I was not aware that Bezos and Musk have this problem. Thus to inform you all, where we can discuss the pros and cons, watch this video. To be frank, It seems Elon has a huge lead. I have admired his space craft from the get go. He not only has carried passengers to space, he has 3 civilians up in space now. And his rockets are proven to land back on Earth or on his ship. i understand that Bezos is almost as rich as the Federal Government. Richer if you count Bezos lacks the enormous debts. Musk is going up in wealth as fast as his rockets climb. So we may thank Musk like we do the Wright Brothers for the USA entry into space or in the case of the Wrights, up in the air.
I wonder who will be the first trillionaire. Bezos is only 20% there but things happen fast nowadays My money is on Vladimir Putin who's been well over 200 bill for a decade, but Heads of State are often disqualified, like the Sultan of Brunei
Musk v Bezos is about how we as a society choose to spend gigantic sums of money while much of the world struggles with getting food.
If you were interested in their views on space, you would have said something about their views on space. You didn't.
I actually kind of like the way that Elon Musk wants to challenge Putin to a duel....... that has potential! For a billionaire to be willing to risk his own life in order to attempt to save perhaps a million or more Ukranians..... is not something that happens every ten or fifteen minutes. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/musks-combat-challenge-putin-prompts-mockery-russia-2022-03-16/ Musk's 'combat challenge' to Putin prompts mockery in Russia
I havn't dived into this subject exactly, but from what I've gleened in passing, it seems Musk is genuinely interested in expanding humanity beyond our current earthboundness, while it seems Bezos is just trying to compete in the next big business sector, or possibly just engaging in the ultimate wealth-hobby. But even so, both have my well-wishes. I think humanity needs to expand offworld, and the quicker the better. Whether its the result of the desire to advance humanity, profit seeking or just for fun, the more we try the more we learn. And for whats its worth, I'll love to try to colonize mars, even at risk of a suicide mission. Im prolly too old and wrong skillset, but the offer is on the table nonetheless.
Considering how easy it was to be "proscribed" in Rome I find it hard to see how anybody kept any wealth at all.
I wish one of them would decide to develop Fusion. I've been told it's estimated to take 25 billion, and it seems either one could afford that. If it worked they'd make another fortune even larger. If it didn't, hey, it's only money. Space Travel may be reviving since they recently discovered water on the Moon. This has important ramifications: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/nasa-discovery-moon-water-explained-6897526/
There was a game under development some years ago called "Blue Mars" and this other thing some years later. I think they will eventually (2300-2400) develop Mars as a resort. They can probably do that with atomic powered satellites restoring the planet's Van Allen belts so it can retain an atmosphere and pulling water up from either deep in the planet or impacting asteroids
While I agree with the benefits of water, I think we're a long ways away from having a station on the moon such as we have in Antarctica, for example. We don't have adequate space suits for staying on the moon. The Lunar regolith is somewhat like powdered glass. The original moon men wore out their suits with their few steps on the surface. The plan at present is to make space suits in only specific sizes and then automate the production. And, those space suits don't protect against the serious radiation that is a permanent feature. People say we'll get out of the space ship asap and then live underground and only occasionally venture to the surface. But, where's the plan for the equipment needed to make underground living work? Even if we find caves, it doesn't mean we can move in and stay there permanently. When asked what NASA's plans are for surviving the trip to Mars, the answer given to a knowledgeable reporter was that we have to get there really fast!
I'm rooting for Elon Musk. He just strikes me as a guy doing it to push humanity towards a greater destiny, where as bezos just comes across as a get rich quick scheme. I dunno, that's just the impression I get. I could be way off on one or both of them. I do think humanity's destiny lies beyond this planet though.
Space travel? We are still at the beginning. The greatest limitation [so far] is the propulsion. Until we will use chemical reaction rockets we will have to face the problem of a little payload carried by a huge and expensive rocket [or other launcher, like a space shuttle]. Imagine to find a way to send to the orbit a spaceship as big as a cargo vessel or a container ship. That would mean to conquer the space for real. Today we need to launch many little "modules" to build a space station or, in a not far future, a base on the Moon. So, the game changer will be an engine able to win gravity without being so hulking. In other words we need well more efficient engines.
Given advances such as reusable rockets and space based manufacturing I think we can build the stuff we want to build in space, rather than launching completed objects. I think things get harder when one considers the problem of radiation. Today, NASA has no solution for protecting humans on a trip as far as Mars. The round trip alone would put a human at a lifetime radiation limit. We can say we'll just live in caves. But, I haven't heard of anyone planning to bring along a backhoe to construct entrances, build launch pads and do other basic work that humans would require. The movie "The Martian" just ignores the problem. I think the real key is not flying humans around space. Robots can do the work we want done.
I think fusion is a far harder and way more expensive a project than either his space progress or his ev progress. With cars, he took batteries that existed and put them in a car. That's not like fusion. Rockets are a bigger deal, but NASA has been really helpful to those who want to build rockets.
He'd make a lot more money with Fusion. Electric cars still leave us with the problem of how do you power the cars. Energy is modernity's major bottleneck. Unlimited cheap and clean energy solves everything
Here I see two matters: reusable launchers are great, but they don't solve the problem of the little payload: you need many reusable rockets to build something decent in the space in an acceptable time ... or you will need anyway years to build a tin can in the space. The second point is about radiations. There are systems to protect biological entities from cosmic radiations. But the problem of the payload is relevant also about this point: at NASA they are training the crews to create a water protected room [water is great to protect you from radiation], but Orion capsule doesn't offer all that room! If we want to be safe during an interplanetary journey we need bigger spaceships, not simple "capsules".
I'm all in favor of finding some better rocket fuel. Do you have any ideas? By being reusable, SpaceX dropped the price per pound of putting stuff in space by a huge percent. Yes, our budget doesn't allow for creating a spacecraft that actually protects astronauts from radiation - or create artificial gravity. So, the current plan for radiation is to "get there fast"!
Well, I don't believe the problem is the cost of electricity. EVs cost less per mile in fuel already. I agree with your "where to plug it in" issue to some extent, but anyone who has a home or an apartment where there is power to the parking area can simply plug in after coming home. Plus, a lot of corporations are providing electric charging at work. And, with the range of one charge reaching 500 miles on some EVs, with the move to provide public charging, and with many businesses and shopping centers providing charging, this problem will become less of an issue.
