Considering how far the planets are from us and how much per pound ($10,000) just to put it in orbit, mineral exploration with the idea of commercializing it is so far away, it might be worthwhile just to research producing minerals synthetically that would far out perform the natural ones we use now. We are on the verge ( within two decades) of a whole plethora of artificial material production now.
From what I have seen the idea of non terrestrial resource mining is to use said materials IN space for commercialization.
@dagosa et al What is the source of livelihood wages to those great minds furthering Science with "categorization"? Hint: Not Charities And when we teach children Pluto is a planet, again - how much do you suppose this whole exercise in categorization costs us? Gracias. Moi Thinker for Hire Message Interest Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic, regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
Is it "arrogant" for biological taxonomists to define what the word "clade" means? Is it "arrogant" for geologists to come up with terms for various features between Earth's surface and it's center? Why is it "arrogant" for astronomers to come up with a taxonomic definition for the word "planet" that is useful in studying our solar system? I don't understand your definition of the word "arrogance". So far, it seems to be a measure your knowledge of a particular topic. Am I wrong?
Every field of science has its vocabulary designed to allow effective communication. As for kids, we have a far richer story now than in the past. We can show proof that there are unanswered questions, and that they are fully invited to the party if they hit the books in math and science.
With such platitudes, would you like to invest in a bridge in NYC? Yes, I agree, we must always endeavor to elevate ourselves to ever higher platitudes. I believe it was Spiro Agnew who said something to that effect. Moi because Atavisms happen
OK, so you stoop to long term criminals who have nothing whatsoever to do with the topic in order to support of your nonsense. Case closed.
Ill answer you this way. Pluto used to be a planet. Then it wasn't. And now, it is again. Pluto hasn't changed. So you don't get just a teensie little bit that our scientific naming community had just a touch of arrogance to then decide that it had changed? The point wasn't that Pluto itself changed. Only that a very few people here decided to change it. Presumptive, and arrogant.
What HAS changed is the discovery of a number of objects both larger and smaller than Pluto as well as facts about how Pluto's orbit and material in its vicinity. Nobody changed Pluto. What changed was the understanding of Pluto. And, the group who changed that is an international group that needs sound, shared terminology for communication within their field. And, that's a common basis for taxonomic change in all branches of science as well as in engineering and among the public. So, Ceres is between Mars and Jupiter and it's larger than Pluto. When someone talks about "the planets" should that include Ceres? How about Makemake, Eris, and Haumea? ==> If an astronomer has an answer to this question, does it mean the astronomer is arrogant?
Wow. I didn’t know the cost of public education hinged upon knowing if Pluto was a planet or dwarf planet.
We have a huge barrier to cross before we ever consider traveling to Pluto for minerals. It’s called space travel. The major way that knowing what minerals exist on Pluto that we can use here, is an exercise in synthesizing the material here. Look up “ graphene.” Wonder materials exist here through our science that may not occur naturally on Pluto. I think we’re watching too many “alien” movies.
It’s scary thinking there are people walking around on earth with so little schooling in science as to make such statements. These statements do confirm we need to do a better job educating our populous.
The best part? You, of all people lecturing on an educated position. But by all means, if you feel slighted, feel free to ask for your refund... What you are so unwilling to address is the ridiculous posturing within the scientific community not just for air time, but for preeminence. So much ego for all to see. So, hide behind your faith. we get it...
Then why bring up mineral rights while discussing categorizing Pluto ? The technology we have today and the near future, pretty much eliminates the relevancy of discussing mineral rights in outer space.
Please read the thread in order to see discussion progression as it will answer your question. I should not be required to do it for you.
It’s not ego, it’s fact. Science is the source of many of the best ideas mankind has ever had. Just because you seem to have so little awareness of this fact and how science should be included in nearly every major decision and discussion that affects the populous, puts you and others like you on the wrong side. You’re going to be wrong way more often then not if you continue to take a stance on topics based upon politics and opinion and does not include science.
Well, if you bring it up, at least describe how it's scientifically relevant anywhere in space. It will be a long time before our Star Trek neighbors show themselves and question our right to mine minerals that power our warp drives while traversing the galaxy.
Shortly humans will begin the commercialization and habitation of space which inevitably requires resources and eventual manufacture/Industry. Private entities are already doing what they have always done and started corporations or businesses to capitalize on and profit from it. https://theconversation.com/mining-...-untold-wealth-heres-how-to-get-started-95675
You see... that right there... that's funny. As in, completely unable to actually understand what a "fact" is. You know, Pluto hasn't changed, right? Nothing about the planet or it's characteristics changed, did it? So what "facts" changed? The only thing that changed was the CHARACTERIZAION of those "facts" by folks who's egos led them to demonstrate their public stupidity. That's the little nugget out of this. If you believe that "characterization" then becomes "fact", they for sure, you really need to do some discovery on whether or not you can actually get a refund. I know I want one now.
Really ? We landed on the moon 50 years ago and haven't been back since. What makes you think we can colonize some where else in space when our analysis of atmospheric conditions give us no indication we could inhabit anywhere in our solar system, let alone at some other star where travel at even light speed makes it prohibitive. This is our home for possibly centuries; let's get used to the idea we need to be mindful of how we treat it. I get sending unnamed probes to other planets and asteroids to study their geology and possibly bring back samples that could cultivate our own research, but our actual habitation just ain't happening for a vey long time.
You are clearly unaware of what lunar dust does to machines and people and no one even mentioned interstellar travel except you just now. Habitation is happening right now, or are you unaware of the ISS? Just so you know, it has already begun...pay attention.
