December 14, 2011
What Makes an Explorer?
There is a type of social deviate who doesn’t fit in, and who naturally seeks the freedom of the wilderness. The American frontier was settled by that kind of spirit. Ironically, the wilderness of space requires a high degree of social conformity before you are allowed to enter, so today’s pre-selection of candidate explorers effectively requires a different personality type from those who historically ventured into the frontier.
Exploration by individuals or small groups dates from the Stone Age, and is principally responsible for humanity’s infestation of the entire globe. It is undirected and seemingly random, and social progress is achieved more by accident than by design. This is exploration in its purest form—exploration to satisfy human curiosity, in a constant search for new places to live and resources to use. To partake in this kind of exploration is simple: You just go.
Another type of exploration is more organized, and is done by countries and governments. Historically such explorations were made for exploitation: the taking of natural resources, the control of key geographic regions, and eventually, colonization. Exploration was a wealth-creating enterprise that, if consistently pursued over decades, returned orders of magnitude on the initial investment. This kind of exploration is no longer possible on Earth.
Society-sponsored exploration has therefore shifted from exploitation to knowledge acquisition. We explore today for science, for new knowledge that will tickle our imaginations and enrich our minds. This exploration is well planned and conducted by professional explorers selected in part for their ability to conform. At the same time, exploration has shifted from a wealth-generating activity to a wealth-consuming activity.
One aspect of this gentler age of exploration is the difficulty in maintaining a consistent level of effort over a period long enough to make progress. Meaningful exploration on today’s frontier requires about ten years, sometimes more, of consistently directed effort before significant scientific returns are seen. The shift from wealth generation (exploitation) to wealth consumption (knowledge) creates a constant battle for justification of the investment.
As space technology advances, we will reach the point where we started in the Stone Age: Exploration with no more justification than individual curiosity. Such an eventuality will open the Petri dish of Earth and allow this infestation called humanity to contaminate our solar system.









[...] My friend Don Pettit has similar thoughts in his blog post today. Posted By: Paul D. Spudis — Lunar Exploration,Lunar Resources,Space [...]
Pingback by The Path of Exploration | The Once and Future Moon — December 14, 2011 @ 8:36 am
The other reason besides curiosity is simple survival. People scratching a living out of the wilderness are more often doing so because they have been driven from better lands.
Since there is no other land, the modern version is collective survival of our species. We need to establish a presence off world to survive. Unfortunately we do not perceive a threat that will drive us “out there.”
Even though there are several.
Comment by GaryChurch — December 14, 2011 @ 1:13 pm
“One aspect of this gentler age of exploration is the difficulty in maintaining a consistent level of effort over a period long enough to make progress.”
I have been thinking about it and the ISS seems to be justifying it’s existence because “it is there.” So perhaps the solution to the consistent effort problem is people on the moon, or rather, in the moon.
The big problem with habitats is radiation and space as I see it. This would lead me in the direction of a tunneling machine that can dig habitat at a certain number of feet a day. Land it near water and the people have that resource. Solar energy and they have that resource.
So with spare parts and mechanics to repair and maintain the tunneler, water and power, with a minimum number of resupply missions we have something like the ISS on the moon that will keep being supported because “it is there.”
Slow and steady, the tunnels may, in the course of a few years, be several miles of living space capable of growing more than enough food. That would be the foothold that Mir and the ISS cannot have.
And then there is the possibility of using H-bombs. I wrote and essay about this, along with a couple others about spaceship propulsion and construction, on the Lifeboat blog.
Please ignore the CERN doomsday cult that contaminates that blog.
Thanks for your time,
Gary Church
http://lifeboat.com/blog/2011/12/plowshare-in-space
Comment by GaryChurch — December 19, 2011 @ 2:05 pm