Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?

James Nicoll wrote:
> 
> In article <Xns9A6C620B08D40genewardsmithsbcglob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Gene Ward Smith  <gene@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >IsaacKuo <mechdan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:436b6e99-cbff-4c6e-868c-
> >3985f0941bbe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >>> Why not forget about the star****p and use the small sail****ps for
robot
> >>> probes? We could fund out interesting stuff, like if there was
something
> >o
> >> ut
> >>> there even worth considering a manned mission for.
> >>
> >> Mainly because you could probably find out all of that interesting
> >> stuff by not sending anything at all across the stars.  Build a big
> >> fresnel lens telescope back home in the good old Solar System.
> >>
> >
> >I thought of that, but a space telescope capable of resolving decent
images
> >of Earth-sized planets around nearby stars would already be an immense
and
> >difficult project. But I'm all for it.
> 
>         If you can get them out past 550 AU, you can use the sun's
> gravity as a lens.

That would work?  Can we stay on Earth and use other stars' gravity
in that way too?

-- 
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - - email: kgaertner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"If I let myself get hung up on only doing things that had any actual
chance of success, I'd never do *anything*!" Elan, Order of the Stick