9/2/22: Statuses and reading about proposed "progress studies" field

 AGENDA AND MINUTES

 

This was fun. Some people take this way more seriously than me.

 

1. Updates:

• Pre-seminar refreshments again.
  
• PT: No word on submittal. Working on slides, hope to finish draft in a few days. Might be possible to do a rehearsal next time.
  
• MH: May narrow down the review toward causes of productivity slowdown or something like that.
  
• HA: No news from OAS yet. OAS said we could submit excerpt to thespacereview.com. Or we could do an updated S-curve figure in early 2023 with 2022 data and submit there.
• DB: 11th Southeast Symposium on Contemporary Engineering Topics (SSCET) will be on Friday, September 16th in Little Rock, in the UALR EIT building. DB will list everyone as co-presenters.
• RS: Around mid-September we might hear from them about the WMSCI paper - if it will be promoted to JSCI. It's looking likely but not certain yet.
  
• Recent space activities? 
• Here is the lunar calendar for 2022. This is a new potential hiccup in developing a Moore's law for deep space vessel lifetimes. No news this week?
  
1. Launched: CAPSTONE, a 12-unit CubeSat, lunar orbiter with 9-month planned lifetime, launched after delays. Launch vehicle Lunar Photon may also be a separate independent deep space vessel.
   
2. Future: Artemis 1 mission launch was delayed a few times, is now scheduled for tomorrow.
   
• Payload: Orion capsule with no crew, will not be reused, and short lifetime of 25 days ending in reentry and recovery
• Contents: instruments, etc.
• Payloads: Multiple CubeSats including JAXA's OMOTENASHI
3. Future: CLPS-1 (Peregrine Mission One), launching in Q4 2022
• Payload: Peregrine lander with short lifetime
• Contents: rovers, instruments, etc. with longer lifetimes
  
4. Future: CLPS-2 (IM-1) (Intuitive Machines 1), launching Dec. 22
• Payload: Nova-C lander (lifetime: 1 lunar day)
• Contents: instruments, rover, CubeSat camera
• DOGE 1 (CubeSat)
• Lunar Flashlight (CubeSat)
5. Future: Luna 25, launching Sept. (doubtful?) by Russia
6. Future: Smart Lander for Investigating Moon (SLIM), JAXA vessel launching in 2022, short lifetime of 2-3 weeks in orbit and several days after landing

2. Reading and discussion

• We read more of https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/we-need-new-science-progress/594946. Some time ago, the vote for this article was 4. We read the first 4 paragraphs earlier. Today we read more, leaving six more paragraphs in the article to finish it.
• Possible readings/videos that have not yet been scanned and voted on. As time allows, read/view paragraph/minute or two of each and vote: Should we read it in more depth? 5=strongly agree, 4=agree, 3=neutral, 2=disagree, 1=strongly disagree.

• https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/techno-optimism-for-2022.
• Chad Jones, https://web.stanford.edu/~chadj/, writes about endogenous growth theory.
• Pantelis Koutroumpis, The Productivity Paradox, a report.
• Some interesting videos are at the Kartik Gada channel such as at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuRX67CJhaOT98Jdjh85CEQ which we discussed previously.
• https://www.planet4589.org. Astronautics section. Something we haven't read yet, like one of the yearly reports. 
• Future Spaceflight Meditations, a cosmist perspective, by Jiulio Prisco, physicist formerly with the ESA.
• Readings that we previously scanned and voted on that might or might not be read in more depth at some point. Listed in decreasing order of vote score. 
• Https://www.planet4589.org. Examine the various data files ("catalogs") for several sessions/weeks of readings. Vote was 4. The start point is https://planet4589.org/space/index.html.
  
• One of McDowell's *yearly* (not the more frequent news) reports, in particular, the most recent one: https://planet4589.org/space/papers/space21.pdf. We read through the first paragraph of section 1.1. Vote to continue was 4.
• Already voted on: Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Let's find out more about it. We skimmed https://www.picmet.org/main/ and the question next is whether we want to read through the site in more detail. Do we search this site for another paper/papers to read? Vote was 3 11/12.
• Already voted on. We found that the paper at https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-40896-1_3 seems like it might be a good paper for us to read. Vote was 3.9.
• Already voted on: One candidate: https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/394111 is a recent account of using DEA (which is part of TFDEA). We rechecked the abstract and read the first paragraph. Votes were: 3,5,2,5,4, averaging 3.8. 
• Goldin et al., The Productivity Paradox, https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/productivity-paradox/. We read the "Home" tab and 2 paragraphs of the "Background" tab. Vote to continue reading was: 3.5.
  
• 5/20/22: We read the enlarged font paragraph at the beginning of "Women's Place in Space Exploration, 1996, ...\femaleAstronauts\relatedArticles\WomenPlaceInSpaceExplorationRef2.pdf. Vote was 3 1/3.
• Already voted on: The Institute for Progress. They address questions like what policies and social factors affect technological progress. We will try out a bit of https://progress.institute/immigration-powers-american-progress/ to see if we want to read it in full. Vote was 3 2/7.
• Voted on 4/15/22: One of McDowell's update reports, available on the website. Link is: https://planet4589.org/space/jsr/jsr.html. We checked #804. Vote was 3 1/12.

• Completed readings
• Ryan et al., "A Forgotten Moment in Physiology: the Lovelace Woman in Space Program (1960-1962)", 2009. Completed 7/22/22.
• Various previous papers.
  
• For general reference here are some generic questions about articles (and videos):
• What is the source?
• What is the most significant advance in the human knowledge presented in the paper?
• Why is that advance important?
• What important questions arise from the paper for future research?
• What important questions would it be nice if the paper answered, but does not answer?
• What does the paper present that is novel (no one else has provided that before)?
• What is the relevance of the paper to our satellite research goals?
• Questions from the group?