Consider the stargate
The death of Dr Sir Arthur C Clarke @ the age of 90 was neither unexpected (he had been in ill-health for some time) nor wanted. As the last direct inheritor of the Wells tradition for science fiction as a transcendental critique of the future based on contemporary history, he saw our worlds recast in many forms-always flawed, generally exiting, occasionally misanthropic, but always worth the ultimate price of admission.
At least two of his stories have been posted online: The star is a blunt knife but undeniably effective; while The wind from the sun is a lyric study in the idea of future as possibility. If Ray Bradbury set out to prevent the future, Dr Clarke’s goal was to create it (most famously with his analysis of satellites in geostationary orbits); but he remained an oddly private man for such a highly public figure. It’s possible that his lasting legacy will be his skeptical optimism about humanity’s place in the future; not the final collection of writings that are his current transmission into the future
In thinking about his death, one can only quote the man himself, talking about the death of the other half of the Clarke-Asimov Treaty:
“Ladies and gentleman, there is only one Isaac Asimov.” Now there is no Isaac Asimov and the world is much poorer place.
The Good Doctor himself couldn’t’ave put it any better
TeresaC
Thank you Robert for reminding us of a great man.
robtclements replied
Thanks, hon. I was launched into the future by the Clarke-Asimov duopoly; & now that both of them are no longer with us, who will fight the good fight against hatred & nonsense? Only us….
TeresaC
Perhaps now, it’s time for little voices to take up the challange, one by one it might even create a much bigger effect for the future.
robtclements replied
That has to be our goal. It certainly was the goal of the twin axes of the Clarke-Asimov Treaty
bodymechanic
a great man and hopefully the space elevator will come to fruition! and i liked julis sumner miller too as a physicist. i dont think stephen hawking is good on the story side!
robtclements replied
The space elevator can be done with current technology (C60-sometimes called buckministerfullerene-has the strength/weight ratio to do it). Even the issue of radiation exposure while traversing the van Allen belts can be addressed
What you need is a reason to justify the appropriately astronomical cost. We don’t have one yet
Prof. Hawking is a complicated case (Why is it so? as JSM might ask). A brilliant man & a sobering personal tale, he’s also the living embodiment of Niels Bohr’s old bromide that the only way to get a new idea accepted into science is to wait for all the old scientists to die….
Sir Arthur would be furious @ this assessment, i’m sure….
bodymechanic
i think he’d understand, it may of been a final helpful push of his ideas,
maybe if they build it, the reasons will come to justify the costs? mmm the quandry!
robtclements replied
With the imbecilic shutting down of NIAC by people who never let the facts get in the way of a dumb policy, a space elevator may arise in one of two ways. The first is as an evolutionary development of tether technology , the second is as a quixotic Cities in flight experiment
History suggests that the latter solution is more likely than the former