[SpaceProgram] SpaceProgram Digest, Vol 13, Issue 60

Felix Hamilton fhamilton at gmail.com
Tue Sep 25 22:10:07 CEST 2012 

Even better than a closed cycle boat (from a ground up perspective) might
be doing a cut at a closed cycle RV. Not only would it be quite cheap to
put together from the ground up, but it could be moved around easily for
collaborative and experimental purposes ...

/Felix

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:05 PM, <
spaceprogram-request at lists.hackerspaces.org> wrote:

> Send SpaceProgram mailing list submissions to
>         spaceprogram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         spaceprogram-request at lists.hackerspaces.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         spaceprogram-owner at lists.hackerspaces.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of SpaceProgram digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Fwd: Project Management, Starships, and the Failure of
>       Modern Physics - YouTube (Matt Johnson)
>    2. Re: Project Management, Starships, and the Failure of Modern
>       Physics - YouTube (Matt Johnson)
>    3. Re: Project Management, Starships, and the Failure of Modern
>       Physics - YouTube (cole santos)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 09:32:01 -0700
> From: Matt Johnson <railmeat at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Szymkowiak <paulszym at gmail.com>
> Cc: Hackerspaces Space Program communication list
>         <spaceprogram at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> Subject: Re: [SpaceProgram] Fwd: Project Management, Starships, and
>         the Failure of Modern Physics - YouTube
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAPou7eDpWU+QhhcNUROJK6rUs-vcJgQZ-awsPHJKdy0ajkR_3w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hello Paul,
>
> I thought when I was sending the email that what I was saying was
> pretty obvious. Of course I did not read through the archives to learn
> what has already been discussed.
>
>
> You wrote "In terms of what a longer-term plan for space exploration
> might look like, it seems to me that a lot of the obvious technology
> needs and required advances - or at least the known problems and
> challenges to be overcome - are fairly easily identified and already
> widely discussed." I agree however I think it is worth spaceGAMBIT
> referencing a document defining those problems and challenges. That
> would help clarify a granting or challenge process. I don't know of
> such a document. If there is not one, it would be worth spending
> spaceGAMBIT money to creat it.
>
> Thanks
> -- Matt Johnson
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Paul Szymkowiak <paulszym at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Great points you've raised.
> >
> > To clarify any wrong impression, the points you've raised have been part
> of
> > an active, ongoing discussion within the caretaker team. I think it's
> great
> > to see those same challenges discussed in a wider group.
> >
> > Having lead some projects at hackerspaces, and participated in others, I
> > don't think the idea of top-down, big-plans-upfront will fly. I agree
> that
> > many large-project management techniques aren't really going to work in
> this
> > context.
> >
> > I think there are a number of ways to run this program, but - at least
> in my
> > view - this will succeed if the ongoing plan for the actual research is
> > driven predominantly bottom up.
> >
> > One idea of how that might look is that hackerspaces joining the program,
> > nominating a representative or two to present their interests, and have
> > those groups of representatives define the plan. There are challenges
> with
> > this approach, especially around managing change over time, but as I see
> it,
> > it's probably a reasonable middle ground. Trying to have lots of
> independent
> > researchers - rather than teams - coordinate a plan may be ineffective.
> >
> > In terms of what a longer-term plan for space exploration might look
> like,
> > it seems to me that a lot of the obvious technology needs and required
> > advances - or at least the known problems and challenges to be overcome -
> > are fairly easily identified and already widely discussed. In fact, many
> > hackerspace groups are already pursuing some of those challenges. So,
> > although I'm advocating an inclusive plan, driven by the interests of
> > individual hackerspace teams, I suspect that the plan will end up with
> many
> > elements we'd have included by taking a more top-down, project-management
> > lead plan.
> >
> > As I see it, one of the things the SpaceGAMBIT organisation can do is
> assist
> > in enabling that process, rather than driving it. In my view, that is a
> mix
> > of linking projects and people across the network, providing funds,
> curating
> > project results and content as a commons resource, and enabling skill and
> > knowledge sharing.
> > Thanks & Best Regards,
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > Paul Szymkowiak
> >
> > On 23 September 2012 11:49, Matt Johnson <railmeat at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jerry, I met you at 100YSS, that is how I heard about your space
> >> GAMBIT and this email list. As I understood it the talk was about how
> >> to focus physics research at a large scale, such as federally funded
> >> research projects and large university. I see hacker spaces involved
> >> in a large number of small loosely coordinated, or uncoordinated
> >> projects. Is that wrong? Since these project will be smaller, they
> >> would use more mundane project management techniques.
> >>
> >> I had hoped that 100YSS would present some kind of road map or broad
> >> plan that the various groups working on interstellar space could
> >> follow. I still hope they present something. It would probably be
> >> worthwhile asking someone at 100YSS if they plan to produce a road
> >> map.
> >>
> >> I am not sure how best to proceed with this sort of problem. You must
> >> have given it some thought before you made the DARPA grant proposals.
> >> What did you come up with? If I were thrown into this problem with no
> >> preparation I would start with some kind of literature search to get a
> >> picture of the current situation and try to interview experienced
> >> researchers in the field to find out what they think the next steps
> >> should be. Then some kind of RFP process to see what people are
> >> interested in doing.
> >>
> >> I am not sure how something like RFPs would work in a hacker context,
> >> do you know of examples of this being done? Perhaps an "X prize" style
> >> approach is more appropriate. In either case they would benefit from
> >> some kind of evangelism and marketing.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matt Johnson
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > This was given in the context of the 100YSS organization.
> >> > There are probably a half dozen different non-profit organizations and
> >> > groups now pursuing space technology.
> >> > To some extent each of these (including our SpaceGAMBIT) does 'control
> >> > project goals and funds' which decides what work will be done, at
> least
> >> > on
> >> > their nickel.
> >> >
> >> > If you have a limited amount of funds and your goal is to give it to
> >> > hackers
> >> > to further space education and research
> >> > how would you decide what work will be done?
> >> >
> >> > That is a quandary that I face.
> >> > Please help us decide.
> >> >
> >> > Jerry Isdale
> >> > isdale at spacegambit.org
> >> > USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> >> > Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> >> > http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> >> >
> >> > This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> the
> >> > human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> >> > civilization,
> >> > all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not necessarily
> >> > reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sep 22, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Interesting talk, the sliders were pretty funky though. I am sure
> >> > there is a lot to be gained by using the best technics in decision
> >> > making and project management. That assumes that there is some
> >> > organziation or body that controls project goals and funds and that
> >> > can decided what work will be done. That does not match with my
> >> > understanding of what a hacker space is.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Matt Johnson
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Jerry Isdale <isdale at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This was the talk at 100YSS Symposium that kicked me off on Quaternion
> >> >
> >> > Maxwell Physics.
> >> >
> >> > The engineer part of me likes the rigor Buck brings to the discussion
> >> > ...
> >> >
> >> > The hacker part of me wants to run screaming naked thru the rainforest
> >> > (my
> >> >
> >> > backyard).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t95xWsxqNvI
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The discussion of Heaviside-Tate flame war and impact on theoretical
> >> > (and
> >> >
> >> > applied) physics starts about 12min in.
> >> >
> >> > The rest of discussion is pretty interesting too.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Jerry Isdale
> >> >
> >> > isdale at spacegambit.org
> >> >
> >> > USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> >> >
> >> > Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> >> >
> >> > http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> the
> >> >
> >> > human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> >> > civilization,
> >> >
> >> > all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not necessarily
> >> >
> >> > reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >
> >> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >
> >> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >
> >> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:00:28 -0700
> From: Matt Johnson <railmeat at gmail.com>
> To: Hackerspaces Space Program communication list
>         <spaceprogram at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> Subject: Re: [SpaceProgram] Project Management, Starships, and the
>         Failure of Modern Physics - YouTube
> Message-ID:
>         <CAPou7eCz5iZUPXn8SrZTAMB0-Z6qVjRU2VAQCfZ4pyAi=
> 6u1aQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Cole, I cannot think of much tech that could cross over from
> seasteading to spacesteading. The seasteaders have it easy they rely
> on navel architecture, as well understood and established engineering
> domain. Not much technical research is required.
>
> They are much more ambitious in the political, legal, social and
> economic realms. I am sure spacesteaders will be able to learn a lot
> from seasteaders in those areas.
>
> --
> Matt Johnson
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM, cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Seasteading has almost identical needs as spacesteading in theory it
> easyer
> > to develop. Perhaps it could be a stepwise goal. A lot of tech could
> cross
> > over.
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> There was an interesting talk at 100YSS on SeaSteading ... homesteaders
> >> going to sea... or under it.
> >>     http://lmgtfy.com/?q=seasteading
> >>
> >> Definitely an option to investigate.
> >>
> >> Jerry Isdale
> >> http://MauiMakers.com
> >> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
> >>
> >> On Sep 23, 2012, at 4:14 AM, ainut at hiwaay.net wrote:
> >>
> >> > It would not have to be a standalone unit.  It could be one of the
> >> > underwater restaurants that we install an airlock in.
> >> >
> >> > Or we could just build one that way.  Part of it above the water or on
> >> > land, and part underwater.  This type, however, would allow designers
> to be
> >> > sloppy since the danger factor is much less than a pure underwater,
> >> > standalone unit.
> >> >
> >> > David M.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Quoting cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> >> I think an underwater habitat would be a great project. If you can
> >> >> figure a
> >> >> way to get one to maui we could look around for some grants (NOAA,
> >> >> NASA).
> >> >> But 5k is not enough. Multi million is a bit much, but its still a
> >> >> 100k+
> >> >> project AFTER moving it. You need a big boat for support. It could be
> >> >> done
> >> >> privately as well with tourism as main capacity and space research as
> >> >> an ancillary use.
> >> >>
> >> >> I know a guy in the big island had a big bubble dome. I dove it once.
> >> >> Had
> >> >> to bring an extra tank to fill it up.
> >> >>
> >> >> The state of Hawaii would allow us to lease underwater space. It has
> >> >> been
> >> >> done for the ocean aquaculture guys.
> >> >>
> >> >> This is a year 3-5 project idea AFTER we get a sustainable income
> >> >> stream,
> >> >> through grants, donations, and other fundraising.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> There is a reason the abandoned or soon to be abandoned underwater
> >> >>> habitats are that way.
> >> >>> Mostly they have outlived their usable lifetimes.
> >> >>> One of my neighbors used to work on the NOAA Aquarius habitat like
> >> >>> 10-15yrs ago.
> >> >>> he said it was old and dangerous back then.
> >> >>> A real underwater habitat would be a multi-million dollar endeavor,
> >> >>> and so
> >> >>> beyond the scope of what we could do.
> >> >>> An inflatable underwater garden/greenhouse? maybe that would be
> >> >>> doable.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Propulsion and guidance for atmospheric rockets is covered by ITAR I
> >> >>> think.
> >> >>> Interplanetary is probably not.  Interstellar is probably too far
> out
> >> >>> for
> >> >>> them to worry about (aside from nuclear which is restricted for
> other
> >> >>> reasons)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The video that started this thread looked back at the history of
> >> >>> physics
> >> >>> and identified a point where something happened.
> >> >>> Maxwell's unification of Electro-Magnetic-Light started a highly
> >> >>> productive time in physics and engineering.
> >> >>> And yet it was met with such vehement antagonism that a major
> >> >>> simplification/approximation was required for its acceptance.
> >> >>> What if there is a whole lot more lying in wait beyond that
> >> >>> approximation?
> >> >>> Buck seemed to think it was a good fertile ground for research.
> >> >>> I think there are too few people who understand quaternions and the
> >> >>> basics
> >> >>> of EM theory expressed that way.
> >> >>> I've started digging into it slowly (reading
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> http://www.das.uchile.cl/~rmendez/Documents/Roger_Penrose_Road_to_reality.pdf
> >> >>> )
> >> >>> over my head in first pages. I'd love a hacker based intro to the
> >> >>> concepts.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> >> >>> http://MauiMakers.com
> >> >>> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Alex Cureton-Griffiths wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I like this idea! Any links for location/cost/condition/etc?
> >> >>> Renovating a
> >> >>> research station to make it usable would be a useful experience in
> >> >>> itself.
> >> >>> I think some of the Maui Makers crew have scuba experience as well,
> so
> >> >>> they'd be a good match for this project
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Propulsion is covered under ITAR I think, so doing anything hands-on
> >> >>> (or
> >> >>> even hands-off) with that is a no-go since we're an international
> >> >>> organization. I love the idea of livability testing.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 23 Sep, 2012, at 12:07 PM, ainut at hiwaay.net wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Methinks one of the best items we could do with small sums of money
> is
> >> >>> adopt one of abandoned underwater "livability" research stations.
> >> >>> With one
> >> >>> of those, we could really test ideas from the group to see if it
> would
> >> >>> work
> >> >>> in space.  How long term the tests are would depend upon each
> >> >>> individual
> >> >>> goal, of course, but these 'habitats' are very cheap (maybe free)
> and
> >> >>> are
> >> >>> test beds that will actually bite you if your ideas are not
> workable.
> >> >>> Small scale, of course.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> We need to think about the spaceship propulsion certainly, but
> >> >>> livability
> >> >>> is just as high a concern; maybe higher if people are going on it!
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> David M.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Quoting Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Aloha Matt
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Buck's talk was on the large scale - partially to say to the group
> at
> >> >>> large - what needs to be done.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If you are going to look at building an interstellar ship one big
> >> >>> question
> >> >>> is the physics of propulsion
> >> >>>
> >> >>> that is what Buck focused on.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The 100YSS Org still seems pretty disOrg, IMHO. They have yet to
> >> >>> create a
> >> >>> separate entity to run things, operating under Mae's Mother's
> >> >>> non-profit
> >> >>> foundation for now.  I missed the wrapup session but I havent heard
> of
> >> >>> grand vision yet.  Only seen one summary of event so far too.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> As for how a Hackerspace or alliance of spaces could do things...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It could be total anarchy, which would be mostly what hackers would
> >> >>> prefer
> >> >>> i think,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> but our program has somewhat lower aspirations, at least in the
> short
> >> >>> term.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> One goal (akin to the 100YSS.org) is securing funding/donations to
> >> >>> allow
> >> >>> us to continue beyond the initial seed from DARPA.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Where we diverge immediately, is the hacker goal of MAKE SOMETHING.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> actually producing something will also help secure funding, IMHO
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The proposal team has several ideas for projects.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cole has actually started on his (well he has 1000 ideas/min and 100
> >> >>> projects started/wk)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Some other ideas have been talked about on this list or by private
> >> >>> email.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> A Challenge is one option, but I dont think we can do an open ended
> >> >>> one
> >> >>> like X-Prize (like "create a FTL drive") as that might not be
> claimed
> >> >>> by
> >> >>> end of program. One challenge I have been talking up is an
> educational
> >> >>> one
> >> >>> -- create open curriculum space science and/or hacker-tech course
> with
> >> >>> all
> >> >>> material and replicate at another space purely using online comms.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> We will most likely have an official RFP out in a month or so.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Start thinking of ideas - short run, low budget (3-6mo, <$5000USD).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> General area - humanity's long term survival and expansion into
> space
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> >> >>>
> >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> >> >>> civilization,
> >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> necessarily
> >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 3:49 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi Jerry, I met you at 100YSS, that is how I heard about your space
> >> >>>
> >> >>> GAMBIT and this email list. As I understood it the talk was about
> how
> >> >>>
> >> >>> to focus physics research at a large scale, such as federally funded
> >> >>>
> >> >>> research projects and large university. I see hacker spaces involved
> >> >>>
> >> >>> in a large number of small loosely coordinated, or uncoordinated
> >> >>>
> >> >>> projects. Is that wrong? Since these project will be smaller, they
> >> >>>
> >> >>> would use more mundane project management techniques.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I had hoped that 100YSS would present some kind of road map or broad
> >> >>>
> >> >>> plan that the various groups working on interstellar space could
> >> >>>
> >> >>> follow. I still hope they present something. It would probably be
> >> >>>
> >> >>> worthwhile asking someone at 100YSS if they plan to produce a road
> >> >>>
> >> >>> map.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I am not sure how best to proceed with this sort of problem. You
> must
> >> >>>
> >> >>> have given it some thought before you made the DARPA grant
> proposals.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What did you come up with? If I were thrown into this problem with
> no
> >> >>>
> >> >>> preparation I would start with some kind of literature search to
> get a
> >> >>>
> >> >>> picture of the current situation and try to interview experienced
> >> >>>
> >> >>> researchers in the field to find out what they think the next steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> should be. Then some kind of RFP process to see what people are
> >> >>>
> >> >>> interested in doing.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I am not sure how something like RFPs would work in a hacker
> context,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> do you know of examples of this being done? Perhaps an "X prize"
> style
> >> >>>
> >> >>> approach is more appropriate. In either case they would benefit from
> >> >>>
> >> >>> some kind of evangelism and marketing.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Matt Johnson
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com
> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This was given in the context of the 100YSS organization.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> There are probably a half dozen different non-profit organizations
> and
> >> >>>
> >> >>> groups now pursuing space technology.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To some extent each of these (including our SpaceGAMBIT) does
> 'control
> >> >>>
> >> >>> project goals and funds' which decides what work will be done, at
> >> >>> least on
> >> >>>
> >> >>> their nickel.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If you have a limited amount of funds and your goal is to give it to
> >> >>> hackers
> >> >>>
> >> >>> to further space education and research
> >> >>>
> >> >>> how would you decide what work will be done?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That is a quandary that I face.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Please help us decide.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> >> >>>
> >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> >> >>> the
> >> >>>
> >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> >> >>> civilization,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> necessarily
> >> >>>
> >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Interesting talk, the sliders were pretty funky though. I am sure
> >> >>>
> >> >>> there is a lot to be gained by using the best technics in decision
> >> >>>
> >> >>> making and project management. That assumes that there is some
> >> >>>
> >> >>> organziation or body that controls project goals and funds and that
> >> >>>
> >> >>> can decided what work will be done. That does not match with my
> >> >>>
> >> >>> understanding of what a hacker space is.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Matt Johnson
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Jerry Isdale <isdale at gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This was the talk at 100YSS Symposium that kicked me off on
> Quaternion
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Maxwell Physics.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The engineer part of me likes the rigor Buck brings to the
> discussion
> >> >>> ...
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The hacker part of me wants to run screaming naked thru the
> rainforest
> >> >>> (my
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> backyard).
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t95xWsxqNvI
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The discussion of Heaviside-Tate flame war and impact on theoretical
> >> >>> (and
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> applied) physics starts about 12min in.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The rest of discussion is pretty interesting too.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> >> >>> the
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> >> >>> civilization,
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> necessarily
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >>>
> >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> SpaceProgram mailing list
> >> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:05:40 -1000
> From: cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com>
> To: railmeat at gmail.com, Hackerspaces Space Program communication list
>         <spaceprogram at lists.hackerspaces.org>
> Subject: Re: [SpaceProgram] Project Management, Starships, and the
>         Failure of Modern Physics - YouTube
> Message-ID:
>         <CABSLL0qCSXXwZBNxq=Rr4m+9qJF7SE+4fe5n2f=e=
> u94ND_vvg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Sea-steading crossover would be in certain systems. Sustainable habitat
> design with a small footprint, waste management, food production, and small
> scale replication of industrial processes. If you look at their website
> their goal is to be independent of land based infrastructure. As an avid
> diver, I can tell you that the underwater environment is about as close to
> weightlessness as you can get. The issues of decompression, bends, and
> other pressure sicknesses apply in space as much as underwater. Thier
> habitats must be water proof, and if its water proof its air proof. Think
> about a sail boat. How long can you last without going ashore for fuel and
> water, dumping waste(assuming you dont use the ocean as a dumping ground,
> hence the sustainble part)? One stepwise goal could be to design a close
> cycle boat for 1 man and send him around for a while. Initial projects
> could be aspects of that entire system. Toilets, waste processing, micro
> showers, food production systems, air handling systems, ect. You would need
> to process waste, capture water, control atmosphere, do hydroponics, ect in
> space and seasteaders would need similar tech. This would allow us to test
> habitat level 1 tech readiness technology without the cost of booting it to
> space. First test on ground, then at sea, then in space. NASA does the same
> thing that's what Aquarius was for. Navel engineering is not even close to
> the state where it can be considered a closed ecological system. They dump
> their waste at sea, they burn insane amounts of fuel to make water, cook
> food, ect. They desalinate water instead of processing their waste water,
> ect.
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Matt Johnson <railmeat at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Cole, I cannot think of much tech that could cross over from
> > seasteading to spacesteading. The seasteaders have it easy they rely
> > on navel architecture, as well understood and established engineering
> > domain. Not much technical research is required.
> >
> > They are much more ambitious in the political, legal, social and
> > economic realms. I am sure spacesteaders will be able to learn a lot
> > from seasteaders in those areas.
> >
> > --
> > Matt Johnson
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM, cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Seasteading has almost identical needs as spacesteading in theory it
> > easyer
> > > to develop. Perhaps it could be a stepwise goal. A lot of tech could
> > cross
> > > over.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> There was an interesting talk at 100YSS on SeaSteading ...
> homesteaders
> > >> going to sea... or under it.
> > >>     http://lmgtfy.com/?q=seasteading
> > >>
> > >> Definitely an option to investigate.
> > >>
> > >> Jerry Isdale
> > >> http://MauiMakers.com
> > >> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
> > >>
> > >> On Sep 23, 2012, at 4:14 AM, ainut at hiwaay.net wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > It would not have to be a standalone unit.  It could be one of the
> > >> > underwater restaurants that we install an airlock in.
> > >> >
> > >> > Or we could just build one that way.  Part of it above the water or
> on
> > >> > land, and part underwater.  This type, however, would allow
> designers
> > to be
> > >> > sloppy since the danger factor is much less than a pure underwater,
> > >> > standalone unit.
> > >> >
> > >> > David M.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Quoting cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com>:
> > >> >
> > >> >> I think an underwater habitat would be a great project. If you can
> > >> >> figure a
> > >> >> way to get one to maui we could look around for some grants (NOAA,
> > >> >> NASA).
> > >> >> But 5k is not enough. Multi million is a bit much, but its still a
> > >> >> 100k+
> > >> >> project AFTER moving it. You need a big boat for support. It could
> be
> > >> >> done
> > >> >> privately as well with tourism as main capacity and space research
> as
> > >> >> an ancillary use.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I know a guy in the big island had a big bubble dome. I dove it
> once.
> > >> >> Had
> > >> >> to bring an extra tank to fill it up.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The state of Hawaii would allow us to lease underwater space. It
> has
> > >> >> been
> > >> >> done for the ocean aquaculture guys.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> This is a year 3-5 project idea AFTER we get a sustainable income
> > >> >> stream,
> > >> >> through grants, donations, and other fundraising.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Jerry Isdale <
> jerry at mauimakers.com>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> There is a reason the abandoned or soon to be abandoned underwater
> > >> >>> habitats are that way.
> > >> >>> Mostly they have outlived their usable lifetimes.
> > >> >>> One of my neighbors used to work on the NOAA Aquarius habitat like
> > >> >>> 10-15yrs ago.
> > >> >>> he said it was old and dangerous back then.
> > >> >>> A real underwater habitat would be a multi-million dollar
> endeavor,
> > >> >>> and so
> > >> >>> beyond the scope of what we could do.
> > >> >>> An inflatable underwater garden/greenhouse? maybe that would be
> > >> >>> doable.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Propulsion and guidance for atmospheric rockets is covered by
> ITAR I
> > >> >>> think.
> > >> >>> Interplanetary is probably not.  Interstellar is probably too far
> > out
> > >> >>> for
> > >> >>> them to worry about (aside from nuclear which is restricted for
> > other
> > >> >>> reasons)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The video that started this thread looked back at the history of
> > >> >>> physics
> > >> >>> and identified a point where something happened.
> > >> >>> Maxwell's unification of Electro-Magnetic-Light started a highly
> > >> >>> productive time in physics and engineering.
> > >> >>> And yet it was met with such vehement antagonism that a major
> > >> >>> simplification/approximation was required for its acceptance.
> > >> >>> What if there is a whole lot more lying in wait beyond that
> > >> >>> approximation?
> > >> >>> Buck seemed to think it was a good fertile ground for research.
> > >> >>> I think there are too few people who understand quaternions and
> the
> > >> >>> basics
> > >> >>> of EM theory expressed that way.
> > >> >>> I've started digging into it slowly (reading
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> >
> http://www.das.uchile.cl/~rmendez/Documents/Roger_Penrose_Road_to_reality.pdf
> > >> >>> )
> > >> >>> over my head in first pages. I'd love a hacker based intro to the
> > >> >>> concepts.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> > >> >>> http://MauiMakers.com
> > >> >>> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Alex Cureton-Griffiths wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I like this idea! Any links for location/cost/condition/etc?
> > >> >>> Renovating a
> > >> >>> research station to make it usable would be a useful experience in
> > >> >>> itself.
> > >> >>> I think some of the Maui Makers crew have scuba experience as
> well,
> > so
> > >> >>> they'd be a good match for this project
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Propulsion is covered under ITAR I think, so doing anything
> hands-on
> > >> >>> (or
> > >> >>> even hands-off) with that is a no-go since we're an international
> > >> >>> organization. I love the idea of livability testing.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On 23 Sep, 2012, at 12:07 PM, ainut at hiwaay.net wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Methinks one of the best items we could do with small sums of
> money
> > is
> > >> >>> adopt one of abandoned underwater "livability" research stations.
> > >> >>> With one
> > >> >>> of those, we could really test ideas from the group to see if it
> > would
> > >> >>> work
> > >> >>> in space.  How long term the tests are would depend upon each
> > >> >>> individual
> > >> >>> goal, of course, but these 'habitats' are very cheap (maybe free)
> > and
> > >> >>> are
> > >> >>> test beds that will actually bite you if your ideas are not
> > workable.
> > >> >>> Small scale, of course.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We need to think about the spaceship propulsion certainly, but
> > >> >>> livability
> > >> >>> is just as high a concern; maybe higher if people are going on it!
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> David M.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Quoting Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com>:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Aloha Matt
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Buck's talk was on the large scale - partially to say to the group
> > at
> > >> >>> large - what needs to be done.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> If you are going to look at building an interstellar ship one big
> > >> >>> question
> > >> >>> is the physics of propulsion
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> that is what Buck focused on.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The 100YSS Org still seems pretty disOrg, IMHO. They have yet to
> > >> >>> create a
> > >> >>> separate entity to run things, operating under Mae's Mother's
> > >> >>> non-profit
> > >> >>> foundation for now.  I missed the wrapup session but I havent
> heard
> > of
> > >> >>> grand vision yet.  Only seen one summary of event so far too.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> As for how a Hackerspace or alliance of spaces could do things...
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> It could be total anarchy, which would be mostly what hackers
> would
> > >> >>> prefer
> > >> >>> i think,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> but our program has somewhat lower aspirations, at least in the
> > short
> > >> >>> term.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> One goal (akin to the 100YSS.org) is securing funding/donations to
> > >> >>> allow
> > >> >>> us to continue beyond the initial seed from DARPA.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Where we diverge immediately, is the hacker goal of MAKE
> SOMETHING.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> actually producing something will also help secure funding, IMHO
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The proposal team has several ideas for projects.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Cole has actually started on his (well he has 1000 ideas/min and
> 100
> > >> >>> projects started/wk)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Some other ideas have been talked about on this list or by private
> > >> >>> email.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> A Challenge is one option, but I dont think we can do an open
> ended
> > >> >>> one
> > >> >>> like X-Prize (like "create a FTL drive") as that might not be
> > claimed
> > >> >>> by
> > >> >>> end of program. One challenge I have been talking up is an
> > educational
> > >> >>> one
> > >> >>> -- create open curriculum space science and/or hacker-tech course
> > with
> > >> >>> all
> > >> >>> material and replicate at another space purely using online comms.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We will most likely have an official RFP out in a month or so.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Start thinking of ideas - short run, low budget (3-6mo,
> <$5000USD).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> General area - humanity's long term survival and expansion into
> > space
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use
> of
> > >> >>> the
> > >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> > >> >>> civilization,
> > >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> > necessarily
> > >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 3:49 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hi Jerry, I met you at 100YSS, that is how I heard about your
> space
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> GAMBIT and this email list. As I understood it the talk was about
> > how
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> to focus physics research at a large scale, such as federally
> funded
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> research projects and large university. I see hacker spaces
> involved
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> in a large number of small loosely coordinated, or uncoordinated
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> projects. Is that wrong? Since these project will be smaller, they
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> would use more mundane project management techniques.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I had hoped that 100YSS would present some kind of road map or
> broad
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> plan that the various groups working on interstellar space could
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> follow. I still hope they present something. It would probably be
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> worthwhile asking someone at 100YSS if they plan to produce a road
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> map.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I am not sure how best to proceed with this sort of problem. You
> > must
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> have given it some thought before you made the DARPA grant
> > proposals.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> What did you come up with? If I were thrown into this problem with
> > no
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> preparation I would start with some kind of literature search to
> > get a
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> picture of the current situation and try to interview experienced
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> researchers in the field to find out what they think the next
> steps
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> should be. Then some kind of RFP process to see what people are
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> interested in doing.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I am not sure how something like RFPs would work in a hacker
> > context,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> do you know of examples of this being done? Perhaps an "X prize"
> > style
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> approach is more appropriate. In either case they would benefit
> from
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> some kind of evangelism and marketing.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Matt Johnson
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jerry Isdale <
> jerry at mauimakers.com
> > >
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This was given in the context of the 100YSS organization.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> There are probably a half dozen different non-profit organizations
> > and
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> groups now pursuing space technology.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> To some extent each of these (including our SpaceGAMBIT) does
> > 'control
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> project goals and funds' which decides what work will be done, at
> > >> >>> least on
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> their nickel.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> If you have a limited amount of funds and your goal is to give it
> to
> > >> >>> hackers
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> to further space education and research
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> how would you decide what work will be done?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> That is a quandary that I face.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Please help us decide.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use
> of
> > >> >>> the
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> > >> >>> civilization,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> > necessarily
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Sep 22, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Interesting talk, the sliders were pretty funky though. I am sure
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> there is a lot to be gained by using the best technics in decision
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> making and project management. That assumes that there is some
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> organziation or body that controls project goals and funds and
> that
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> can decided what work will be done. That does not match with my
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> understanding of what a hacker space is.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Matt Johnson
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Jerry Isdale <isdale at gmail.com>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This was the talk at 100YSS Symposium that kicked me off on
> > Quaternion
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Maxwell Physics.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The engineer part of me likes the rigor Buck brings to the
> > discussion
> > >> >>> ...
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The hacker part of me wants to run screaming naked thru the
> > rainforest
> > >> >>> (my
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> backyard).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t95xWsxqNvI
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The discussion of Heaviside-Tate flame war and impact on
> theoretical
> > >> >>> (and
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> applied) physics starts about 12min in.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The rest of discussion is pretty interesting too.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Jerry Isdale
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> isdale at spacegambit.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> USA Program Lead, SpaceGAMBIT
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Global Alliance of Makers Building Interstellar Technology
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://SpaceGAMBIT.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use
> of
> > >> >>> the
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> human(s) named above. If intercepted by an extraterrestrial
> > >> >>> civilization,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> all opinions expressed in this email are my own and do not
> > necessarily
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> reflect the opinion of mankind as a whole.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> SpaceProgram mailing list
> > >> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SpaceProgram mailing list
> > > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > SpaceProgram mailing list
> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/spaceprogram/attachments/20120925/c0cc3266/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> SpaceProgram mailing list
> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>
>
> End of SpaceProgram Digest, Vol 13, Issue 60
> ********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/spaceprogram/attachments/20120925/50e0f8f5/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the SpaceProgram mailing list