• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Sailing Asteroids through Space - The Astrolithic Age

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
We are on the dawn of a new age of mankind, soon asteroids as large as many km in size will be sailed from their original orbits around the Sun to Earth Geostationary orbit by using the energy of the Sun and their own asteroid material as propellant. Once in Earth orbit they will be refined to obtain precious materials and repurposed to create human habitats for millions of people who will climb there through space elevators.
See our video for details of the beginning of this new age of the Space stones: the Astrolithic.
Astrolithic 3.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,515
Reaction score
245
It's reasonable to think that sooner or later we will enter "The Expanse Era"...but I can't see millions of people living in space, simply because the conditions of Solar System ecosystems are hostile to our biological nature. In my opinion, we should better focus on Earth as our home. I see the Solar System as a source for raw materials not a confortable habitat.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,748
Reaction score
828
Good Idea
if Roids are solid objects.
but most of the smaller ones are "gravel packing" to move them into GEO will be difficult.
one option is to process them at site and move refined raw material to Earth Orbit
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
I see the Solar System as a source for raw materials not a confortable habitat.
Whereever there are resources, there will be people. Where there are people, there will be people making that place comfortable. Soon enough the roughest asteroid mine will have a quality of life beyond what you or I have, and likely *far* beyond the likely squalid conditions of polluted, overcrowded, overgoverned dystopian Earthers.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
It's reasonable to think that sooner or later we will enter "The Expanse Era"...but I can't see millions of people living in space, simply because the conditions of Solar System ecosystems are hostile to our biological nature. In my opinion, we should better focus on Earth as our home. I see the Solar System as a source for raw materials not a confortable habitat.
Hi Antonio, one one side I fully agree with you, Earth is our first priority. On the other hand, we may be on the point when it becomes convenient to start moving out, in our plan the asteroid material will be used to create environments which are 100% ok to be inhabited, at least not worse than big crowded city are. But, even if I may be part of such expanse project, I will stay back here to continue my part on Earth.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
I see the Solar System as a source for raw materials not a confortable habitat.
Whereever there are resources, there will be people. Where there are people, there will be people making that place comfortable. Soon enough the roughest asteroid mine will have a quality of life beyond what you or I have, and likely *far* beyond the likely squalid conditions of polluted, overcrowded, overgoverned dystopian Earthers.
That is more or less our point. We can create new places without the defects of the old ones... they may not have beauty and romance of good old Earth, but they may offer new options to grow differently.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Good Idea
if Roids are solid objects.
but most of the smaller ones are "gravel packing" to move them into GEO will be difficult.
one option is to process them at site and move refined raw material to Earth Orbit
yes, that is also an option. Indeed Sun's heat can be used to solidify the outer layer and create a crust to bring them closer to the centralized processing region.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
949
Reaction score
451
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
yes, that is also an option. Indeed Sun's heat can be used to solidify the outer layer and create a crust to bring them closer to the centralized processing region.

I'm not sure it would actually work. You are essentially trying to melt the loosely combined pile of rock with non-uniform heat transfer & melting properties. Wouldn't the asteroid just fell apart?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Earth is our first priority.

Sure. It can be strip mined currently much easier than asteroids. But soon we'll be able to move outwards, at which point Earth can be disassembled. Take it apart down to the core and you've got a *lot* of nickel-iron to work with. It's not clear that fission will be all that important by that point, but there will of course be a truly vast tonnage of fissionable materials made available once the Earth is shredded.
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,405
Reaction score
2,306
Website
www.amazon.com
Good Idea
if Roids are solid objects.
but most of the smaller ones are "gravel packing" to move them into GEO will be difficult.
one option is to process them at site and move refined raw material to Earth Orbit
And many new craters in the Earth surface...:rolleyes:
 

iverson

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
364
Reaction score
172
I always wonder how the average earthling is supposed to have the discipline to manage the delicate balance between waste, air, water, and vacuum in a cramped artificial environment when we have done so badly with our much more forgiving planet.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
949
Reaction score
451
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
I always wonder how the average earthling is supposed to have the discipline to manage the delicate balance between waste, air, water, and vacuum in a cramped artificial environment when we have done so badly with our much more forgiving planet.
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

P.S. And must point out the disciplining effect of being personally responsible in unforgiving situation)
 
Last edited:

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
yes, that is also an option. Indeed Sun's heat can be used to solidify the outer layer and create a crust to bring them closer to the centralized processing region.

I'm not sure it would actually work. You are essentially trying to melt the loosely combined pile of rock with non-uniform heat transfer & melting properties. Wouldn't the asteroid just fell apart?
Not all asteroids are so loose, the more useful one may be rather compact, prospection missions will be arranged to confirm the selection. In any case the heat concentration and intensity can be finely controlled.
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,515
Reaction score
245
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

But the biggest of that cilinders were designed for 100,000 inhabitants only. Considering human reproduction rates, that’s could be overpopulated in a few generations.

I always wanted to know projects or even planetary settlements have carefully evaluated in terms of ecological resilence. The challenge isn’t to build extraterrestrial facilities for humans on orbit, inside an asteroid or in the lunar surface. The challenge is to stay.

Why not go robotic?
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
I always wonder how the average earthling is supposed to have the discipline to manage the delicate balance between waste, air, water, and vacuum in a cramped artificial environment when we have done so badly with our much more forgiving planet.
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

P.S. And must point out the disciplining effect of being personally responsible in unforgiving situation)
exactly, avoiding crowd is the key. We actually prefer spheres rather than cylinders, they come more naturally out of Asteroid spheoridal shapes.
 

Attachments

  • PopulationDensity.jpg
    PopulationDensity.jpg
    65.4 KB · Views: 6

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Earth is our first priority.

Sure. It can be strip mined currently much easier than asteroids. But soon we'll be able to move outwards, at which point Earth can be disassembled. Take it apart down to the core and you've got a *lot* of nickel-iron to work with. It's not clear that fission will be all that important by that point, but there will of course be a truly vast tonnage of fissionable materials made available once the Earth is shredded.
I must clarify: Earth priority is to preserve it as it is, fixing environmental issues, social injustice, etc... We are not going to dismantle Earth, we are going to create colonies orbiting it instead.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

But the biggest of that cilinders were designed for 100,000 inhabitants only. Considering human reproduction rates, that’s could be overpopulated in a few generations.

I always wanted to know projects or even planetary settlements have carefully evaluated in terms of ecological resilence. The challenge isn’t to build extraterrestrial facilities for humans on orbit, inside an asteroid or in the lunar surface. The challenge is to stay.

Why not go robotic?
Robotic is fine, but does not solve Earth overpopulation. Human expansion beyond Earth will benefit a lot from Robotic assistance but will be essentially for people to inhabit space colonies.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Good Idea
if Roids are solid objects.
but most of the smaller ones are "gravel packing" to move them into GEO will be difficult.
one option is to process them at site and move refined raw material to Earth Orbit
And many new craters in the Earth surface...:rolleyes:
if you are worried about the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth, I have to ensure that the thrust and orbital control are very finely controlled over the about 2 years orbital transfer journey. It is much easier to avoid Earth rather than hit it. And BTW the same technology can be used to divert asteroids already on Earth collision course if we discover them in time.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
I must clarify: Earth priority is to preserve it as it is, fixing environmental issues, social injustice, etc... We are not going to dismantle Earth, we are going to create colonies orbiting it instead.
What do you mean "we?" When I gain ultimate power, I will begin the process of transforming the Earth from a sphere with about 200 million square miles of area into a few trillion habitats of several hundred to thousand square miles each, with a few thousand multi-million square mile giants. Planets are damned inefficient long-term. This would of course not only negate "environmental issues," it would also make issues of social justice moot. Don't like where you live? There are a few hundred billion alternate locations, often currently uninhabited, within the Dyson swarm around the Sun.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
I must clarify: Earth priority is to preserve it as it is, fixing environmental issues, social injustice, etc... We are not going to dismantle Earth, we are going to create colonies orbiting it instead.
What do you mean "we?" When I gain ultimate power, I will begin the process of transforming the Earth from a sphere with about 200 million square miles of area into a few trillion habitats of several hundred to thousand square miles each, with a few thousand multi-million square mile giants. Planets are damned inefficient long-term. This would of course not only negate "environmental issues," it would also make issues of social justice moot. Don't like where you live? There are a few hundred billion alternate locations, often currently uninhabited, within the Dyson swarm around the Sun.
"We" are the team preparing the project I am describing.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
949
Reaction score
451
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
if you are worried about the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth, I have to ensure that the thrust and orbital control are very finely controlled over the about 2 years orbital transfer journey. It is much easier to avoid Earth rather than hit it. And BTW the same technology can be used to divert asteroids already on Earth collision course if we discover them in time.

I should point out, that the same technology could also be used to threaten Earth with asteroid impacts... :)
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
if you are worried about the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth, I have to ensure that the thrust and orbital control are very finely controlled over the about 2 years orbital transfer journey. It is much easier to avoid Earth rather than hit it. And BTW the same technology can be used to divert asteroids already on Earth collision course if we discover them in time.

I should point out, that the same technology could also be used to threaten Earth with asteroid impacts... :)
Almost every technology can be misused...
Trajectory control shall be performed under supervision of an international committee which will have full access to calculations and parameters. This can only be an effort performed with full transparency and in agreement between Earth nations. A possibility is UN supervision under a UN Space Agency (to be established by merging the various NASA, ESA, Jaxa, etc...)
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
if you are worried about the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth, I have to ensure that the thrust and orbital control are very finely controlled over the about 2 years orbital transfer journey. It is much easier to avoid Earth rather than hit it. And BTW the same technology can be used to divert asteroids already on Earth collision course if we discover them in time.

I should point out, that the same technology could also be used to threaten Earth with asteroid impacts... :)
Almost every technology can be misused...
Trajectory control shall be performed under supervision of an international committee which will have full access to calculations and parameters. This can only be an effort performed with full transparency and in agreement between Earth nations. A possibility is UN supervision under a UN Space Agency (to be established by merging the various NASA, ESA, Jaxa, etc...)
BTW, I actually presented this project at the UN in Vienna during a recent Human Space Flight Experts Conference
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

But the biggest of that cilinders were designed for 100,000 inhabitants only. Considering human reproduction rates, that’s could be overpopulated in a few generations.

The biggest of the cylinders O'Neill looked at were something like 8 km in diameter and 30 long and could comfortably hold a couple million, so long as you like modest current city population densities. But in the long term, the largest cylinders acievable with currently projected materials such as graphene have a diameter measured in thousands of km. You could build cylinders so big that the endcaps are mostly giant holes. A 5,000 km diameter cylinder could have end "walls" a thousand km tall... which would leave holes 3,000 km in diameter in the ends. Easy transit in and out, and the ability to see the sun and stars. Or you could have several nested cylinders... a 500 km dia cylinder inside a 1000 km cylinder inside a 2000 km cylinder, etc up to 5,000 km, with none of them actually physically touching. It would be straightforward to have habitats equal to or exceeded the area of Earth.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,568
Reaction score
1,583
I see the Solar System as a source for raw materials not a confortable habitat.
Whereever there are resources, there will be people. Where there are people, there will be people making that place comfortable. Soon enough the roughest asteroid mine will have a quality of life beyond what you or I have, and likely *far* beyond the likely squalid conditions of polluted, overcrowded, overgoverned dystopian Earthers.

See Elysium.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,568
Reaction score
1,583
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

But the biggest of that cilinders were designed for 100,000 inhabitants only. Considering human reproduction rates, that’s could be overpopulated in a few generations.

The biggest of the cylinders O'Neill looked at were something like 8 km in diameter and 30 long and could comfortably hold a couple million, so long as you like modest current city population densities. But in the long term, the largest cylinders acievable with currently projected materials such as graphene have a diameter measured in thousands of km. You could build cylinders so big that the endcaps are mostly giant holes. A 5,000 km diameter cylinder could have end "walls" a thousand km tall... which would leave holes 3,000 km in diameter in the ends. Easy transit in and out, and the ability to see the sun and stars. Or you could have several nested cylinders... a 500 km dia cylinder inside a 1000 km cylinder inside a 2000 km cylinder, etc up to 5,000 km, with none of them actually physically touching. It would be straightforward to have habitats equal to or exceeded the area of Earth.

An old space book I have shows an O'Neil cylinder with a giant propulsion unit at one end and used as an ark ship. O'Neils have always been my favorite habitat configuration. Peter F. Hamilton's "Night's Dawn" trilogy is set in a universe with them everywhere. Much of the story is set IN them.
 
Last edited:

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

But the biggest of that cilinders were designed for 100,000 inhabitants only. Considering human reproduction rates, that’s could be overpopulated in a few generations.

The biggest of the cylinders O'Neill looked at were something like 8 km in diameter and 30 long and could comfortably hold a couple million, so long as you like modest current city population densities. But in the long term, the largest cylinders acievable with currently projected materials such as graphene have a diameter measured in thousands of km. You could build cylinders so big that the endcaps are mostly giant holes. A 5,000 km diameter cylinder could have end "walls" a thousand km tall... which would leave holes 3,000 km in diameter in the ends. Easy transit in and out, and the ability to see the sun and stars. Or you could have several nested cylinders... a 500 km dia cylinder inside a 1000 km cylinder inside a 2000 km cylinder, etc up to 5,000 km, with none of them actually physically touching. It would be straightforward to have habitats equal to or exceeded the area of Earth.
Back to the topic of this thread... whatever the shape of the colony, you need materials, it would be crazy to lift it up from the Earth, hence we need to collect asteroids in the most economical way.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
whatever the shape of the colony, you need materials, it would be crazy to lift it up from the Earth,

Indeed so! That's why you disrupt the Earth. Blow that sucker up into a string of rubble around the Sun. See: "The Venus Belt" by L. Neil Smith for a fictional treatment of the concept. It's never too soon to start planning for planetary devastation. The gravitational binding energy of the Earth is, IIRC, something like 2.2x10^32 Joules, so it'll take a little effort. Nothing that a civilization building a Dyson sphere would fret about, of course.
 

iverson

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
364
Reaction score
172
I always wonder how the average earthling is supposed to have the discipline to manage the delicate balance between waste, air, water, and vacuum in a cramped artificial environment when we have done so badly with our much more forgiving planet.
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

P.S. And must point out the disciplining effect of being personally responsible in unforgiving situation)

My point was that we'd be wise to clean up the mess we've made on earth before we try harder--and demonstrably less roomy--fixes like orbiting 100,000-man cylinders or hollowed out asteroids. Earth has more room, a reliable and fully automated climate control (when we aren't screwing it up), plenty of water, built-in radiation protection, and excellent scenery. A space habitat may be a big box, but it is still a box.

On the other hand, if there is real enthusiasm for space boxes in some quarters, we might have a solution to that population problem: free one-way tickets.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,006
Reaction score
1,320
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
My point was that we'd be wise to clean up the mess we've made on earth before we try harder--and demonstrably less roomy--fixes like orbiting 100,000-man cylinders or hollowed out asteroids.


I think you've got it backwards. One of the reasons why things are the way they are on Earth is because we can't really experiment. But if we had habs, we could. Perhaps what the world needs/what would kill the world is a genetically engineered algae, or a new political/economic system, or a perpetual youth&health retrovirus, or some such thing. Rather test it on a hab, yes?


On the other hand, if there is real enthusiasm for space boxes in some quarters, we might have a solution to that population problem: free one-way tickets.

And in the distant enough future, chances are fair that FutureMom will tell her squallering SpaceBrat "If you don't settle down and go to sleep, we'll send you to Earth." That'd put the spook into 'em more effectively than threats about fat elves from the North Pole or invisible sky wizards or boogeymen: Earth and all its horrors can be seen on the monitors.[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,563
Reaction score
3,845
This appears to be a serious proposal, so it is better placed in "Aviation and Space'.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
I always wonder how the average earthling is supposed to have the discipline to manage the delicate balance between waste, air, water, and vacuum in a cramped artificial environment when we have done so badly with our much more forgiving planet.
The solution is simple; do not make in cramped. The large space colonies, like O'Neil cylinders are much more stable.

P.S. And must point out the disciplining effect of being personally responsible in unforgiving situation)

My point was that we'd be wise to clean up the mess we've made on earth before we try harder--and demonstrably less roomy--fixes like orbiting 100,000-man cylinders or hollowed out asteroids. Earth has more room, a reliable and fully automated climate control (when we aren't screwing it up), plenty of water, built-in radiation protection, and excellent scenery. A space habitat may be a big box, but it is still a box.

On the other hand, if there is real enthusiasm for space boxes in some quarters, we might have a solution to that population problem: free one-way tickets.
It seems that most humans love to know in which box they are contained. It gives a feeling of safety and comfort. I see billions stuck in overcrowded cities. Will be easy to begin offering them a space alternatives. In the meantime of course we shall fix Earth asap... if help can come from space, why not ?
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Blow that sucker up into a string of rubble around the Sun
I did not read about Venus, but the asteroids may well come from a similar event. Perhaps they wanted to use Earth as a temporary station before settling on the belt but something went wrong end they got stuck here.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Blow that sucker up into a string of rubble around the Sun
I did not read about Venus, but the asteroids may well come from a similar event. Perhaps they wanted to use Earth as a temporary station before settling on the belt but something went wrong end they got stuck here.
This would leave an open question: "who are THEY?", but this may be beyond the scope of this forum so I do not encourage to discuss it here.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,755
Reaction score
664
Meanwhile, I am quite grateful that among the many projects mooted, only a few really get anywhere. This one appears to me to be a "Grail" project and mainly aimed at creating a living for some folk. If there are people who are gullible enough to put money in the direction of this then they are probably asking for a nul return.
 

mangiumicro

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
20
Reaction score
4
Meanwhile, I am quite grateful that among the many projects mooted, only a few really get anywhere. This one appears to me to be a "Grail" project and mainly aimed at creating a living for some folk. If there are people who are gullible enough to put money in the direction of this then they are probably asking for a nul return.
I guess discovering the Americas was a similar endeavor which created a living for Cristoforo Colombo and his crew. Progress is full of "Grails" and not all of them are successful and btw sometimes the return is not in form of financial profit.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
1,142
Also don't forget the dominant transformational aspect on our economies.

We can see today the precursor signs of a switch in our economy from gold and other high priced resources and materials to project based capital.
A country like France for example bases it's stability on the 2400+ tons of gold accumulated through her history (and a plenty much through colonial exploitation). France is among the 5 countries possessing the most gold on earth.

The future that is drafted through extraterrestrial mining operations is one where a single company could outpace major state resources in gold, diamonds etc in a matter of a handful of years... Those times will see our economy refocus on projects promises (thanks to speculation and capital raising), fast and away from the economy we know today.
It is obvious that it will be then increasingly difficult for most states to sustain a debt burden economy when gold stock will surge abruptly in a matters of days.

Those days will see entrepreneurial capital drives our economy like the market we see today but vastly exaggerated. The value of workers will also raise, thanks to the push for manpower retention among the vastness of opportunities (the space mining industry will never be short of opportunities given the infinite amount of new made available resources).

Someone here, made the comparison with the West conquest. It will be that in effect... But on craze with the synergistic boost of a new industrial revolution.

States non-focused on their core democratic values will disappear or be engulfed in non-economics based unions around undefined commune ground of political values but economical disarray.

The (new) savages among them will try to scavenge this new dawn. The reactionary push will take the voice of entire states and union ill-placed in this new race.

In short term, the foundations for a better prosperity will (and are already) questioned by states and corporations endangered by the loss of statu-quo.

This Is why a Space Force and agreements like the Artemis accords are fundamental today.

2020 brought us somehow a new hope akin only to what some have cherished for 2000 years. Today, it belongs to us not only to be marveled by it but mostly to be modern protectors.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top