Space Exploration

[3311]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Been watching a lot of space videos lately. Supermassive Black Holes on BBC, All kinds of stuff. Fascinating stuff. Tonight, watched an episode of "Wonders of the Solar System" on science channel. Hosted by a very, very smart guy with a PhD in Particle physics I guess. Jupiters moon of Europa, it's essentially an ice coating over a very deep ocean (possibly as deep as 60Mi/100KM). And mars, deep caves on the surface could harbor microbial life. Titan, very much like the earth was a long time ago.


So, I ask. Where is all the exploration? In the long run, there is little that should be more important than exploring, and learning more about the universe that we live in. It just seems that we aren't doing enough these days to further our knowledge. I mean come on, the past 2 Administrations have pretty much cut NASAs funding to the bone. They cut the new constellation/orion program pretty much to nonexistence. We were supposed to be going back to the moon this decade. Not anymore.

Look at the Voyager program. Launched in the late 60s, it provided pretty much all that we know about the outer planets. Still ongoing today, as The voyager spacecraft speed out of our solar system into inter-stellar space. Why aren't we doing more like this?

A probe to drill through the Ice of Europa, and explore the depths of it's oceans, a habitable base on the moon, and eventually, mars.

Space exploration. Important, or irrelevant? Discuss.
It's apparently not relevant/important anymore since we will be hitching rides with the Russians. And besides, hasn't their mission been changed to more of a Muslim Outreach than one of space exploration?

 

[Spockian1]

Originally Posted By: 3311
It's apparently not relevant/important anymore since we will be hitching rides with the Russians. And besides, hasn't their mission been changed to more of a Muslim Outreach than space exploration emphasis?

You are trying to move this thread toward an US vs THEM perspective. That would not be so bad, except that as soon as the entities who have administrative privileges for this forum see an excuse, they will abuse their privileges to close this thread right down. (I think it's a power trip issue.)

It's rather clear that this thread is beneficial to those choosing to participate.

Please take your US, vs the Muslims, vs the Russies rabble-rousing elsewhere.

 

[3311]

Mine was a statement of fact while addressing the op's question. Not trying to take the thread in any direction but take of it what you will.

 

[Spockian1]

Originally Posted By: 3311
Mine was a statement of fact while addressing the op's question.

No. It doesn't seem so. You were planning to exploit the dislike you expected to find between your intended audience, here, and the Russian Commies and the Muslim Terrorists. And now you are claiming you were not doing that.

Your post seems to have very little to do with Nick R's original query.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Spockian1
Look. If you are looking to make things better for the ever-increasing number of human-beings on this planet you are fighting an unwinnable battle.

Every resource you throw at that problem is going to result in a license for people to have more children. That will require that ever more resources be diverted to that cause.

Mankind will, then, never have time to do anything noble, because it will have to be too focused upon facilitating people's urges to overly-procreate.

I offer no solution to that problem, although I have given the matter a great deal of thought over the years.

But saying that we should divert resources from noble efforts because we could facilitate more breeding that way doesn't make a lot of sense.


Who is to decide what is noble and what is not? and how do you know what you define as unwinnable battle is actually not noble?

I have some recommendation for your solution to achieve a more noble clause but if I said it I would probably be banned for violation of the no religion clause of the forum.

Sure, we get side effects of non stick pans and GPS and all sorts of cool technologies when we were trying to do other more "noble" stuff. But how about spending the money to look for these cool technologies as the main focus rather than as the side effect? How much more would be accomplished? Or maybe we can save some money and achieve the same result (to get the cool tech) and use the rest of the resource on improving people's life?

In that regard, lumping $4000 per capita of waste and $54 per capita of waste together seems to make sense as they both produce useful stuff as side effect and obtain "noble clause" as the main goal.

 

[Spyder7]

I would like to see more effort put into space exploration. I don't think of it even as something within a particular national interest, but something in the overall international interest. Maybe the time has come to take the burden for this from the US and the American tax payer and put it instead into the creation of some kind of international body (like the space equivalent of NATO but non-military).

That would create a much larger pool of funds to draw from, although it require overcoming some major logistical hurdles as well, in just creating the blueprint for such an organization. But since I believe its in all interests - regardless of nationality - the best way to go is with an international model of some sorts. Much more money to draw on to fund it then, and it eliminates moneys spent (wasted) on replicating or duplicating other efforts.

-Spyder

 

[Greggy_D]

Originally Posted By: Spockian1
Military spending led directly to the useless STS program.


I'm curious as to why you think the shuttle program was useless.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Greggy_D
Originally Posted By: Spockian1
Military spending led directly to the useless STS program.


I'm curious as to why you think the shuttle program was useless.


Maybe because the original goal of low cost reusable vehicle turns out to be more expensive than disposing a rocket each time and have more work to keep the tiles from breaking down at launch.

That's why the new design (if any in the future) would be to go back to single use rocket.

 

[bigmike]

Originally Posted By: Volvo_ST1
Originally Posted By: bigmike
This thread was good until someone started throwing around millions and billions of years like it's a fact. How does someone really verify such statements?


Are you asking for definitive proof, or are you questioning the decay of radioactive isotope decays that have a fixed half-life?



I'm asking what does this have to do with space exploration?

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: Spyder7
I would like to see more effort put into space exploration. I don't think of it even as something within a particular national interest, but something in the overall international interest. Maybe the time has come to take the burden for this from the US and the American tax payer and put it instead into the creation of some kind of international body (like the space equivalent of NATO but non-military).

That would create a much larger pool of funds to draw from, although it require overcoming some major logistical hurdles as well, in just creating the blueprint for such an organization. But since I believe its in all interests - regardless of nationality - the best way to go is with an international model of some sorts. Much more money to draw on to fund it then, and it eliminates moneys spent (wasted) on replicating or duplicating other efforts.

-Spyder

We already have the UN and it already doesn't work. We don't need another.

 

[Spyder7]

The UN wasn't the type model I had in mind, and why I choose NATO as an example and not the UN.

-Spyder

 

[Nick R]

What you are talking about is essentially what the writers of Mass Effect thought of. They call it the human systems alliance.

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Systems_Alliance

If you can forgive the game lore, that is essentially what you are talking about. A single entity that funds, and controls what we do in space. Even though it will likely never come to pass, if we ever do encounter someone else, a single entity that has military and political power to speak for humanity as a whole would be necessary.

Still, that's a pipe dream at best. One-way or the other, a single body to oversee and control and fund a multi national space program.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
A single entity that funds, and controls what we do in space.


We already have that, THE MAN(s) who own(s) most of the wealth already control the politics and military indirectly, through out history, then and now and the future.

 

[Pablo]

http://www.space.com/11642-dark-matter-dark-energy-4-percent-universe-panek.html

 

[Volvo_ST1]

Originally Posted By: bigmike
Originally Posted By: Volvo_ST1
Originally Posted By: bigmike
This thread was good until someone started throwing around millions and billions of years like it's a fact. How does someone really verify such statements?


Are you asking for definitive proof, or are you questioning the decay of radioactive isotope decays that have a fixed half-life?



I'm asking what does this have to do with space exploration?


You were asking, "How does someone really verify such statements?" Why did you ask that question if you didn't want an answer?

 

[greenaccord02]

 

[bigmike]

Originally Posted By: Volvo_ST1
Originally Posted By: bigmike
Originally Posted By: Volvo_ST1
Originally Posted By: bigmike
This thread was good until someone started throwing around millions and billions of years like it's a fact. How does someone really verify such statements?


Are you asking for definitive proof, or are you questioning the decay of radioactive isotope decays that have a fixed half-life?



I'm asking what does this have to do with space exploration?


You were asking, "How does someone really verify such statements?" Why did you ask that question if you didn't want an answer?


You answered my question?

 

[Rix]

I'd like to see further "exploration" of space. The problem as I see it is US. We are fragile little things, at the mercy of who-knows-how-many disasters that could befall us.
My opinion is that we're just slogging around in what we can reach, and the really cool things are beyond our reach as of yet.

technology is moving pretty fast in the last 50 years, Maybe it'll move far enough in my lifetime so's I can see something truly spectacular, but I don't really know.

Maybe something'll find US.

I think the human race needs to grow up a little before we can truly utilise all the best of what we have to offer. With budget, military, bla bla bla, I can't even begin to comprehend the complexities of getting these things done. But I sure would like to see something that completely boggles my mind before I die.

 

[Spyder7]

Originally Posted By: Rix
I'd like to see further "exploration" of space. The problem as I see it is US. We are fragile little things, at the mercy of who-knows-how-many disasters that could befall us.
My opinion is that we're just slogging around in what we can reach, and the really cool things are beyond our reach as of yet.

technology is moving pretty fast in the last 50 years, Maybe it'll move far enough in my lifetime so's I can see something truly spectacular, but I don't really know.

Maybe something'll find US.

I think the human race needs to grow up a little before we can truly utilise all the best of what we have to offer. With budget, military, bla bla bla, I can't even begin to comprehend the complexities of getting these things done. But I sure would like to see something that completely boggles my mind before I die.


Space tourism is in its infancy, but before I kick the bucket, the thing I wish to achieve the most is that one experience, one time (I'll count myself lucky if I'm fortunate enough to be around long enough for it to drop to the price to where I could put an entire life savings into that one trip).

-Spyder

 

[Kestas]

Though space flight has caught our fancy since childhood, I personally don't think a three hour space tour would be that thrilling. It'd be really cool, but certainly not "life savings" thrilling.