In article <1rp0ht$g25@hsc.usc.edu>, khayash@hsc.usc.edu (Ken Hayashida) writes: > >The first item of business is to establish the importance space life >sciences in the whole of scheme of humankind.  I mean compared >to football and baseball, the average joe schmoe doesn't seem interested >or even curious about spaceflight.   I disagree.  It think the average joe is interested/curious about spaceflight but sees it as an elitist activity.  Not one which he is ever going to participate in.  >All of us, in our own way, can contribute to a comprehensive document >which can be released to the general public around the world.  The >document would scientifically analyze the technical aspects of long >term human habitation in space.  Why is the general public going to be interested in the technical details of long term space habitation?  I like the idea of the study, but it should be released to other scientists and engineers who will be able to use it. If you want a general public document, you'll need a more general publication.  >I believe that if any long-term space exploration program is to  >succeed we need to basically learn how to engineer our own microworld >(i.e. the spacecraft).  Only through the careful analyses of engineering, >chemical, biological, and medical factors will a good ecosystem be created >to facilitate human life on a long-duration flight.  As one working on Controlled Ecological Life Support Systems, engineering the microworld isn't the problem.  The problem is understanding the basic chemical, biological and medical factors to be able to engineer them efficiently.  For example, the only way we know how to produce food is from plants and animals.  Food synthesis is not very far advanced.  So we have to orbit a farm.  Well that's obviously not very efficient, so we use  technology to reduce the mass and grow plants hydroponically instead of  using dirt.  This is where the engineering comes in.  But new technologies bring new basic questions that we don't have the answers to.  Like, in  dirt we can grow tomatoes and lettuce right beside each other, but in  hydroponics it turns out that you can't do that.  The lettuce growth is  stunted when it's grown in the same hydroponic solution as tomatoes.  So  now you have to consider what other plants are going to have similar interactions.  This means some basic applied scientific research.  And that's what needs to be done with all technologies that have been developed so far. We also need to find out how they interact together.  That's where we are now.  >So, I would like to see posts of opinions regarding the most objective >methods to analyze the accepted scientific literature for technologies >which can be applied to long-duration spaceflight.   First you need to do the literature search.  There is a lot of information out there.  Maybe we should just pick a specific area of long term habitation. This could be useful, especially if we make it available on the net.  Then we can look at methods of analyzing the technologies.  >Such a detailed >literature search would be of interest to ourselves as space advocates >and clearly important to existing space programs. >In essence, we would be dividing the space life science issues into >various technical problems which could be solved with various technologies. >This database of acceptable solutions to various problems could form the >basis of detailed discussions involving people from the bionet, isunet, >and any other source!  Unless there is an unbelievable outpouring of interest on this on the net, I think we should develop a detailed data base of the literature search  first.  Then if we accomplish that we can go on to real analysis.  The data base itself could be useful for future engineers.  That's my response Ken, what do you think?