XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.astro   
   From: fjmccall@gmail.com   
      
   Thomas Koenig  wrote on Tue, 12 Jun 2018   
   19:43:04 -0000 (UTC):   
      
   >Jeff Findley  schrieb:   
   >> In article , droleary@   
   >> 2017usenet1.subsume.com says...   
   >>>   
   >>> For your reference, records indicate that   
   >>> Jeff Findley  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> > Balloon launch isn't worth the trades which have to be made, IMHO.   
   >>>   
   >>> Certainly not today, no, or people would be doing it.  But as I keep   
   >>> saying, new technologies keep popping up all the time that might make   
   >>> it viable in the future, at least for a few use cases.   
   >>   
   >> I have an engineering degree.   
   >>   
   >   
   >So do I (PhD in chemical engineering).   
   >   
      
   That's nice.  What would be your reaction if I speculated about a   
   chemical with 'magic' properties that could be used to build a space   
   tether here on Earth (I say 'magic' because it requires more strength   
   in tension than is theoretically possible)?   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> When developing new things, engineers   
   >> work with what they have today because they've got schedules and   
   >> deadlines to meet.   
   >>   
   >   
   >The world would be a poorer place if that was the case.   
   >   
      
   That IS the case.  You're a chemical engineer.  When you need to   
   design a new industrial process to produce some chemical, do you run   
   off and try to pull something out of your ass or do you start with   
   known reaction pathways and mechanisms?   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> You're talking about technologies not yet invented.   
   >> That's research, not development.  The two are not the same.   
   >>   
   >   
   >How would you classify chemical process development?  Seems that,   
   >according to your defiinition, I am doing more research than I   
   >thought :-)   
   >   
      
   You're certainly doing SOME research, but I assume what you're doing   
   is trying to come up with ways to optimize known reaction pathways so   
   that the one you want 'wins'.  In other words, you're starting with   
   what you know today rather than postulating some undiscovered chemical   
   reaction.   
      
      
   --   
   "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar   
    territory."   
                                         --G. Behn   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)