HyperDrive

For years I've thought about space in sort of a fantasy/scifi ideology, watching the Star Treks, Stargates, and shows like that for years thinking about how cool it would be to work with that technology. Every now and again I think, "Gee, it would sure be a lot of fun to work in the space industry," citing in my mind the likes of Scaled Composites, SpaceX, Bigelow Aerospace, Blue Origin, and some others. Over the last few months, though, I've been thinking a lot more seriously about it. There are so many opportunities, if you can get to them: tourism, exploration, mining, and off-world settlement to name a few. These are untapped industries that are going to grow and become substantial world markets, likely at some point within the next 20 years. And I can't help but think that, since I enjoy space and tech so much, why shouldn't I be pursuing this more? I suppose I was just wondering if anyone has really thought about it. I mean, I don't have a wife, don't have kids, and I can pretty well live anywhere in the world. If I'm going to do something like this, now would be the perfect time to take some chances. I've been looking a bit at a conference coming up in July (NewSpace 2011 Space Conference out near San Francisco -- anyone else here going to be at this?) and I'm thinking more and more about going. I'm not sure what I'm trying to get out of this topic post (support? help? best wishes? all of the above?) but I've been around STSF for a while and couldn't think of anywhere else a post like this would be better suited. For all I know there could be some people on here who have also thought about it and come to some conclusion about (a) how they're going to pursue something like this, or (B) why they're avoiding it. I just wanted to throw this up here and see if anyone had any comments about the idea and topic. I know there are those who are just yearning for the day that starships can blast across the galaxy at FTL speeds, but the likelihood of that in the near future is certainly slim-to-none. Maybe the best we can do is setup the next generation for something that remarkable. Anyway, if you've made it this far, thanks for reading. I'd love to read a few remarks and opinions about this topic if you have anything to say. I don't know for sure whether or not it is something anyone on this forum has thought about, but I have to think that a few of you have. Just want to probe your minds a little bit.

Good question. Short answer? Space manufacturing. I think space mining is still a little off (except maybe for mining the Moon for He-3) but the ability to manufacture in space (i.e. probes, ships, satellites, etc.) is legitimate. Recent studies to see how 3D printers function outside of Earth's gravity makes this sound even more possible as a business pursuit. The propulsion mechanisms, some of the electronics, and a few other parts would have to be transported from the Earth's surface, but the framing can be developed in space and the object can be constructed in orbit. Since it is essentially raw material being transported from Earth into space, and not a finished product, some amounts of risk on the consumer end is removed. The biggest market would be the creation of space objects that are too large to be currently feasible (i.e. can't fit in the Space Shuttle, on an Atlas V, or would have to be assembled in space with pieces delivered from multiple launches). In terms of space exploration (and colonization), this is how you will create a large living space that can be delivered to another planet. The biggest space business will probably be mining operations, but the magnitude of an operation like that (and the high number of deaths that would likely be associated with it) make mining something that is a bit more distant. Plus, those mining operations (whenever they do come into existence) will need transport vessels... which can also be manufactured while orbiting Terra Firma. Essentially, someone is going to eventually spend a lot of money to build a manufacturing operation in space. It will be large--it'll be sent up in pieces (sort of ISS-like). But it will help prevent anyone from having to build and launch "sections" of a space station/ship/probe/etc ever again. That would be my plan to (a) fuel exploration, and (B) make some money doing it. Anyone have $150 billion (+- $50 billion) lying around somewhere?

So I just found out that Star Trek: The Exhibit is coming to my city in 10 days. Has anyone gone? Is it something worth checking out? It'll be here until May, so I don't have to rush into it (though for a little higher price I have the chance of meeting Robert Picardo and sipping a cocktail the night before it opens to the public). There's a Star Trek: The Exhibit website and there's also an exhibit website at the Louisville Science Center (where the display is located in the city) if anyone wants to look it up.

Or, more precisely, a ship full of trekkers. I just ran across this article and figured you'd all enjoy it. Anyone on here taken part in this nautical festivity? I wonder if they have a "Captain for the day" program... ;) worldhum.com/features/travel-stories/star-trek-where-no-travel-writer-has-gone-before-20091103/ (link removed, but you smart people can find this website if you try)

So, I'm sure a lot of you don't know me at all, but that's ok. I stopped participating in STSF about 4 years ago when I started my undergrad studies. Well, now it's nearly four years later, and I'm about to graduate... but with no idea what I want to do. The fact is, I went to a liberal arts school, which has left me with a wide array of interests, but no set direction. I'm a chemistry major, but I'm not necessarily sure that I want to do chemistry with my life, so I don't know if chem grad school is where I want to be next year. So, I've reached a dilemma. I think I'd like to teach at some point in my life, but not right now. Obviously, I have a huge interest in space, science, and trek-like things, but I'm also interested in international relations, communications, transportation, among others. Basically, I'm seeking recommendations. I'm probably going to apply to Teach for America, and maybe something else that would help me prolong deciding about life. But, I'd love to just jump into something I know I'd love. (Anyone know of a spaceship that needs a chemist? ;) ) I've even thought about going and getting an MBA, and just starting my own research company or something like that. (Dream big, right?) Anyway, I just thought I'd throw something out here and see if anyone knew of something I was overlooking. Suggestions are welcome!

Oops, forgot about the no links rule. I was wondering if it had ever been considered for a Vegas replacement. I think it said there were something like 100 people who did the cruise. Definitely would be nerdy, but still pretty neat.

Thanks Lexi! I'll look at usajobs later and see what I can find. I definitely haven't ruled out doing something with the military, especially since they get all the cool gadgets and such. Thanks for the help!

Interestingly enough, I've actually been looking at that some. There are still only a few such programs in existence, though, and they're highly competitive, but I've considered applying to some. The ones I know of off hand are at Penn State, U. Washington in Seattle, and Arizona State. There are a few other schools (such as Harvard) that kind of/sort of have programs. I've also thought about getting a masters degree in physics, and then trying to get into space telescopy or something similar.

So... to come back some time later and jump into a random conversation... The advertisements for this have me skeptical. I've seen (nearly?) every episode of SG1, and not very many of Atlantis (and most of the ones I have seen were in German about a month ago, where two episodes are usually on right after I get home from work, but the language skills are still a bit weak in some areas). Anyway, I saw the advertisements, and I felt like they were trying to make Stargate look too much like Enterprise (and that sure turned out well). From what I could tell, they added the sex appeal (and not that strange Dr. Carter sex appeal, but girls in far more revealing/less military clothing). For me (and probably most early SG1 fans), the original series focused quite a bit on connecting history to the future, and doing so with technology that is thought to be "hypothetically" correct. I'm afraid that aspect will be critically lost with this new series, much like how it was only used sparingly in later seasons of Atlantis. That being said, I think there are still quite a bit of avenues for the Stargate universe to explore, and I am excited about the new series. Basically, I just hope it doesn't suck. I'm never home on Friday nights, so as long as I can watch it online somewhere, I'll be fine. (At some point, I'm going to invest in a TiVo or something.) I really hope they don't "battlestar" it too much, meaning I hope they don't ruin a potentially good storyline with a bad script.

I missed you, Sub. *sniff*

Can you imagine how weird that would be, looking out a window, and seeing someone just flying through the air? Ok, I admit, it would be totally awesome. Hi Kroells. :P

Haha... I think it would be really neat, and totally freaky. It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of this. The way it looks to be, it isn't just rolling out in sheets of aluminum like we would want. I'd bet that it's a detailed and expensive process. :P But I totally want some for my transparent car.

I dressed like Doc Brown from Back to the Future. It was pretty much amazing. I bought some white hair paint, lab coat, and nice, colored button-up shirt. I loved it!

For safety sake (and, in my opinion, ease of use), Firefox is better to use. Both have security holes, but IE holes tend to be more severe, mostly because hackers tend to spend more time trying to crack it. Firefox has also had some pretty severe holes in the past. However, for Firefox security issues, the community tends to get fixes out incredibly fast. By now, Firefox supports just as much (and a little more in some areas) as IE does, function wise. With the introduction of IE7, Microsoft seems to have, for the most part, caught up with web changes, and I haven't seen any security issue that hasn't had a fix released a short time later. Honestly, as far as I can tell, the IE vs. Firefox debate has really come down to preference. Many people will argue that IE is ridden with security issues, and while that is true with IE6, the latest versions are actually much more secure. However, that being said, I don't trust Microsoft ActiveX controls, and I find them dangerous. Due to this, and personal preference, I dominantly use Firefox, and I do recommend it, as well. If you are shopping for a browser, you may want to give Opera a try, too.

Oh, come now. Troy has her way of destroying large portions of a ship, if not the entire thing. ;) That aside, I need to look into this new Trek series thing. I've Googled it, and I'll take a closer look at it later. It looks interesting.

I agree that, if the American citizens want it, they are much better at rallying together than people in other states. However, American citizens don't want to deal with more, they want to deal with less. Unfortunately, our want for not having to deal with things is much more powerful than our want to help the world around us. But, I do believe, if you were to ask nearly any American, he or she would be in favor of recycling and helping our environment. However, many fewer would be interested in actually being part of that help. It would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to ask your American neighbor or friend to increase his or her workload for any reason, let alone for the good of an environment that, for the time being, is working for them just fine. I don't think that a government should run the lives of the people, but they should create mandates when it is necessary to help future lives and generations. With my children suddenly in the picture, I am much more willing to support our government in creating new environmental mandates. This would be a major change, and would be imbedded in the philosophies of future generations, but never our current one. By no means do I look to Europe as my idealistic place, but when another culture has a better idea in place than your own, it would only make sense to start using it yourself. And, as for our so-called experts, also unfortunately, they have other selfish issues to get past, and simply cannot be trusted. I wouldn't exactly trust a "scientist" employed by a political party. I see where you're coming from, Grom, and I would agree with you, if I believed the American people would change this on their own. But, I don't think they will (for a wide array of various reasons, some better than others). I think government interaction is vital, should people be serious about actually wanting to help the land.

I've been living in Munich for the last five weeks, and when it comes to pollution and being eco-friendly, there is no comparison between here and Louisville, KY. I'd first like to mention trash, recycling, and so on. All German households must recycle. They take plastic bottles back to the store, and receive a deposit for them. They seperate plastic, paper, biodegradible from their trash. The biotrash is, essencially, buried in the backyard. No problems. The paper and plastics are taken to recycling nodes, where most will get deposits back for them (usually only fifteen cents or so, but this becomes a couple of Euros pretty fast). The "other" trash is collected once a week, but the garbage collectors will only take one can of predetermined size. Now, the reason this is done here, primarily, is because the inner-European countries don't have enough room for dumps or any other mass collections of garbage. A side effect of this, of course, is that they do not waste as much recyclable material. (As a side note, Germany does not have trash cans on street corners. They have bins that are divided into three sections: paper, plastic, and everything else. This requires no extra effort on the part of the person throwing something away, and helps the environment. It makes perfect sense to have these in the States, too.) The problem in America is that we have no self-sustaining reason to actually do this. We have plenty of room for landfills, and it requires much less effort just to throw things away. However, this requires more plastics and papers to be produced. Production of these materials adds to air pollution, while not recycling these materials leads to wasting and ground pollution. Personally, I think recycling in the US should be further endorsed, but it is not anywhere near the top of the campaign list. The campaign list, of course, has more to do with topics of global warming, so on and so forth. While I don't agree with a good portion of science in AIC, the fact is, it is still air pollution that is dangerous to our environment (and ourselves). The reason the US gets such a bad wrap for this is because, basically, we drive everywhere, and we have lax environmental standards. People in other countries ride bikes, or use more public transportation. Ok, so why don't Americans use more public transportation? Simple. America doesn't have sophisticated public transportation systems. Large cities have subway systems, but these often don't travel as far out of the city as needed, and it is more convenient for a person to drive than wait 15 minutes for the next bus or train. And, as for public transportation, other countries can use trains. America is far to large to use trains to really get anywhere in a decent amount of time, so that possibility is completely out. (Especially if a train from NYC to Chicago takes 15 hours for $100, and a flight takes about 1 hour and costs $60.) As for bikes, well, they're just insanely dangerous. We don't have bike routes in most cities. For that matter, riding a motorcycle is becoming more and more dangerous, because drivers don't look out for them. The same holds true for bikes, and I for one do not want to risk getting killed on a bike by a driver not paying attention. And, I will freely admit that I would, put simply, rather drive myself. I can work on my own schedule, and get back to life much quicker. (I couldn't count the hours of my life I have wasted, in only five weeks, while waiting for an S-Bahn to come to my suburb.) So, what is this entire post trying to emphasize? Americans don't have any other means of travel, so we must use cars. Also, Americans have no reason, other than the environment, to recycle. And lastly, energy and gas here are cheap, so money is not an issue in conserving energy. It comes down to, then, our government. For America to ever actually be successful in helping the environment, the government must start, essentially, forcing people to do it. The growing number of activists in the States already recycle and conserve, so it wouldn't be an issue for them. However, many people who don't conserve go through a lot of power, and waste a lot. Even a small, simple mandate, such restricting the number of trash cans you can set out every week, would be incredibly effective. This would force people to start recycling more, because they wouldn't have any other way of getting rid of it (except burning, which is illegal in most populated areas for obvious health concerns). And, naturally, raising the prices of electricity and natural gas, but that wouldn't be neccessary if people would simply concerve what they have. (For comparison, a gallon of fuel in Munich runs about $7.00 a gallon, and electricity is about double the price per watt as it is in the US.) In America, if gasoline prices rise, we'll pay for it anyway. If electricity prices rise, we'll start turning off lights when leaving the room, turning the air conditioner off when it is 70 degrees outside, etc. There are ways for America to become much more environmentally friendly, but I simply don't think that asking the people to recycle and conserve is enough. When recycling and conserving become a norm, it won't be a problem, but I think we need the government to push us to that point. I go back to Kentucky in a week. I'm quite interested to see how I will react when I see a milk jug in the trash can, or something similar. I'm fairly certain that I will put more effort into recycling, simply because it isn't that difficult to do, it helps the planet that provides for me, and I've grown use to it. Sorry this was so long. I know that, before I lived in Germany, I had no idea how many resources I wasted. Honestly, I think anyone who came and lived in Europe for only a couple of weeks would realize how much some of these things help. It has definitely changed my outlook on several things, most of which I never even thought about before. Anyway, I hope at least some of this makes sense. Even if you don't agree with Gore and AIT, which I don't particularly agree with a lot of it, there is no reason why you shouldn't take care of the environment you live in. I mean, we keep our private homes clean, so I don't see any reason not to keep the public around us clean, too.

No joke, this is some awesome news. Thanks for bringing this up (though, admittedly, I posted that comment a couple of years ago, haha). He use to present some awesome topics over in the science and technology board at ST.com. He left after some stupid members on the board started flaming him and junk like that. It was a sad day. Woo, this just made my day, haha.

I do what I can. :) No problem. I'm just glad they kept some form of the clipboard from the old version, albeit it seems harder to use. Oh well.

14) Double shot every time Wesley Crusher saves the ship.

You can also copy/paste from the chat window for your own records, though I believe you may have to do this several times during a sim in order to retain all written text.

Careful, Huff. If I've learned anything from Christmas, I've learned that soap poisoning causes blindness. Anywho, I got a new shotgun and a paintball gun. Oh, and also the Far Side Gallery 2007 calendar (woop!). One of my best friends gave me Spaceballs and Ferris Bueller, too, so I'm pretty pumped about those. The best present was that I got to come home and spend some time with mom and dad (and time away from college work)!

I never took the "you are what you eat" thing seriously until I started eating donuts every day.

So, why not just stick some type of device on your ship to determine the frequency of the phaser blast that just hit you, and then shoot back on the same frequency? If the shield frequency wasn't being rotated, then the return fire would be able to penetrate the shields without any problem. :D As for transporters, they're designed to keep out intrusions, which could include people trying to beam aboard during a battle. So not being able to beam through shields would be a definate plus in a situation like that.

Happy birthday! Yea, I'm late, but I'm a firm believer in the "it's the thought that counts" philosophy. We'll always be with you.