Re: starship-design: FW: New thoughts

[Lindberg <lindberg@olywa.net>]

Kyle,
First, a question:  How does one determine the criteria for the "types"
of civilizations?  Could you tell me a website or recommend a book for
in-depth information?

Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
> 1. What we need to get to a nearby star
> 
> A. Colonies on the moon, asteroids, etc. to gather resources to build starships
> B. Extraordinary advances in materials development, propulsion systems, and fuel production
> C. A better government/economy system
> D. More public interest in spaceflight (ad-campaigns, tv shows, etc?)
> E. Interferometers to detect presence of planets at a destination star system. That way, we'll know whether or not to go there.

Also, prehaps I could speak to letter [C].  Many students of foreign
affairs (and i happen to think similarly) see the world as moving toward
a multipolar arraingement of states based on economic cooperation due to
the relative absence of strategic threats in the post-cold war
environment.  The European Union is farthest along this path and in 1999
the "euro" will come online as the official currency of an economy and
population which is larger than the US.  Obviously, the euro will
quickly replace the dollar as the world's dominant currency due to its
stability (the Germans will get to run the bank) and size.  In the
western hemisphere Clinton is negotiating a NAFTA-like arraingement for
Latin America sans Cuba. (It _will_ go through despite any amount of
union footdragging)  In the east, ASEAN, which is much looser, may
tighten up.
	The above was a li'l longwinded, but the upshot is this, individual
states will give up some sovereignty for economic benefits.  Integrated
economies mean **larger** economies, ones which might be better able to
support space, maybe even underwrite an asteriod mining company
(remember that?).  
220,284
Nels Lindberg