LiftPort Group
  • Home
  • About
    • Press
  • EVENTS
    • Dec 7-9 - Blue Marble Week
    • Oct 15-16 – Space Education and Strategic Applications Conference
    • Sept 19 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: Space Elevators, Energy, & Space Force
    • Sept 23 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: Space Commercialization, China, & Space Force
    • Sep 26 - Better Futures: The Future of Space
    • Sept 26 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: “The Future of Space” Afterparty
  • Projects
    • The Earth Elevator
    • Lunar Elevator
    • LiftPort Museum >
      • Art and Images
    • Tethered Towers
  • Store
  • YouTube
    • LiftPort Videos >
      • A Busy Moon! - ESA Chart Explained
    • Space Policy >
      • Better Futures Event
      • To the Moon to stay
      • Extending Humans to Mars
      • Commercialization of LEO
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 3
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 2
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 1
      • A New Vision - Part 4
      • A New Vision - Part 3
      • A New Vision - Part 2
      • A New Vision - Part 1
      • Background & Easter Eggs - Part 3
      • Introduction - National Space Council Policy
      • A New Era: The New White House Space Policy
  • Technical Advisory Council
  • Blog
  • Get Involved
    • FAQ
    • Contact
    • Newsletter
    • Book Club

LiftPort Blog

Minimum Viable Answer

14/6/2017

0 Comments

 
Two weeks ago, I was giving a lecture at the International Space Development Conference.  There was a full day of programming related to the Space Elevator, and I was the wrap-up speaker.  I gave my introductory talk on the Lunar Space Elevator Infrastructure.  I’ve been thinking about that talk, since then, because something was different that time.  I had a minor epiphany.

The audience was pretty typical.  There were about 50-60 people, from a variety of technical and non-technical backgrounds.  Notably there were several PhDs, but as is usual in a National Space Society public forum, the majority were non-technical space-hobbyists.  I particularly like this kind of audience for a couple reasons:

  1. I’m a very capable generalist, but I’m not a specialist technician.  So if a question is deeply nuanced, I’m the wrong guy to answer it.    
  2. These audiences rarely ask me something I can’t answer.  (I can usually parrot a response that my team has prepped me for.)  In this setting I can usually answer each question pretty well.
  3. I genuinely like these fans; they are the lifeblood of a project like ours.  I like the hope and vision that they imagine our (humanity’s) near-term future will be like.

During the long Q & A period – in an hour talk, my ratio is usually 20 minutes of prepared lecture, and 40 minutes of responding to audience questions – I delivered my well-worn reply: “we don’t even have all the questions, yet, let alone have all the answers…”

And that line got me to thinking about the kinds of answers we are beginning to develop.  Because it is true, we are still developing the comprehensive list of questions, issues, and concerns which need to be addressed before we can build our Elevator on the Moon.  

We are also beginning to generate ‘answers’ to some of the issues we’ve identified.  But what kind of answers are they?
​

This project is a non-stop balancing act of trade-offs.  If we spend X amount of money we can buy Y number of rockets/string/robots, and achieve Z results.  Each Z result impacts and influences all the other variables and an ‘answer’ in one problem will inevitably impact all the other related problems.
In keeping with our Three Mandates (1. Single Launch Solution, 2. Current Technology, 3) Sputnik-like Simplicity) we are aiming for the simplest possible answer to the question – ‘how do we build an Elevator on the Moon?’  We don’t need feature-creep, or mission-creep.  We don’t need to add complexity to what is arguably the most complicated system every designed.  We don’t need the costs associated with add-on features.  We do need a system which will work; a system which will survive its infancy and grow over time.  And so, with ‘Sputnik-like Simplicity” in mind, I’m going with a new rule – Minimum Viable Answer.  This is the answer which will ‘work’.  It’s not the ‘best’, and it might not even be a ‘good’ answer.  It’s merely ‘good enough’.  That might mean that there are several preliminary answers which are ‘good enough’ – and which will plug into our models/simulations.  And maybe ‘good enough’ will evolve into ‘good’ as we refine things.  It is unlikely that we will ever get to a ‘best’ answer, because of the complexity of the trade-space.  
So thanks, Silicon Valley.  While I might loath your “minimum viable product” model, you did give me the language and the philosophy to develop this Occam’s Razor-esque tool for developing answers.

-Michael Laine,
​President, LiftPort Group

0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Michael Laine
    ​Griffin Pontius
    Jeremy Wain Hirschberg
    Darius Tamboli
    Byungik Jung
    Fabio Mendez
    YE K
    Jiyeon Go
    YuJin Kim
    ​Rachel Brooks

    Categories

    All

    Archives

    March 2023
    January 2023
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    April 2021
    December 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2018
    October 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    August 2016
    June 2016
    July 2015
    June 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Company

About
Space Elevator
Tethered Towers
​Lunar Elevator
​Better Futures

​
Press

Support

Contact
FAQ
Terms of Use
Picture
Follow us across the web.
© COPYRIGHT 2020- 2023  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
  • Home
  • About
    • Press
  • EVENTS
    • Dec 7-9 - Blue Marble Week
    • Oct 15-16 – Space Education and Strategic Applications Conference
    • Sept 19 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: Space Elevators, Energy, & Space Force
    • Sept 23 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: Space Commercialization, China, & Space Force
    • Sep 26 - Better Futures: The Future of Space
    • Sept 26 – Adam Crigler IRL Video Show: “The Future of Space” Afterparty
  • Projects
    • The Earth Elevator
    • Lunar Elevator
    • LiftPort Museum >
      • Art and Images
    • Tethered Towers
  • Store
  • YouTube
    • LiftPort Videos >
      • A Busy Moon! - ESA Chart Explained
    • Space Policy >
      • Better Futures Event
      • To the Moon to stay
      • Extending Humans to Mars
      • Commercialization of LEO
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 3
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 2
      • Ambitious Strategy - Part 1
      • A New Vision - Part 4
      • A New Vision - Part 3
      • A New Vision - Part 2
      • A New Vision - Part 1
      • Background & Easter Eggs - Part 3
      • Introduction - National Space Council Policy
      • A New Era: The New White House Space Policy
  • Technical Advisory Council
  • Blog
  • Get Involved
    • FAQ
    • Contact
    • Newsletter
    • Book Club