The Space Program

[Quetzlsacatanango]

A space program is the only hope for mankind.

It can cure our scarcity problems, which are pretty much the root of all our other problems. I can forgive a lot, I can even forgive Obama for a lot, but I can't forgive him for leaving the US without a space shuttle.

OP, to say the US has "given up its space program" is overstating it... but sadly not by much.

 

Again, you guys are not seeing the big picture.

Picture the light side of the moon covered with solar panels, or a turbine system between the light and dark sides that uses the temperature differential to generate electricity. The power is beamed back to earth via microwave or even laser.

Picture mining the moon, mars, or asteroids for precious metals or rare earths. Who cares if it take a year? Wouldn't it be worth the time if you could say "in two years, the transport will be back with a hold full of gold"?

This is not to mention perpetuating the species by not having all your eggs in one basket on a single muddy rock.

These things could be done today - no sci fi, no futuristic propulsion, just the will and the courage to do it.

 

To say it's too hard, or too expensive, or too dangerous, is pathetic, shortsighted, and cowardly, respectively.

Edited September 19, 2011 by Quetzlsacatanango

[HeyYou]

A space program is the only hope for mankind.

It can cure our scarcity problems, which are pretty much the root of all our other problems. I can forgive a lot, I can even forgive Obama for a lot, but I can't forgive him for leaving the US without a space shuttle.

OP, to say the US has "given up its space program" is overstating it... but sadly not by much.

 

Again, you guys are not seeing the big picture.

Picture the light side of the moon covered with solar panels, or a turbine system between the light and dark sides that uses the temperature differential to generate electricity. The power is beamed back to earth via microwave or even laser.

Picture mining the moon, mars, or asteroids for precious metals or rare earths. Who cares if it take a year? Wouldn't it be worth the time if you could say "in two years, the transport will be back with a hold full of gold"?

This is not to mention perpetuating the species by not having all your eggs in one basket on a single muddy rock.

These things could be done today - no sci fi, no futuristic propulsion, just the will and the courage to do it.

 

To say it's too hard, or too expensive, or too dangerous, is pathetic, shortsighted, and cowardly, respectively.

 

YEEE HAAA! THAT'S what I am talkin' about!:thumbsup:

[marharth]

According to popular theory, we ARE researching fusion power, and not just the government, there are private companies working on it as well. And it wouldn't be short term. Space manufacturing, another source of raw materials. (I always wanted to try my hand at asteroid mining.) launch and docking points for ships. espeically those that cannot enter the atmosphere. Etc. Lotsa uses for space stations, and moon bases.

Researching it more gets stuff done faster is my point.

 

Moon bases and such can be extremely helpful, but we can't build them yet. That is because we lack a ton of funding since it costs a lot of money to launch a firework to the moon, and even more to build something.

 

My point is we should focus our funding on research as a investment. Once we at least have Fusion Power, then we can cut a lot of costs and get to the moon without as much economic trouble.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Point of order: nuclear fusion research is not a "popular theory." Fusion has been achieved by several different methods, by several different laboratories. The problem with fusion lies in getting enough more energy out of a fusion reaction than it takes to induce the reaction so as to make it a viable source of power. Currently the only method we have of achieving that kind of output to input ratio is to build a thermonuclear bomb- which has been discussed as a method of spacecraft propulsion, believe it or not.

 

IMO, too much focus is placed on scientific discovery as the sole and exclusive reason for space exploration. As far back as historical records exist (and back to the dawn of our species in the archaeological record), humanity has been a species of explorers. Everywhere we have gone, we have developed new cultures- new modes of speech dress and even of thought itself- that have driven our social evolution. As we fill out and populate every nook and cranny on our home planet, then connect ourselves with near-instant telecommunication networks, we will ultimately stagnate. Our culture will homogenize and we will achieve a single, unified identity... unless we induce change by going to new places, living in them and developing new cultures, we will not continue to evolve and grow as a species. We will ultimately meet our end in some cosmic cataclysm, or in a disaster of our own making, having never set foot beyond our doorstep.

 

We've had the proven ability to get a spacecraft to Mars and land it safely since the 1970s. We've had the ability to build modular spacecraft and assemble them in orbit since the Gemini flights of the 1960s. We know how to simulate gravity on long voyages in space, even though we've never put that knowledge into practice. Today's PDAs have enough processor power to make any necessary computations for an interplanetary mission.

 

Our problems here on Earth are worthy of attention, but most of them are ultimately transient. Economic crises pass. Nations rise and fall. The one purpose which ought to motivate all of humanity as a unified whole is to ensure the long-term advancement and, ultimately, the long-term survival of our species. The only way to achieve those ends is to undertake missions in and through space, and to establish permanent colonies on other planets. To ignore that truth is to commit mass suicide, be it two thousand or two million or two billion years from now. Our extinction is certain without sustainable off-Earth colonies. Since we have the knowledge and the technology to put humans on other worlds, and such colonies do not presently exist, it stands to reason that our first priority ought to be getting up off our collective asses and creating them.

 

Any step that leads away from space is a step in the wrong direction. We should have had a next-generation reusable spacecraft twenty years ago so that we wouldn't have needed to abandon manned spaceflight when the Shuttles got too old to use safely.

[HeyYou]

For the most part, I agree with you, but, unless/until a sustained fusion reaction can be used to generate power which is useful for an atmospheric drive which DOESN'T kill everyone around...... we aren't going to get far. Sure, we CAN get to mars with our chemical reaction motors, but, the amount of fuel that needs to be carried for the round trip is a bit prohibitive. (unless you don't mind the trip last twenty years, or.... is one way.)

 

Also, until we can get out of our own solar system, and populate some of the nearer stars, our sun going nova WILL eliminate us as a species. Mars just ain't far enough out, even if there was a self sustaining colony there. THAT is not going to be feasible with chemical reaction motors...... the trip would take decades, just to get to the nearest star. (four light-years, give or take) and we don't even know for sure if there is a planet there capable of supporting human life. (that would be a one way trip with chemical engines.)

 

We DO need to expand into space though. We ARE explorers. Stuck on this one lonely rock..... yeah, what HE said. :D

[stars2heaven]

Just to make a clarification here....the Space Program was not ended. The current shuttle program was ended. They were old, out dated, dangerous, and the costs to maintain them were beginning to exceed the costs of building new ones. Furthermore, the costs of the shuttle program were beginning to hold us back from other endeavors. Investments into newer and better technology can now be made and now NASA can pursue the programs that it really wanted to. Our primary mission of developing technologies that can get us into space relatively cheaply and safely has been achieved, and it's time for the private sector to begin taking over. (and here in Florida they are doing just that)

[HeyYou]

Yeah, they outsourced our space program to Russia.

[stars2heaven]

Yeah, they outsourced our space program to Russia.

 

That is not true. There are companies here in the US already gearing up to take the place of the shuttle program. Any role Russia will be playing in terms of sending manned flights into space will be a very short term one. Also, the space program has not been outsourced to anywhere. NASA is still running the space program right here in the US. They simply don't have an overburdening shuttle program holding them back from moving on to deep space exploration...which is what it seems like you want them to be doing.

Edited September 20, 2011 by stars2heaven

[kvnchrist]

Yeah, they outsourced our space program to Russia.

 

That is not true. There are companies here in the US already gearing up to take the place of the shuttle program. Any role Russia will be playing in terms of sending manned flights into space will be a very short term one. Also, the space program has not been outsourced to anywhere. NASA is still running the space program right here in the US. They simply don't have an overburdening shuttle program holding them back from moving on to deep space exploration...which is what it seems like you want them to be doing.

 

And I take it we are not paying good money to be taxied to the international space station on vessels far older than the shuttles.

 

Gearing up, still means they are still in the invention mode, which the shuttles were tried and true. They might be old but until these so-called wonder companies have something viable, we are still at the mercy of technology that the space shuttle makes look like a Conestoga wagon.

 

I was wondering where you get the incite to say how long we will be at the mercy of the Russians? That must be a magical gift indeed.

 

The difference between HeyYou and your argument is that he is looking at the present and you are looking at the future. The future is nice, but we still have to get there.

[marharth]

Yeah, they outsourced our space program to Russia.

 

That is not true. There are companies here in the US already gearing up to take the place of the shuttle program. Any role Russia will be playing in terms of sending manned flights into space will be a very short term one. Also, the space program has not been outsourced to anywhere. NASA is still running the space program right here in the US. They simply don't have an overburdening shuttle program holding them back from moving on to deep space exploration...which is what it seems like you want them to be doing.

 

And I take it we are not paying good money to be taxied to the international space station on vessels far older than the shuttles.

 

Gearing up, still means they are still in the invention mode, which the shuttles were tried and true. They might be old but until these so-called wonder companies have something viable, we are still at the mercy of technology that the space shuttle makes look like a Conestoga wagon.

 

I was wondering where you get the incite to say how long we will be at the mercy of the Russians? That must be a magical gift indeed.

 

The difference between HeyYou and your argument is that he is looking at the present and you are looking at the future. The future is nice, but we still have to get there.

We can get there faster if we focus on research...

 

I think its perfectly fine that our shuttle program ended. We won't be able to do much with our modern space shuttles.