Why We Should Go Into Space

[L. Marcus]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

... Nice rack!

[Clonus]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

But yes, Space Nownownow isn't the way to go. But on the other hand, neither is The Governments Keep The ISS Floating 'Til 2020, Everything Else Is The Private Sector's Job. We should have some new goal in space that was made this millennium (love how I can correctly apply that term to everything older than twelve years). The Space Shuttle is dead, Constellations is gone, the ISS has another 9 years before it burns, Virgin Galactic has been saying "by the end of this year" for the last 4 years, and that's it for our current manned space flight projects. Whatever happened to "We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people.", to "Boldly going", or to the "too small and fragile a basket"?

 

It wore out when we lost the extra motivation of proving that our missile technology was good enough to annihilate the other guys.

[Badger]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Look, I want to go to space to find some hot green chicks. No other reason. Where are the hot green chicks?

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Maybe we'll find out next year, when the Hubba-Hubba Space Telescope launches.

 

......

 

I can't believe I went there.

[dmjalund]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

I can't believe I went there.

you went there to fix the lense - it was steaming up

[AlHazred]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things' date=' not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.[/b']

I agree with that guy! Mike, I got to use that quote one of these days, and I'll be sure to attribute it to you!

 

We can't give up now! Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? No! Did we give up when the Mexicans killed those other guys at the Little Big Horn? No! We got to go there, man!

[Old Man]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Byt we've already reached the asteroids' date=' and we've even landed probes on them, the first to do so [i']wasn't even built or designed to land on an asteroid was not intended to, and they landed it literally on a spur of the moment idea when the mission was over![/i]

 

We can reach the near earth asteroids, the rest is just engineering details that can be worked out if we try.

 

Actual mining of the asteroids isn't just an engineering problem, it's an economics problem. If that $20T asteroid costs $30T to return safely to Earth then the business model needs some help.

 

Not that I am against space exploration--quite the opposite. I support it as a means of directing more resources to scientific research in general. I perceive science as being deeply neglected worldwide. It's very annoying to me that the only science that gets any significant government support is related to either killing people or keeping them alive long enough to empty their wallets. There is so much fundamental science that we don't understand.

 

Also, space elevator.

[Escafarc]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Look' date=' I want to go to space to find some hot green chicks. No other reason. Where are the hot green chicks?[/quote']

 

Well at least now it looks like we might get one of them to go home with us:

 

http://www.delish.com/food/recalls-reviews/australian-brewery-to-test-worlds-first-space-beer?GT1=47001

[Badger]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Actual mining of the asteroids isn't just an engineering problem, it's an economics problem. If that $20T asteroid costs $30T to return safely to Earth then the business model needs some help.

 

Not that I am against space exploration--quite the opposite. I support it as a means of directing more resources to scientific research in general. I perceive science as being deeply neglected worldwide. It's very annoying to me that the only science that gets any significant government support is related to either killing people or keeping them alive long enough to empty their wallets. There is so much fundamental science that we don't understand.

 

Also, space elevator.

 

You didnt make your case. Our government wouldnt give up over an economic problem, we would raise the cost from 30 to 40 trillion for 20 trillion asteroid, then do it.

[Old Man]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

You didnt make your case. Our government wouldnt give up over an economic problem' date=' we would raise the cost from 30 to 40 trillion for 20 trillion asteroid, then do it.[/quote']

 

After defining the asteroid as a terrorist hideout, sure. We spare no expense when it comes to the War On Terra.

[Escafarc]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Alrighty then... SF writer it is!

 

But the real reason I want to go into space is:

 

SPACE HAS BETTER MUSIC!

 

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

50 billion dollars to go to mars? That's chump change, stop thinking so small!

 

You want a reason to go into space? How about twenty trillion of 'em?

 

Read it and drool, brothers. A small, typical asteroid may contain up to 20 trillion dollars (say that number a few times. Twenty trillion dollars. Doesn't it just feel good to say it?) worth of metals, including metals that are vital to high tech and are getting harder to find on earth, like the so-called 'conflict metals" that are beginning to cause some concern among those with social consciences.

 

Yes, but bring one of those rocks here, and the price of gold will go from "just under inkjet printer" per ounce to "give me a quarter so I can get this solid gold ring from this candy machine."

 

There is more gold in one of those asteroids than has been dug up by mankind, ever, from Earth. Plenty more in the Earth for us to find, but mostly at incredibly impractical places or depths.

[Susano]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Yes, but bring one of those rocks here, and the price of gold will go from "just under inkjet printer" per ounce to "give me a quarter so I can get this solid gold ring from this candy machine."

 

There is more gold in one of those asteroids than has been dug up by mankind, ever, from Earth. Plenty more in the Earth for us to find, but mostly at incredibly impractical places or depths.

 

Actually, considering the industrial uses of gold, you'd still make a profit.

[Robot_Nixon]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

The United States initiated a space surge twice and both for the same reason; fear of the soviets.

 

The Soviet Union went into space for one reason; Fear of the United States.

 

The real space program in the 21st century is going into space for one reason; Fear of the west (can you guess who I mean?)

 

Man has explored space for one reason and one reason only; Military gain.

 

The US thinks it is secure against all other major powers. It will not go into space for exploration, knowledge or that big fat cash ball asteroid. It will only do it again on the previous scale out of fear.

[Escafarc]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

The United States initiated a space surge twice and both for the same reason; fear of the soviets.

 

The Soviet Union went into space for one reason; Fear of the United States.

 

The real space program in the 21st century is going into space for one reason; Fear of the west (can you guess who I mean?)

 

Man has explored space for one reason and one reason only; Military gain.

 

The US thinks it is secure against all other major powers. It will not go into space for exploration, knowledge or that big fat cash ball asteroid. It will only do it again on the previous scale out of fear.

 

Repped. But people look at you strangly when you try to explain that NASA's purpose was to defeat the Soviets as part of the PR Machine of the Military/Industrial Complex(the technical advantges gain over them were just a bonus). The problem with NASA(as well as many other Gov.Orgs.) was when there goals were achived they failed to "refocus". In the early 90s they suffered from a lack of any real leadership or direction.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Uh, dude? You know that your phone works because of "satellites," right? You know where satellites are? That's right, space.

The problem here is fanboyism. Space is a dangerous and difficult environment that happens to be very expensive to get to and experiment in. So we're going there ....

 

I almost said "slowly," there, until I realised how absurd it is. Compare: the first patent for a telephone was issued in March, 1876. I'm suspecting more American patent trolling here, because the first (Hungarian) patent for a telephone switchboard is the same year. The next decade had hardly turned when there was a major political/corporate war over the right to lay landlines in London, as consumer demand for the new device broke out amongst the London rich technogeek hipster subset.

 

It took until the 1930s for the modern box telephone to emerge. At the same time, the GPO was experimenting with automatic exchanges, but the move away from local telephone operators was a phenomena of the 1950s in North America, and I remember dealing with long distance operators in the 1970s. The telephone was a century old before the modern era of direct dialling began. We have been in space for 53 years. At that point in the history of the telephone industry, rich people were just beginning to get rid of the home battery pile.

 

So relax. Chill out. Yes, I know that this means that you won't be able to get a job on a space station, or retire to the Moon. Sad face. But there's nothing going deeply, socially wrong. You're just watching reality unfold as it must.

[Escafarc]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

Uh' date=' dude? You know that your phone works because of "satellites," right? You know where satellites are? That's right, [i']space.[/i]

The problem here is fanboyism. Space is a dangerous and difficult environment that happens to be very expensive to get to and experiment in. So we're going there ....

 

I almost said "slowly," there, until I realised how absurd it is. Compare: the first patent for a telephone was issued in March, 1876. I'm suspecting more American patent trolling here, because the first (Hungarian) patent for a telephone switchboard is the same year. The next decade had hardly turned when there was a major political/corporate war over the right to lay landlines in London, as consumer demand for the new device broke out amongst the London rich technogeek hipster subset.

 

It took until the 1930s for the modern box telephone to emerge. At the same time, the GPO was experimenting with automatic exchanges, but the move away from local telephone operators was a phenomena of the 1950s in North America, and I remember dealing with long distance operators in the 1970s. The telephone was a century old before the modern era of direct dialling began. We have been in space for 53 years. At that point in the history of the telephone industry, rich people were just beginning to get rid of the home battery pile.

 

So relax. Chill out. Yes, I know that this means that you won't be able to get a job on a space station, or retire to the Moon. Sad face. But there's nothing going deeply, socially wrong. You're just watching reality unfold as it must.

I'm not sure who this is aimed at? I agree that we should go to space. I even think that the government should be involved. I just think NASA needs a complete overhaul in the way they do things.

[Cancer]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

The problem here is fanboyism.

 

My recent experience at a science fiction con leads me to say here: "You have no idea."

[Susano]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

The United States initiated a space surge twice and both for the same reason; fear of the soviets.

 

The Soviet Union went into space for one reason; Fear of the United States.

 

The real space program in the 21st century is going into space for one reason; Fear of the west (can you guess who I mean?)

 

No. Unless you mean the US. Personally, I've been wondering about a China/US space race. Except we don't have anything to lift off with right now.

 

Man has explored space for one reason and one reason only; Military gain.

 

Yes, because there's so much military potential in Mars, Mercury, and the outer solar system that we just had to send probes out there.

 

The US thinks it is secure against all other major powers. It will not go into space for exploration, knowledge or that big fat cash ball asteroid. It will only do it again on the previous scale out of fear.

 

Considering we've been sending long-range probes such as Pioneer and Voyager, planetary probes such as Viking and the Mars rovers, dropped a probe on Titan, sent out Galileo to orbit Jupiter, and just had a probe arrive at Mercury, we seems to be doing a lot of space exploration just for the knowledge. I'll also point out that Bush did talk about sending men to Mars (but that did go nowhere) and Obama has requested an overhaul of the current planned manned missions and the launch vehicle. So there's a lot of talk about going back to the Moon and then beyond, but the current budget is such a wreck that yes, you'll not see something on the scale of Apollo. Actually, I fear that the talk of returning to the Moon is just talk, because NASA always seems (to Congress) to be a waste of money. So unless China really starts to push their space plans (which includes a Moon landing, IIRC—and India has mentioned a Moon mission as well) things will go really, really slowly.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

No. Unless you mean the US. Personally, I've been wondering about a China/US space race. Except we don't have anything to lift off with right now.

 

 

 

Yes, because there's so much military potential in Mars, Mercury, and the outer solar system that we just had to send probes out there.

 

 

 

Considering we've been sending long-range probes such as Pioneer and Voyager, planetary probes such as Viking and the Mars rovers, dropped a probe on Titan, sent out Galileo to orbit Jupiter, and just had a probe arrive at Mercury, we seems to be doing a lot of space exploration just for the knowledge. I'll also point out that Bush did talk about sending men to Mars (but that did go nowhere) and Obama has requested an overhaul of the current planned manned missions and the launch vehicle. So there's a lot of talk about going back to the Moon and then beyond, but the current budget is such a wreck that yes, you'll not see something on the scale of Apollo. Actually, I fear that the talk of returning to the Moon is just talk, because NASA always seems (to Congress) to be a waste of money. So unless China really starts to push their space plans (which includes a Moon landing, IIRC—and India has mentioned a Moon mission as well) things will go really, really slowly.

 

Victory Rep.

[Robot_Nixon]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

No. Unless you mean the US. Personally, I've been wondering about a China/US space race. Except we don't have anything to lift off with right now.

 

 

 

Yes, because there's so much military potential in Mars, Mercury, and the outer solar system that we just had to send probes out there.

 

 

 

Considering we've been sending long-range probes such as Pioneer and Voyager, planetary probes such as Viking and the Mars rovers, dropped a probe on Titan, sent out Galileo to orbit Jupiter, and just had a probe arrive at Mercury, we seems to be doing a lot of space exploration just for the knowledge. I'll also point out that Bush did talk about sending men to Mars (but that did go nowhere) and Obama has requested an overhaul of the current planned manned missions and the launch vehicle. So there's a lot of talk about going back to the Moon and then beyond, but the current budget is such a wreck that yes, you'll not see something on the scale of Apollo. Actually, I fear that the talk of returning to the Moon is just talk, because NASA always seems (to Congress) to be a waste of money. So unless China really starts to push their space plans (which includes a Moon landing, IIRC—and India has mentioned a Moon mission as well) things will go really, really slowly.

 

We won't be competing with the Chinese on a new space race with this deficit, unless you mean for a seat on one of their rockets.

 

None of the probes have been on the financial scale of the space race, and if you had read more closely I specifically wrote, 'on that scale'. Yes, I know we will go forward with spending on space exploration in dribs and drabs to be discussed and cancelled from Administration to Administration. That isn't what I was posting about, however. I was posting about the commitment and spending required to set up a water cracking plant on the moon or just a manned mission to mars. That is just wishful thinking right now.

 

As far as another country going to the moon, I am sure it will happen. China has the money and the captive populace to be able to fund it and ignore popular opinion. We won't even have a design for a new heavy lifter until 2015 (if all discussions go perfectly and the design isn't questioned at all) and the Chang'e-3 should be lifting off in 2013 or 14. That's a decade worth of difference from plans to blast off.

[Old Man]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

None of the probes have been on the financial scale of the space race, and if you had read more closely I specifically wrote, 'on that scale'. Yes, I know we will go forward with spending on space exploration in dribs and drabs to be discussed and cancelled from Administration to Administration. That isn't what I was posting about, however. I was posting about the commitment and spending required to set up a water cracking plant on the moon or just a manned mission to mars. That is just wishful thinking right now.

 

I wish I could argue with this but you're probably right, interplanetary manned space flight is probably a nonstarter in the current political environment.

 

 

As far as another country going to the moon, I am sure it will happen. China has the money and the captive populace to be able to fund it and ignore popular opinion. We won't even have a design for a new heavy lifter until 2015 (if all discussions go perfectly and the design isn't questioned at all) and the Chang'e-3 should be lifting off in 2013 or 14. That's a decade worth of difference from plans to blast off.

 

I hear conflicting reports about the viability of the Chinese vehicle. I'm kind of pulling for them in a way, if only because it might get international manned spaceflight going again. Plus, I'd love to see the President award the Chinese astronauts a silver medal for their accomplishment.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

The Chinese Launch Vehicle failed because, as all things made in China, it is mostly made of lead

[Robot_Nixon]

Re: Why We Should Go Into Space

 

I wish I could argue with this but you're probably right' date=' interplanetary manned space flight is probably a nonstarter in the current political environment.[/quote']

 

It doesn't have to be. We need to get America's richest families on board and pay off this deficit. The poor can't pay it, and the middle class (what of it remains) would take decades. Without getting into blue v. red, or a class warfare discussion, they are the only ones that can. We're also going to have to cut government spending. One party agrees with one of these ideas, and the other agrees with the other, but it is going to take both and it has to be done soon. THEN...

 

We can get the next generation into exploring space. I don't care if it is out of fear, or a purer sense on exploration and learning. Convince them to get their leaders of their time to shift just 1/3 of the defense budget to NASA and give it serious goals that are allowed to last beyond any one Administration's whims. (I say next generation, not ours because the deficit will take all we have.)

 

If you ever heard of the technological singularity, you know it is based on an exponential curve of discovery and theoretical breakthroughs of sciences we have already discovered and allowed to mature and then synergize. Space technology will feel that same exponential improvement if we're willing to set our sights on 'big grabs' like an asteroid exploitation, HE3 or water cracking moon station, or the ancillary discoveries involved with a multi-month mission like a manned mars mission (water cracking preferred as it can act as a space harbor for the other missions).

 

The Chinese Launch Vehicle failed because' date=' as all things made in China, it is mostly made of lead [/quote']

 

I'm pretty sure you're making a culturally biased joke here, but just so there is no misunderstanding, Chang'e-2 worked flawlessly and achieved all mission goals. Here are some images from November.

 

Unfortunately, it is this kind of arrogant cultural bigotry that dominates US thinking. "Oh we don't really have to worry about Chinese technology, it's 50 years behind." This just makes us complacent. Technologically speaking, the Chinese government has two standards. The standards for its people and export, and then another far more strict standard for national projects. This is why you get Milk poisoning and lead paint on toys but also the Three Gorges Dam which much like their space program, is based on western technology.

 

This same level of national arrogance led to the deficit in the first place. You know, it's funny, but you see plenty of ridicule for national patriotism, while in the same circles national arrogance is accepted. We really need to swap those around. (you might think from these last two sentences I might be a conservative, but re-read the post and see that I draw good ideas from both parties. I don't care about red v. blue, just that we fix the problems and get moving toward a greater goal.)