Helium has a bad habit -- unique among the elements -- of escaping our atmosphere. It exists in individual atoms, (as a "noble" element) and those atoms have a very low mass so they can escape from the gravitic pull of our planet altogether.
As distinct from hydrogen, the only lower-mass atom. Hydrogen atoms naturally combine with oxygen, and fortunately for us all they fall to the ground as beautiful water! But helium, very useful stuff, (not quite so useful as water, but ...) literally floats away from us. We may soon need a new supply. And mining the moon could provide it. Here is more: Bing Videos
Meanwhile, as I move further into the development of my philosophy of planetary emergentism, I have come to the conclusion that it would be a good idea for the human species to abandon plans to colonize Mars, or anyplace else.
But I have to concede that colonizing our own moon may be a partial exception. The Earth-moon system is a far tighter unit that the solar system is. Heck, the source of our tides and may soon become the source of our helium. But the Big Thinkers have fixed upon the moon only as a base, to which we must return after a half-century absence chiefly for the purpose of striking out further.
And the real anxiety behind THIS notion is that we will soon make the Earth inhospitable so we ought to have somewhere else to go.
We have no Plan(et) B. We should abandon thoughts of acquiring one. Stick to Plan A -- sustaining the conditions of life on Mother Gaia. And maybe her orbital sidekick.
Planetary emergentism. My tablet did not like that second word. I had read it, but knew its' cousin, emergence, better. I think you are on to something. As you may know, or may have heard, I am tinkering with an idea around *contextual reality*. Simply put, it is simpler than your task: for a plurality of people, reality is what they---or their group identity---says it is. We can't change the physic of helium. But, we can stubbornly assert our contextual reality---and, do.
ReplyDeleteI could have easily dubbed this *artificial reality*. But, that would not do because contextual reality is, decidedly, real and founded upon Davidson's notion about belief, a propositional attitude, in his lexicon. All of this is predicated by complexity. Kaufman, the Oracle from Calgary, opened that can. Or no, maybe not---he may have simply riled a hornet nest?
Read a bit of another blog today. It is long and discusses something called The Phantom World Hypothesis. The author is liked by some, and is a "really smart guy". Have read some other musings on Magic and Mysticism and opinions on the difference. My take-away there is, roughly, Mysticism co-exists with Magic --- has for centuries...Magic came later to the party. Magicians MAY lay claim to mystical concept or ideal. That is a good PR move and somewhat legitimizes illusions and legere demain. Most of the difference lies in what people want to believe. I think that is key to many societal problems.
ReplyDelete