[FoRK] why not space
dave.long at bluewin.ch
Tue Oct 25 08:45:15 PDT 2011
Well, if getting to mars is difficult for monkeys in tin cans, why
not bring mars to the monkeys?
John McCarthy, "Chaos and Moving Mars to a Better Climate"
> ... we compute the changes in the orbits of Jupiter and Venus
> required to move Mars to one AU from the sun. ... Venus comes out
> distressingly close to the sun, ... Oh well, nobody we know lives
> on Venus.
I had a classmate once who noted that there are ME's, ChE's, EE's,
etc., so why not G(ravitational) E(ngineer)s?
 since our computers are no longer (as in the days of Poincaré or
Hohmann) un-tinned monkeys, we now can numerically find relatively
cheap unstable transfers.
 cf. Gómez et. al., "Invariant Manifolds, the Spatial 3-Body
Problem and Space Mission Design"
 in the horse cavalry days being "in the saddle" with an opponent
in a duel meant being situated in phase space so as to have control
of relative distance and attitude; in the XXth century fighter pilots
updated being "in the saddle" to refer to being comfortably on
someone's six (or, for John Boyd, on his twelve!), yielding the same
control; in space being "in the saddle" can refer to the opposite
eigenvalues of a halo orbit around L1 or L2, from which it's possible
to control the transition to many other trajectories with minimal Δv .
More information about the FoRK