jump to navigation

Dr. Mike Griffin, Tuesday, 9-16-14 September 17, 2014

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
11 comments

Dr. Mike Griffin, Tuesday, 9-16-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2317-BWB-2014-09-16.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guest:  Dr. Mike Griffin.  Topics: Human spaceflight policy, political choices, space technology, Mars, Moon, Asteroids and more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed back to the program Dr. Mike Griffin.  During the first segment of our 90 minute discussion, Mike talked about human spaceflight (HSF) and the commercial space market.  He said exploration would be a government project or at least with government in the lead, especially if the commercial market was not there.  He threw water on the argument that our space policy was budget driven.  Instead, he talked about it being based on choices we make. It was not and is not about the money.  His comments throughout or discussion on this topic supported his argument.  He even said the cost of space for the U.S. taxpayer was around 15 cents/day.  This discussion evolved to one on the importance of leadership which we agreed was in short supply today.  Included in this discussion was Mike’s vision for our space policy & program, plus he explained its importance and value to our nation both today and for the future.  He spoke to the issue of what society wants and the choices it makes that shape our future.  Space should be part of our national policy debate and hopefully such a debate would enable quality choices to be made that keep us on the leadership edge with all nations.   Mike was asked who he thought would be next on the Moon and he said China.  We also talked about the private sector taking us back to the Moon with HSF.  He said that the private sector could do this, capital was not an issue, but for the private sector to do it there needs to be a closing of the business case which he did not see at this time.  SLS John called in & asked about space advocacy diversity which he said seemed to be at war with NASA & whatever the program of record might be.  Mike had much to say about this, especially about inefficiencies in government organizations and projects.  He also said if the private venture or industry cannot make money, then it should be a federal project. Many times during our discussion he said that there are things that a society should do just because they are hard & they don’t have to look good on the balance sheet.  John also asked about the RD-180 engine, Mike offered us his conclusion as to why we should be a new version of the RD-180 so that we do not continue being dependent on Russia for space related hardware, etc.  Later, he was asked about cislunar space development which he said should be a public enterprise.  He cited many examples and models supporting the public development of this important space infrastructure.  SLS was discussed.  Mike very clearly articulated the case for SLS today and again repeated that SLS future missions are about choices, not the budget.  Don’t miss his comments.  As the segment ended, Randy emailed a question asking for the rational & silver bullet for HSF.  In my opinion, Mike gave an excellent response to this question so don’t miss it.

In the second segment, Mike got some questions about NASA doing more R&D and even forming a NACA-like division or program.  We talked about NASA R&D, the need for a NACA-like program and more.  Dave, our caller, commented on leadership, then Bill in Denver emailed in a question about using fuel depots and smaller launch vehicles rather than heavy lift vehicles like SLS.  Again, Mike had much to say about heavy lift, including that while possible to do smaller vehicle launches., the numbers don’t pan out for efficiency.  You need to listen to this full discussion which also addressed some bogus assumptions regarding inefficient heavy lift decision making.  Nuclear propulsion and Vasimr came up, , then we again focused on vision that takes on big challenges because we can!  More was said on lunar colonies evolving to longer BLEO missions plus cislunar commerce, especially cislunar cargo missions.  Another listener asked about being dependent on the Russians for HSF to the ISS and if shuttle was retired too early.  Mike talked about having wanted to fly shuttle at a minimum rate annually until a new vehicle was operational.  We talked about the role of the congress and White House as compared to the role of the NASA Administrator.  Later, we talked about the role of public support and individuals petitioning congress on space policy.  Listen to his story about the Hubble repair mission.  I even asked if poorly written and fantasy driven letters to informed staffers helped or hurt the cause.  Listen for Mike’s response. In summary, Mike said his wish was that people would share is view that there are important things for society to do but that don’t look good on a balance sheet.  In the end, he said he was optimistic that his positive views on space would prevail and that when policy makers realized that China was going to put people on the Moon and what that would mean for the US, it would not be allowed to happen.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.

Dr. Armen Papazian, Monday, 2-10-14 February 11, 2014

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments

Dr. Armen Papazian, Monday, 2-10-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2184-BWB-2014-02-10.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

Guest:  Dr. Armen Papazian.  Topics:  Dr. Papazian presented his ideas and theories for investing in space based on wealth, not debt.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.

We welcomed back to the show Dr. Armen Papazian to further discuss his innovative and groundbreaking money mechanics of space theory along with his having received the Alpha Centauri Prize Progenitor Award for his space economics work.  You can read more about the award, his theory and body of work at www.keipr.com.  Several times during our 1 hour 34 minute discussion, Dr. Papazian referenced his Cambridge University Business School Nov. 2013 presentation, “Our Financial Imagination and the Cosmos” which is at www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/media/2013/our-financial-imagination-and-the-cosmos.  During our first segment, Dr. Papazian introduced us to his space economic proposal which is to invest directly in NASA and space commerce by creating money through wealth, not by debt which is the traditional way of getting investment money into the banks to circulate it to industry.  As this theory may be difficult to understand, the first segment was devoted to describing how the system proposed by our guest would work, the use of Public Capitalization Notes (PCNs) rather than debt securities, and for the Fed to directly invest in NASA and the space industry about half of their monthly QE3 financial support going to the banking industry.  This would put abut $40 billion per month in the hands of NASA and the space industry as wealth investments, not debt.  Listeners asked our guest several questions to help understand the proposal, if the plan added to inflation, and to understand just how the PCNs would work.

In the second segment, we continued the discussion but listeners also wanted to know more about the plan which seems to bypass the banking industry.  Dr. Papazian explained that the banks were not bypassed but that the money would flow to them differently. Instead of from the Fed to be loaned out as debt, NASA and the businesses would get the funds direct as explained in the first segment and then the money would go to the banks in the form of deposits.  Remember that the banking industry leverages deposits with reserve ratios to increase their money supply to make loans so by the direct wealth investment in space, banks are still very much part of the process.  During both segments, we talked about the advanced technology regarding the space investments yet they were constrained by out of date financial methodologies and instruments.  Not only would this new space money mechanics increase space investment, it would also be used by NASA for more education.  Also mentioned during both segments was the traditional economic concept of scarcity.  Our guest spent lots of time debunking scarcity, especially with space given the vastness of the solar system, stars, all of space.  As you will hear, the reality of our environment is that it is not based on scarcity so why should our methods for creating money be based on scarcity.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS Blog per above.  You can reach Dr. Armen Papazian through me or his website.