Here's why:
* No Known Technology: We don't have the technology to build massive space stations capable of housing entire populations, let alone those able to chase and manipulate celestial objects like comets or asteroids.
* Extreme Environment: Comets and asteroids are harsh environments. They lack atmospheres, have extreme temperatures, and are bombarded with radiation. Building and maintaining a permanent station on them would pose immense technical challenges.
* Orbital Mechanics: Capturing and manipulating a comet or asteroid would require incredible amounts of energy and advanced propulsion systems that currently don't exist.
* Sustainability: Even if we could reach a comet or asteroid, providing sustenance and resources for a large population on a body with limited resources would be extremely difficult.
However, there are elements of the concept that have some scientific basis:
* Space Exploration: We are actively exploring comets and asteroids through missions like Rosetta and OSIRIS-REx. These missions provide invaluable data about their composition, formation, and potential resources.
* Asteroid Mining: Some scientists believe that asteroids could be mined for resources in the future. This would require significant advancements in technology, but the potential is there.
* Space Stations: We have successfully built and maintained space stations like the International Space Station, demonstrating our ability to create habitable structures in space.
In conclusion: While the idea of a "superstation" on a comet or asteroid might be entertaining, it's not scientifically plausible with our current technology and understanding. The real potential for exploring and utilizing these celestial bodies lies in focused scientific missions and the development of advanced technologies.
