our Milky Way from Death Valley, California that I have seen.

What do you notice?

I saw a very beautiful band of stars rising above the horizon, and one of my friends pointed to it and said “That is the Milky Way”. Wow! We could actually see our own galaxy from within.

Hint. The Earth is half way between the center of the Milky Way and the outer edge.

What do you notice?

We are not at the edge of the Milky Way, we are half way inside it. So “unless you get too close to the edge of the loaf where the analogy breaks down” should not happen. Right?

Wrong. We are only half way in and we see the Milky Way severely constrained to a narrow band of stars. That is if the baking bread model is to be correct we have to be far from the center of the Milky Way. This is not the case.

The Universe is on the order of 10³ to 10⁶ times larger. Using our Milky Way as an example the Universe should look like a large smudge on one side and a small smudge on the other side if we are even half way out. We should see two equally sized smudges if we are at the center of the Universe! And more importantly by the size of the smudges we could calculate our position with respect to the center of the Universe! But the Hubble pictures show us that this is not the case! We do not see directional smudges, but a random and even distribution of galaxies across the sky in any direction we look.

Therefore the baking bread model is an incorrect model of the Universe and necessarily any theoretical model that is dependent on the baking bread structure of the Universe is incorrect.

We know that we are not at the center of the Universe. The Universe is not geocentric. Neither is it heliocentric. The Universe is such that anywhere we are in the Universe, the distribution of galaxies across the sky must be the same.

Einstein (TV series Cosmic Journey, Episode 11, Is the Universe Infinite?) once described an infinite Universe being the surface of a finite sphere. If the Universe was a 4-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional sphere, then all the galaxies would be expanding away from each other, from any perspective or from any position on this surface. And, more importantly, unlike the baking bread model one could not have a ‘center’ reference point on this surface. That is the Universe would be ‘isoacentric’ and both the velocity property and the center property would hold simultaneously.

Previous post in the Kline Directive series.

Next post in the Kline Directive series.

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.

In this post I explain two more mistakes in physics. The first is 55 years old, and should have been caught long ago.

Bondi, in his 1957 paper “Negative mass in General Relativity”, had suggested that mass could be negative and there are surprising results from this possibility. I quote,

“… the positive body will attract the negative one (since all bodies are attracted by it), while the negative body will repel the positive body (since all bodies are repelled by it). If the motion is confined to the line of centers, then one would expect the pair to move off with uniform acceleration …”

As a theoretician Bondi required that the motion be “confined to the line of centers” or be confined to a straight line. However, as experimental physicist we would take a quantity of negative mass and another quantity of positive mass and place them in special containers attached two spokes. These spokes form a small arc at one end and fixed to the axis of a generator at the other end. Let go, and watch Bondi’s uniform straight line acceleration be translated into circular motion driving a generator. Low and behold, we have a perpetual motion machine generating free electricity!

Wow! A perpetual motion machine hiding in plain sight in the respectable physics literature, and nobody caught it. What is really bad about this is that Einstein’s General Relativity allows for this type of physics, and therefore in General Relativity this is real. So was Bondi wrong or does General Relativity permit perpetual motion physics? If Bondi is wrong then could Alcubierre too be wrong as his metrics requires negative mass?

Perpetual motion is sacrilege in contemporary physics, and therefore negative mass could not exist. Therefore negative mass is in the realm of mathematical conjecture. What really surprised me was the General Relativity allows for negative mass, at least Bondi’s treatment of General Relativity.

This raises the question, what other problems in contemporary physics do we have hiding in plain sight?

There are two types of exotic matter, that I know of, the first is negative mass per Bondi (above) and the second is imaginary (square root of −1) mass.  The recent flurry of activity of the possibility that some European physicists had observed FTL (faster than light) neutrinos, should also teach us some lessons.

If a particle is traveling faster than light its mass becomes imaginary. This means that these particles could not be detected by ordinary, plain and simple mass based instruments. So what were these physicists thinking? That somehow Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformations were no longer valid? That mass would not convert into imaginary matter at FTL? It turned out that their measurements were incorrect. Just goes to show how difficult experimental physics can get, and these experimental physicists are not given the recognition due to them for the degree of difficulty of their work.

So what type of exotic matter was Dr. Harold White of NASA’s In-Space Propulsion program proposing in his presentation at the 2012 100-Year Starship Symposium? Both Alcubierre and White require exotic matter. Specifically, Bondi’s negative mass. But I’ve shown that negative mass cannot exist as it results in perpetual motion machines. Inference? We know that this is not technologically feasible.

That is, any hypothesis that requires exotic negative mass cannot be correct. This includes time travel.

Previous post in the Kline Directive series.

Next post in the Kline Directive series.

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.

In this post on technological feasibility, I point to some more mistakes in physics, so that we are aware of the type of mistakes we are making. This I hope will facilitate the changes required of our understanding of the physics of the Universe and thereby speed up the discovery of new physics required for interstellar travel.

The scientific community recognizes two alternative models for force. Note I use the term recognizes because that is how science progresses. This is necessarily different from the concept how Nature operates or Nature’s method of operation. Nature has a method of operating that is consistent with all Nature’s phenomena, known and unknown.

If we are willing to admit, that we don’t know all of Nature’s phenomena — our knowledge is incomplete — then it is only logical that our recognition of Nature’s method of operation is always incomplete. Therefore, scientists propose theories on Nature’s methods, and as science progresses we revise our theories. This leads to the inference that our theories can never be the exact presentation of Nature’s methods, because our knowledge is incomplete. However, we can come close but we can never be sure ‘we got it’.

With this understanding that our knowledge is incomplete, we can now proceed. The scientific community recognizes two alternative models for force, Einstein’s spacetime continuum, and quantum mechanics exchange of virtual particles. String theory borrows from quantum mechanics and therefore requires that force be carried by some form of particle.

Einstein’s spacetime continuum requires only 4 dimensions, though other physicists have add more to attempt a unification of forces. String theories have required up to 23 dimensions to solve equations.

However, the discovery of the empirically validated g=τc² proves once and for all, that gravity and gravitational acceleration is a 4-dimensional problem. Therefore, any hypothesis or theory that requires more than 4 dimensions to explain gravitational force is wrong.

Further, I have been able to do a priori what no other theories have been able to do; to unify gravity and electromagnetism. Again only working with 4 dimensions, using a spacetime continuum-like empirically verified Non Inertia (Ni) Fields proves that non-nuclear forces are not carried by the exchange of virtual particles. And therefore, if non-nuclear forces are not carried by the exchange of virtual particles, why should Nature suddenly change her method of operation and be different for nuclear forces? Virtual particles are mathematical conjectures that were a convenient mathematical approach in the context of a Standard Model.

Sure there is always that ‘smart’ theoretical physicist who will convert a continuum-like field into a particle-based field, but a particle-continuum duality does not answer the question, what is Nature’s method? So we come back to a previous question, is the particle-continuum duality a mathematical conjecture or a mathematical construction? Also note, now that we know of g=τc², it is not a discovery by other hypotheses or theories, if these hypotheses/theories claim to be able to show or reconstruct a posteriori, g=τc², as this is also known as back fitting.

Our theoretical physicists have to ask themselves many questions. Are they trying to show how smart they are? Or are they trying to figure out Nature’s methods? How much back fitting can they keep doing before they acknowledge that enough is enough? Could there be a different theoretical effort that could be more fruitful?

The other problem with string theories is that these theories don’t converge to a single set of descriptions about the Universe, they diverge. The more they are studied the more variation and versions that are discovered. The reason for this is very clear. String theories are based on incorrect axioms. The primary incorrect axiom is that particles expand when their energy is increased.

The empirical Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformations require that length contracts as velocity increases. However, the eminent Roger Penrose, in the 1950s showed that macro objects elongate as they fall into a gravitational field. The portion of the macro body closer to the gravitational source is falling at just a little bit faster velocity than the portion of the macro body further away from the gravitational source, and therefore the macro body elongates. This effect is termed tidal gravity.

In reality as particles contract in their length, per Lorentz-Fitzgerald, the distance between these particles elongates due to tidal gravity. This macro expansion has been carried into theoretical physics at the elementary level of string particles, that particles elongate, which is incorrect. That is, even theoretical physicists make mistakes.

Expect string theories to be dead by 2017.

Previous post in the Kline Directive series.

Next post in the Kline Directive series.

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.

One clear way to shore up the US economy is to end foreign bases and end the embargo of Cuba. Boycotts hurt both sides, the Cuban economy is smaller so it hurts them more. The US economy is shaky so at some point embargo’s may be the straw that makes us fall apart.

Bumblebees spread beehive syndrome, and all flee the hive after a bee sips from the genetic insecticide in the corn syrup in a discarded soda can. Corn that got cross-pollinated by the wind. How would organically labeling food ingredients help the situation? Only corn from the Southern Hemisphere could be truly labeled, not genetically modified. In the past laboratories blew up, on occasions when an experiment went wrong. The earth not just the mountain section of France and Switzerland is the laboratory when it comes to Large Hadron Collider research.

I want to start a project of mass visualization, but before I post any depressing thoughts, I think I must enclose a little excerpt on the good news in the last election. The Republicans lost much of their base as many Orthodox Jews voted Democrat and Cuban-Americans stopped listening to their hysterical leaders, booting two out of office. Suddenly around the country most Council for a Liveable World candidates won. Suddenly far fewer Americans believe that pot or gay marriage will destroy our country. It is for a moment at least suddenly easier to try to solve out collective problems.

Now that I got that paragraph out of the way, I want to go on with my project of visualizing the world around us.

The following link is about visualizing large sums of money and finance in general,

http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/

Even many professional economists and physicists envisioned far more as a child then their everyday efforts to skillfully ticker with known formulas a little. Visualizing is considered something for kids to do; something only high pressure salesman ask others to do. A very few individuals continue visualizations all their life, such as Albert Einstein.

We live in a universe with the very small and very large, tiny gamma rays can pass through almost any object so the space between the planets circling the sun must be comparable with the space between atoms circling a molecule. And their must be space as between the stars sub-atomically, if gamma rays can pass trough without bumping directly into some resistance. Gravity increases four times as it gets closer, like swinging a heavy ball around ones head puling it harder toward oneself and it goes faster. Space junk before it hits the atmosphere ends up circling at the speed of about three times a day. If the earth had no atmosphere and was solid with nothing lighter than lead, space junk would circle several times faster before hitting the shrunken earth. The Echo Satellite which I liked to look for at night, much slower, the moon once a month around the earth, the earth once every 365 days around the sun with less pull. If the earth shrunk to a black hole, space junk would spin around until reaching the speed of light and go no faster so instead quickly fall toward the black hole that was the earth.

We consider this kind of visualizing something for smart children, but if this is true then Einstein never grew up.

Enclosed are some links for visualizing quantity,

Google the following and click on quick view, GOOGLE THIS PPT FILE,

http://www.hstwohioregions.org/sitefiles/The%20MegaPenny%20Project.ppt  

The ancients had a similar illustration concerning a chessboard. A story of a king impressed by his astrologers predictions offered to give his servant any reward of whatever he wanted and got asked for a seemingly humbly request a grain of wheat (or other versions say a grain of rice) doubled for each square on a chess board and if 16 grains equal a penny, what takes the place of rice and wheat grains in our world, a cubic mound, one quintillion pennies, would be comparable with a cube as high as Mt Everest (scrawl the above link for a fire on quadrillion).

Time visualizing,

http://www.costellospaceart.com/html/time_and_the_speed_of_light.html

Visualizing scale

https://richerramblings.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/visualising-scale/

When it comes to visualizing the four dimensions, the old stand by is Flatland,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland

Where in a two dimensional world certain members appear to have magic by using the third, jumping over barriers appearing to others to be passing right through walls. Actually it is more like us in this corner of the universes living on a frozen lake as amoeba-like oily intelligent blobs that slither around the surface of the frozen lake with little understanding of height. In other words the fourth and fifth or more dimensions are all around us but we don’t notice. If this isn’t true it would mean that dimension is the wrong concept when applying it to time.

There are no sites links that I could find on the dangers and hopes of genetic engineering. However insecticide was genetically implanted on corn for animal feed back in 1991. I see no sense of terror that it might invade the Southern Hemisphere or hear of anyone manually importing Southern Hemisphere bumblebees to our national parks. Now there is fear that the man-make insect terminator genes might spread to rice, wheat and any other plant not helped by insects,

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0040035

There are fantasist genetic experiments cross-breading goats with spiders to create thread stronger than steel, wide goats might live longer if their hair was resistant to being torn apart by wolfs. Creatures with hard to digest inbreed thread or glass-like bits near their muscles and bones from whatever man-made source would crowd out animals who were easier to digest. Labeling foods for genetically modified products is actually of small comfort.

Some dangerous experiments should be done despite the danger. There was suggestions even 45 years ago on lubricating the fault lines to only have small earthquakes from then on. If things went wrong and their was a huge one instead there would be no Japan disaster or any other huge earthquake in today’s world. I don’t know what is equally dangerous and necessary when it comes to food production. Of course none of this is safe.

Physicians like Otto Rossler has extreme trouble visualizing Hawkins Radiation. But those who skillfully push formulas around find it extremely handy and convincing. Hawkins radiation is one of the main reasons Large Haddon Collider research is considered safe despite the fears among some, of an out of control black hole. Another reason is that there are immense forces in the universe, the idea that puny little humans can make major change is very, very unlikely. However, what if dark matter was really small black holes which make up most of the universe.

Puny humans adding one more hole would be a small change in the universe. If the moon collapsed into a black hole it would disappear from the sky. During what was once a eclipse of the moon would instead appear very weird, as light from the stars near by bent to a great degree.

But what if physicists made a mistake that there is a minimum size that a micro black hole could shrink without becoming unstable. If this is miscalculation is true then there would be ever shrinking holes. They could be in the middle of many celestial objects including our earth. When a light wave or something else passes over it, it might result in a little hole like a bullet hole, possible making the wave shift ever so slightly toward the red. On the other hand I could wrong because why wouldn’t it make the wave narrower more toward violet. If it was in temperature close to absolute zero the object baring down on the mini-micro hole might stick to it instead of making a hole when passing through such as in the helium cooling coil of the Large Hadron Collider. I hope the cooling coals or horizontal not vertical preventing an updraft that might keep the hole growing for a short while as gravity pulls it to the center of the earth. Tremendous cold right next to intense heat may not occur without human help.

Now back to the fourth and more dimensions and if time is a dimension time travel all around us like with creatures living on the surface of a frozen lake, that have a dim concept of height.

In the collider experiment some particles are synch together like a flock of geese or a chorus line all appearing moving and disappearing together, 

http://sciencestage.com/r/particles-flock-strange-synchroniz…n-collider

http://allenlrolandsweblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/hadron-colli…-urge.html

Maybe we don’t actually see a moment but several moment segments at the same time so quantum physics is like a little time machine, when something reaches the speed of light it moves over in time if it moves faster we see evidence of more of a wave gamma ray extremely hot and fast moving away from us in time if cooler we detect infrared heat waves that we get to observe a wide section. If you take a one tenth second timed picture of a water wave you would see a fuzzy line where the wave moved during the filming but a far faster wave in an iron bar would be closer to a picture of an ink line. All the waves could move endlessly in time but we note only perhaps a billionth of a second, longer as time speeds up for the object moving away from us so we see a slightly wider than perhaps a billionth of a second and thus more of the wave segment of a wave that if we could see all the time segments would extend endlessly in time not the line segment we see but and endlessly wide sweep.

So the object behind a light wave is perhaps there or not there depending on which time segment it is actually in.

At one point astronomy consisted of a series of epicycles as new information was obtained a new epicycle was added,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysterium_Cosmographicum  

With Hawkins radiation and dark matter instead of just invisible ordinary matter with the same proprieties as visible matter we are going through a somewhat similar constantly tinkering with a theory instead of looking for a new one

The problem is the entire earth is a laboratory ready to come apart if something goes wrong. Safety first or else sooner or later one mistake will be the last .

Note: The below is exclusively about the United States of America, yet the theme is international.

Each time an extreme weather event takes place humanity is reminded again that basic preparation for an off-grid experience did not take place across large swaths of an affected population. Ironically, it does not begin to take place, publicly and en masse, after the event.

Saving humanity will have a lot to do with teaching a kid to build a fire, in the near term. More esoteric “preservers” and “shields” have their place, but “Scout” knowledge can produce immediate quantitative and qualitative improvements in humanity’s survival capabilities, fast.

After weather-induced disasters, our tendency is toward construction of physical things – better towers, more resilient dams, improved architecture. Seldom do we do anything to improve ourselves. Thousands remain helpless and dependent in the face of the Hurricane “Sandy” aftermath.

We have the resources in abundance to mobilize a citizenry education program. Many veterans have expert-level qualifications in survival training, for example, and with Internet and iPads their knowledge could be disseminated to every public school auditorium and town hall equipped with electricity at nominal cost, while also providing the instructors with competitive compensation.

To practice and train in the practical skills of preparedness, schools, towns, cities and parks could coordinate to deliver on- and off-site programs all citizens could reasonably take part in over a specified period of time. The goal should be to ensure within a specific time frame every citizen is aware of and able to employ a holistic set of preparedness actions in the event of an emergency. It’s a simple, clear and achievable objective.

It is what we do or fail to do as a society and as individuals to prepare for and learn from risk events that makes them more or less harmful now and in the future. The “existential risk” of extreme weather events, or extreme geological events, or terror events or financial avalanche, or their compounding, barring total annihilation, is the systemic and chronic damage which mutilates the fabric of society over time, making us weaker each time we face a new emergency, and also more prone to creating a new emergency or failing to prepare adequately for the next.

A citizen-wide preparedness program for unplanned emergency off-grid events could be designed for fun, building of comradery and orientation of adults and children toward a grounded, active, positive engagement with a highly variable world, thus doing much to off-set the negative impacts of an increasingly disaster prone environment and also much to build a more internally cohesive society. The literal ROA for investment in citizen preparedness should be exponential if the programming is organized with care, especially when including and evaluating the investment into human capital as an asset class. The very act of addressing how we handle disaster will diminish the potential for disaster itself.

A more self-sufficient and stable citizenry would help to increase public wealth and decrease public debt by limiting or eliminating the public expenditures made after an emergency (through the Federal Emergency Management Agency or through deployment of the military for example). Insurance claims of many types would decrease, new markets for sustainable goods and services would emerge, and dependence for survival upon non-sustainable resources like fossil fuels and coal-powered electricity would be tempered, all with increasing measure and positive impact over time.

A logical step for such a program would be for a public official of rank to announce it as a national priority. This could set a helpful tone of willingness, support or mandate. Local councils and agencies could also come together in confederation and create the same effect. Organizations disposed to the dispensation of preparedness skill sets could also use this time to create momentum.

Becoming competent in the ability to intelligently face adverse conditions is the most important skill required in society today. Until the time when all or a majority of people are able to act with sustained rationality and functionality in an unfamiliar situation or emergency, systems will continue to decay or collapse faster than ability to repair damage or survive impact peaceably.

Seeing the sheer scale of the F-1 engine for the Saturn 5 rocket first hand, stepping inside an Apollo command module identical to those used during the Apollo program, not to mention seeing full life-size replicas of the Lunar Roving Vehicle, an Apollo Lunar Module and for some reason what seemed most surreal to me… the Viking 1 Lander. This was enchantment.

However, for all the amazement that such a museum can provide, it is also a saddening reminder that what once was the forefront of human ambition and endeavor has now been largely resigned to history. NASA budgets are cut annually [2] whilst military expenditure takes ever more precedence. A planned six percent budget decrease in 2013 is the equivalent savings to three hours of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. Instead of reaching to explore outer-space we are encouraged to get excited about the equivalent billions [3] invested on science exploring the subatomic inner-space world. Meanwhile, we tend to forget that the ambitions of space exploration are not just to satisfy some wide-eyed childhood yearning to explore, but the serious and sobering prospect of needing to ensure that we as a species can eventually colonize to other worlds and ensure we are not counting down the days to our extinction on an ever-more-precarious planetary solitude.

In the face of such indifference, such concepts of lifeboats have become marginalized to what is perceived to be a realm solely for loons and dreamers, or ‘space cadets’ as we used to call them back in the days of school. The trillion dollar question really is what it takes to redirect all that military investment into science & exploration instead. It is down to credibility. Governments shy away from investing public funds when there is a lack of credibility.

It was an easy sell to the public to invest in the military after the tragic events of 9/11 and terrorist threats which were presented largely by propaganda/disinformation to the public as an existential risk to the free world. The purse strings opened and an unforgivable amount of expenditure was invested on the military in the subsequent years. Let us hope that it does not take unprecedented natural disasters [4] to awaken the world to the fact that it is nature which poses much greater existential risks to the survival of our society in the long-term.

[1] http://airandspace.si.edu/
[2] http://www.care2.com/causes/2013-nasa-budget-gutted.html
[3] http://www.ibtimes.com/forbes-finding-higgs-boson-cost-1325-billion-721503
[4] http://rt.com/news/paint-asteroid-earth-nasa-767/

Let me clarify what I mean. The term ‘immortal’ literally means someone who never dies, i.e. lives forever. But ‘forever’ means really forever, more than 50 trillion years, until the end of time. In the foreseeable future (the future which is relevant to us alive today) this is just plain nonsense. If the term is nonsense, then it should not be used. Better terms may be ‘longevity’, or ‘extreme lifespan’ which means to live for many years, without stipulating a number. Extreme longevity, or extreme life extension is not immortality. One may be able to live for 1000 years, and then still die. Another suitable term could be ‘indefinite lifespan’ which is the absence of a sustained increase of mortality as a function of age (i.e. it is the absence of death due to aging). These terms denote something feasible, something that can be achieved with the use of near-term future technology.

Another legitimate term to use is ‘Human Biological Immortality’. This is a strict term used in biology to refer to the decrease of the rate of cellular mortality as a function of age. It is, in other words, similar to the term ‘indefinite lifespan’. Here the emphasis is on indefinite, and not on infinite.

I believe that certain humans will be able to live indefinitely (50 years, 500 years, no a priori limit) and that this will happen after a combination of natural evolutionary events (https://acrobat.com/#d=MAgyT1rkdwono-lQL6thBQ) enhanced and accelerated by science and technology (http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/03/04/indefinite-lifespans-a-n…l-brain/). Death by aging will be abolished, and people will only die from accidents, illnesses etc. We will still be mortal.

Is it really necessary to stick to the exact meaning of the words? Yes, it is if we are to be taken seriously. To use terms like ‘eternal life’, ‘immortality, or ‘living forever’ decreases the scientific credibility of the anti-aging movement, has undertones of religious beliefs that have no basis in science, and disconnects both the general public and the funding bodies from the subject.

The point here is that any emerging technologies will only emerge if the public supports them, and if the researchers get funding. If supporters of these technologies appear too irrational, illogical or unreasonable, then they will damage the cause, and make it more difficult for others who, still visionary, have more achievable aims.

I must congratulate many of the presenters, our youth, our next generation leaders, for thinking outside the box. And I congratulate their supervisors, advisors and team members for facilitating a supportive environment that nurtures outside the box thinking.

Here is why. Several remarkable papers were presented. For example, Tom Joslyn (Lt. Col, PhD) presented “Use of Liquid Droplet Stream Momentum Transfer for Lunar and Interplanetary Missions”. By using liquid droplets to conserve and transfer momentum between the momentum storage spacecraft and the lunar landing spacecraft, one could reduce the LEO mass from 200,000 kg to 24,500 kg. The presentation wasn’t about theory. It was about the how such a concept would be Engineering Feasible. The type of liquids required, and the ejection and capture systems required. That is impressive.

Second, “Cockpit of the Future” by the Capstone Team. They presented many new concepts like Palm Piloteer, haptic feedback suits, wrap around displays and seat designs.

Third, I could not decide which was better, Sibylle Walter’s “GoJett: A Supersonic Unmanned Aerial Flight System” and James French’s “A Self-Refueling Mars Airplane”, both were excellent and engineering focused.

Once, again, I am so glad to see our youth thinking outside the box. They are examples of the type of outside the box thinking required to achieve interstellar travel. They are not harping on old failed concepts but moving forward on new concepts, new techniques, new designs, and new prototypes. They will change our world. Congratulations.

May they live long and prosper.

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.