Desiccant is used a lot in boats. ( in the uk at least where damp is an issue )

But is a different way to 3d printers. It’s more about directing condensation.

My thought is to build desiccant holders to mount near the boat windows. (not sure your location if you dont know narrowboat, So ill describe the issue)

My boat was built in the 1970s so is currently single glazed. We plan to do a complete rebuild of the inside and the glazing. But poor again so time.

This design tends to mean condensation builds up hugely on the windows. As the whole design of a steel boat leads to temp differences and the UK has high humidity. More so at water level of course.

The issue is the condensation then runs down from the windows along the wooden panels inside the boat. Doing huge damage over the years. One of the big reason owning a boat is costly. There is constant maintainance and replacement work. Im good at the electrics. But my younger brother dose most of the woodwork.

A common solution is to have a desiccant container with a water catcher below it positioned near the windows. This effectively absorbs some of the humidity before in condensates on the windows. Then, as the Desiccant overloads, releases it into the catcher.

You then need to empty the catcher and replace/dry the desiccant often. And honestly, it still just reduces the issue.

You can buy holders to do his. Sold for boats and caravans etc. But honestly they tend to be a bit universal, so not actually very usable.

Part of me thinks I can design a 3 part system that can be mounted. Have a drip pipe leading directly to the bilge rather than running down the walls. Then have slot in desiccant units that can be carried home and back and microwaved as we swap over.

Short term. The issue is going to be how to drill and inspect the water. While garrenteeing no earth organic contamination.

Untill folks are 100% sure no life at all exists. Any other considerationvwill be on hold.

And proving a negative is going to take ages before folks are happy.

Sorry but those are assumtions based on the idea that the earth is unique.

It is now estimated thatt trillions of plannests wxist in the milky way alone. And abiur 2 million galaxies in the observable universe. We have absolutly no idea how common ir complex the start of life is. Ands assuming we are in anyway unique is not a scientific answer with the knowlesge we have. It is just an assumption.

If life is common and we habe no way of knowing that is not the case. Then we also have ansolutly no way of knowing how common intelegence is.

If intelegence is common. It is reasonable to assume with time radio is an easy invention. Cos lets face it. Based on our data the least intelegent civilization we know off. And the most intelegent discovered it withing 5k years of discovering what we call civalusation.

So again the idea that it is complex for a life to evolve and develop radio is nothing but an assumption. Admitadly a common one. But not one based on any evidence at all. Instead one that is common mainly due to arrogance of mankind assumeing earth must be unique. Just because we lack the tech to see any others.

As for the odds of us developing in time to hear others. Again. The number of plannets and variaty of distances throw that argumebt in the trash.

The estimated number is so great. That no matter when i. The last *estimated" 13.7 billion years we look at. Odd ate high that nillions of planetz exist at the correct distance for us to hear them at some point in the last 100 years of radio until we die as a race.

Again i want to repeat. I am not saying this is such. I have no idea.so to say it is woild be absurdly arragant. And i am far to pessimistic to think such will happen in my lifetime.

I am only sayiing when you remove the (scientifically unviable based on current knowledge) idea that the earth is unique for some reason. Abd add it to the evidence we have found of how many potential planets are in the universe.

Occams Razer is in no way valid to assume it cannot or is provably not alians.

The simplest explanation is NOT the evolution of an entire other species that survives all the way through to advanced tech to send radio signals.

That make a huge huge religion level assumption. That creats so much complexity to throw occam out ass a viable answer.

Is earth unique.

Without assuming the greatest abundance of evidence we have is unique. Then no occams razer is in no way able to make the existance of other planets having reached a similar status as complex.

I’ll repeat again. I in no way think it is. I just challenge that occam is a viable evidence it is not.

As assuming earth is more complex then any other phenomenon in space. Requires you to explain why earthonly happened once. In the huge amount of time astrology is able to see. And vast space.

Any answer that comes is almost paradoxical in its level of complexity. Without more evidence.

Hmm not so sure.

Hear me out. I am not actually saying it is alians. Just questioning that it is not is the logical conclusion of occams razer.

First remember we have 0 idea atm. So occams assumes the simplist explanation is correct.

But over the past couple of decades. The number of planets we have identified has grown hugly.

We only recently gained the ability to detect anything earth sized. But hav already found several.

Evidence is indication that the number of potential planets that are capable of housing life is far from low. Even if we are taking one in a million planets able. Most scientists interested in the field now agree life existing somewhere is more likely then earth being unique for some reason.

So complexity wise. Other life having evolved and developed radio. Is no more complex then some unknown answer. In fact the idea that it is impossible to be alian life is more complex then the idea that it is possible.

Once we have more information. Things will likely change quickly. And I lack the optimism to claim its likely alians.

But occams razer wise. We have evidence of life creating radio waves and transmitting them into space. As we do it a lot. Where as some totally unknown thing we have never seen up to now is a little more complex as a solution.

How do they handle this on ISS

While you are correct. Human experience wise.

We have long had theories and full maths on centrifugal force’s needed to create a gravity like enviroment

Its really more about the will and dedication to develop such ideas.