Thursday, May 24, 2012

NINETEEN: science part 2

Learning the hard way.

It proved to be quite difficult to find my spam posts so far and i realised how much planning matters for science. I didn't find all, but i managed to find most i think for the key peaks. All in all once i had a closer look i think i don't really have much to show up apart from the fact that spamming does work to some extent.

The peaks do correlate to dates when i was more active on space.com. That isn't anything interesting though.

At the moment i can only do back of the envelope calculations using some basic information i have here collected from the views and the poll, and using space.com.

375000 people liked space.com. I am assuming they all are interested in space travel and the industry behind it.
Maximum 670 out of those people viewed my profile so far. I will assume all those represent one person. This will over estimate the amount of people who actually care enough to check out new projects in the industry.
Out of those 30 filled out the poll.
3 thinks its a stupid idea. 10%
4 thinks it is an interesting idea, but don't want to play a role. 13%
11 would like to play some role, but don't want to contribute with funds. 36%
12 would like to play a role and would like to contribute funds. 40%

Now since contributing with funds is only a latter part of the project and people might change their mind if the project takes off, i will put the two categories into one.
This means 76% of the people who filled out the poll would be interested enough in a project like this to try and contribute in whatever way they can.

That looks very promising.

But then out of 375000 only a maximum amount of 670 people visited and checked out the project. That of course depends on how many people visit space.com regularly. Also out of those regulars, how many people actually read the comments at the bottom of the articles. Then out of those how many people react "positively" to spam and check out links posted there.

So this bit doesn't look promising, but i can assign that to the fact that i suck at web design, and also developing and promoting ideas.

The poll itself was put on the site around 200 views but i will ignore this. If the poll is a representative sample of the people who viewed the site, then we should have 509 people (maximum) at this stage who would like to contribute to this project.

Now compared to that we have 30 people who bothered to fill out the poll.

Now if i look at these numbers these things pop straight out at me:
I suck at science.
I suck at communication.
I suck at web design.

I will definitely need to improve those if i want to engage and gather a core group of people to start seriously working on the project.

I will try and find sources for figuring out how many people are globally interested in space travel.
And i guess i should wait for the end of the poll date to get a better idea of the current state of the "crowd".

As far as i can tell at the moment, we are dispersed, focused on a whole lot of different projects, or are completely inactive.

I don't know if that needs changing, or could be changed. I don't know if people want to do more, or could do more.

I just think we could, and we should.



5 comments:

  1. Although i have to say i did disprove my hypothesis. Unless i made everybody who looked alread look again, there is still a large reserve on space.com that hasn't actually seen my spams.

    Though i doubt i will do anymore of that.

    I think i managed to calm down to nominal levels now that i can see not many people actually care.

    I will just get back into JAVA and start writing up some sort of "plan". Though i have no idea where to start or how to structure it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Found an interesting book here:
    http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/the-space-economy-at-a-glance-2011_9789264111790-en

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm with you man that I would like to get to at least LEO in my life which obviously need cheap access to space. That is, you'll need a launch system to leave the gravity well, and spaceships. Actually the stuff I've seen so far it looks pretty much conclusive that it's less of problem building the spaceships than having proper launch systems.

    With many phases, the most important and pressing issue to get out of this pit of gravity, this deep gravity well. While there are plenty of improvements of the current chemical rocket based launch systems, chemical rockets do not seem to fit the bill for a more publicly available, cheap access to space.

    Given that, a "free spaceship" project should start at the development of a launch system that reduces the cost of sending stuff to space. The reduction must be dramatic, costing at least a magnitude less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi There!

      My personal pet project is skylon from reaction engines limited. They are pushing the boundaries of air breathing engines to reduce the amount of oxidizer they need to carry onboard, and if they are successfull we might just get a proper spaceplane.

      We really need reusable systems so that after some maintenance and refueling you can go again in a short amount of time.

      Their system might allow for staging as well with attaching 2 crafts, one mainly atmospheric up to mach 5 or so, and then a rocket for the higher stage.

      There are other more ambitious approaches I like. Launch loops for instance might be needed not only on earth but on moons or dwarf planets to get matter streams happening into orbit.

      What freespaceships would try to do is to get a large supporting crowd behind the efforts of the industry of developing such cutting edge technology.

      It would be people from within, closely affiliated with and also outside the field. Just people who care about our long term future.

      Things I desperately want to avoid:
      -becoming an organisation that chews up a truckload of money just to keep istself running
      -get caught up in politics

      Delete
  4. I really wish i could get access to the actual database of blogger, i want more detailed data about the views going all the way back to the start.

    Look at this:
    Australia 5
    United Kingdom 4
    United States 3
    Canada 1
    Hungary 1

    That is the views from the past day, now we are way in the clear from the effects of the spam and the views dropped down to 15 for the last day.

    Interesting how the United States dropped back on the list compared to overall views.

    Now the question is how many people do those views represent, one for each country, or more?

    Who are these people? The site doesn't /shouldn't/ track my views when i do it from my phone or here. There is an option that i made sure is selected.

    And are they regular people who come back and check on us, or just new ones that stumbled upon the spam links in space.com or in space fellowship.

    Good news is that we are second on a normal "freespaceships" google search, so people can find us easier. Though that has been like that for a while and google isn't a main source of traffic yet.

    All time reffering sites:
    Referring Sites
    www.facebook.com 225
    spacefellowship.com 16
    www.google.com 15
    www3.bestbxcleaner.com 14
    m.facebook.com 8
    plus.url.google.com 3
    www.google.com.au 3
    www3.personal-scanera.com 3
    www4.best-aruchecker.com 3
    getdentalimplantsinfo.com 2

    ReplyDelete