[LMB] Centrifugal gravity, was Re: Cordelia's College sport

Matthew George matt.msg at gmail.com
Tue Jun 22 01:32:18 BST 2021


On Sat, Jun 19, 2021 at 3:44 AM Matija Grabnar via Lois-Bujold <
lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk> wrote:

>
> If we were arguing about something traveling faster than light, you
> would have a point. But none of the stuff under the discussion here
> violates the fundamental laws of physics.
>

We may well discover that our understanding of physics is inaccurate and
FTL is actually possible.  There are laws of economics, psychology,
biology, and engineering, too, which are as unlikely to have exceptions as
Einsteinian physics, and whose restrictions are much harder to convince
people of.

At present, if I understand the state of our engineering properly (which I
am the first to acknowledge I may not), we don't have the ability to send
people to Mars and bring them back alive.  Our projections suggest that the
last astronaut assigned to such a mission would be dying of the effects of
radiation exposure about the time they'd return to Earth.

The Romans didn't have the tech to cross the Atlantic, and if they'd
somehow managed it, they would have been a horror.  But there would have
been clear benefits, by their own standards at least, to their conquering,
'civilizing', and dominating North America.  There aren't any practical
benefits of sending people into space, only hypothetical, imagined ones.
How would we benefit from sending people to Mars (to choose one example)?

Matt G.


More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list