« first day (467 days earlier)      last day (759 days later) » 

1:57 AM
take look space.coop/blog
some small startup of 6 volunteers in LA
also would like to create some working group )
 
 
11 hours later…
1:12 PM
@MolbOrg yeah, they have a bunch of great people. i wonder how i might work together with groups like that.
again i have this feeling of not being sure i should contact them right now - i always want to wait a little more and have something better to show
i suppose i'll send an email and just see what happens
are you saying you'd like to create something similar? not join them?
 
1:33 PM
btw, i saw the team indus thing and it's cool too - just i've been wrapped up in my head, trying to figure out just what to say during my presentation. and i have become cynical about the google xprize, i'm not sure how it will turn out. not that it isn't still an important bit of progress.
 
 
3 hours later…
4:54 PM
Have talked a bit with Yalda Mousavinia
they also at very early stages of their idea, as my impression - that is a good time to talk
linked moonward to her, she said that head of it.
but the conversation was rather short, timezone issues.
 
5:04 PM
They've heard of us? you know, at this stage, that always makes me smile.
did you send something through their contact page? i was thinking of doing the same.
i wonder if any of them are going to the Starship Congress
Mike Murphy, the engineer who earlier suggested using sodium as the heat carrier, responded to my email about reviewing the new model.
he isn't sure of the decision to use Stirling engines because of their general state of development, but if we do, he suggests focusing on the free piston kind
 
I'm the beast, but I'm illiterate beast ))
 
looks good to me :D
i always understand you, that's the main thing
at least - the heavy science parts are a lot harder... other than that...
do you want to be the contact with space.coop for now?
 
5:19 PM
@kimholder I wished to ask when and what, but missed the opportunity in the chat fabric
 
oh, so it was a chat
 
It looks to me they try to determine what general public is interested in, to I guess tune what they will have and thus get some flow of people - all that publicity and traffic stuff.
she did a survey in one of the FB group, I answered and reposted it in another group, then someone asked if it isn't a virus and all that. I dug deeper, took a more precise look at all that, then just wrote message in FB chat.
 
so they are really just getting going
i don't mingle in chats like that. i will, but right now i don't feel i can afford the time
 
I threw the keyword to check the reaction - idk, no reaction. However didn't ask directly. They are somewhere in LA city, as I understood
 
Pasadena, just outside of LA
keyword?
 
5:29 PM
keyword - in that particular situation just using some words to see the reaction
it is like google search - you can input sentence there, but more productive to use some keywords
or at least they should be in sentence
 
oh right - on FB. Yeah, you can tell i don't use it a lot.
 
it is not FB related, it is discussion related.
she could responded something like - oh, so sweet we are also going to SC we could meet there. ))))
 
oh, so you mean you mentioned the SC - are you there right now?
 
move on ), I could just copy paste the chat, but ... :D
 
ok. i was just a little lost.
 
5:37 PM
as for Stirling 3piston - the problem with starlings - I newer saw of heard about powerful Stirling engines. 1MW, 10MW, 100kW
and that means people do not have(or almost not have) the experience of building them
how it scales, is a question of questions
 
yeah, the only thing i have to go on is the statement on the wikipedia page that heavy units should work well.
 
yes, possible. and sure it can be done, but if you plan to rely on proven information or papers - this information or nonexisting or not easy to obtain
 
at the moment, really it is all a sketch. what i wanted is an engine there, a proposal.
i did say to him that there would be a lot of lead time to develop the engine, and that i'm concerned it would be hard to manufacture turbine blades in particular on the Moon
when i looked for a turbine drawing to use to mock something up, they had a huge number of small parts
and i couldn't find anything that seemed to be good to adapt for this.
so largely - at this point the stirling engine was also just a lot easier to model.
 
there was NASA study of improving particular stiling they took, and I guess there is some conclusion, just lost the paper(it deep deep in an archive of an archive), but my impression from it was, it almost as demanding engineering construction as anything else.
High pressure, using He - improves its efficiency.
It could have a sense to use them if you had a more distributed energy generation system, but you have central one place oriented one.
 
there are a number of engines on each tank though
 
5:48 PM
not important - turbines are ok starting from 10kW power
 
and the mass i was figuring would help a lot. These things can be heavy.
at any rate, they can be replaced. just not now. and it certainly would be cool to have a better analysis before taking that step.
and i would really like to take a close look at the free piston version
 
Stirling of significant power it looks and feels just like combustion engine - so there are no benefits of mass or simplicity.
They would be good without the tank and with the generation of energy at the mirror itself.(I guess)
but at the end of the day it isn't that important at the moment.
 
6:09 PM
i'm trying to go over the habs now, improving the models
hey - i linked the new sketchfab model here, didn't i?
you probably saw it from the rss post anyhow.
i need to sketch Gagarin Station, the tether complex. but i am not quite up to that yet.
that's going to be a challenge.
 
7:03 PM
draw a long tether and sphere - everything important is in the sphere ))
 
i was going to go with two O'Neill cylinders extending north and south from the central mass, which is a ring shape of asteroid remnants and reinforcing parts, and extending to the sides the docks for the shipyard
 
 
1 hour later…
8:08 PM
@MolbOrg the speech has changed a fair bit. I think it's close to its final form now. I'm just taking input to improve it a bit, but i don't think there will be any big changes.
 
8:39 PM
@kimholder try that - can you add the comments to the document
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Dianb4-iCpnbM39s_zxUutPdPyc9R2GsY30IdHQIQqg/edit
 
@MolbOrg ok, i think that's set up for suggestions now
i tried to share the doc with the other panel members this way, but two of them don't use google docs and they didn't like it.
so with them i'm doing this by email
 
8:56 PM
@kim it seems now is open for edits - which you probably won't be so
suggestion - that ok - ok can later reject or accept if you like the deit
 
hm. but there seems to be two places to change that. let me see...
 
right corner it's personal setting
in the view menu, it seems to be for others except the owner, but it depends on were you able to edit the link I posted
 
it seems the question is that when i get the link to the document, i have to pick view, comment, or edit
 
yes, now it's how it shoul be
 
oh, no i couldn't edit in the one you shared
 
9:01 PM
you can pick out of what is allowed - and you set what is allowed in the view menu
as owner you allowed to select from all 3 options
ok now it's ok
 
by the way, my presentation is supposed to be 15 to 20 minutes long, and read at a good pace, the text there right now takes just under 20 minutes
 
 
2 hours later…
11:02 PM
I have a bit angry answer, which I'm not proud of, it is in the question ))
2
Q: Why does a family move to the moon?

DanielWhat cultural, social, and environmental factors will cause some of the first families - including kids - go to live on the Moon? Their reason(s) to go should be "realistic", and have parallels to other mass migrations in the past (ie colonization of America, America's westward expansion, Britis...

 
11:18 PM
Yep, a little angry there.
i was following your comments as you made them. the chat box has disappeared for some reason, but i saw it before that.
since there isn't a chat, and you made a lot of comments, i'd like to make some general statements about our different viewpoints so you understand why i'm not in favor of almost any of your points...
i'd put them in 3 categories - personal style, cultural differences, and different views
i'll comment on each in the document, some of the matters are pretty complex though
we could have whole conversations about them - but not right now.
ok, maybe i can do everything now in the comments. let me just finish a piece of this model...
 
it is not necessary, it just another view angle, just an outside noise from my side.
if you find it is perfect, so be it. those comments aren't for discussion, they are just noise.
so the reaction is just to ignore them or listen a bit for signs of something.
I'll read what you have to say, but I'll no discuss.
 
fair enough. there is a philosophical difference here, that is the part that is most interesting.
 
@kimholder There is no need in that, as there is no need to convince me, as I have no intent to convince any one by those comments
 
and maybe the parts where i think you don't see how the project is laid out, so you don't see why i've made certain choices
hm.
it's sort of a lot of work to not want to know what i think about it.
though, yes, i am busy and if it wasn't for that, i'd talk at length about it.
 
It rather difference of approaches, I see why you say/said things (something for sure slips from my understanding) - but in general it is not important as it can be only the way it can be ))
@kimholder yes, intent of the comments to help - if they help great, if they are not, so is it.
 
11:43 PM
i am still mulling over the final part. it doesn't really get across what i'm trying to say.
 
comment about the last part - was more about style of saying thing than about the content itself - take it into the account
 
yeah, it isn't that that's making me want to change it really. it just doesn't quite say what i was going for.
it's interesting to have a bit more of a sense of your viewpoint, based on your comments.
 

« first day (467 days earlier)      last day (759 days later) »