Goodbye moon?


Recommended Posts

Damn.. can't edit my own post.

I seem to strayed a bit with my ramblings.. what confused me about 08993's post is that he thinks we're doomed here, so we should move, but we're doomed everywhere, it's not like we'll ever change, if it's not over population, it'll be nuclear war, if it's not that then we'll exhaust our planet's resources, if not that then some epidemic will kill us all, or something else. We first need to develop the technology to travel light years in manageable time, then we need to focus on terraforming, then whatever else we'll need. But everything now sounds like it's taken from a video game, so how about we focus on Earth, if we're not ready.

why does it have to be ONLY end-of-world scenarios for you? your thinking is exactly like the bad guys from Fallout 2 ... earth is nuked till mutants grow everywhere , and theyre trying to build a spaceship to escape to another planet...

there's a reason they call space the final frontier.... because its just that, a frontier .... imagine if nobody had discovered America, etc.... but yeah, instead of colonizing a new place, the space age has given us a bunch of new stuff like smoke detectors and fuel cells

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna check that out now, Growled.

Oh yeah, there's a reason why we call it the Final Frontier, because there's nowhere else to go :)

Let's assume we do have every technology required to colonize ANY planet, hell even the bloody Sun.

Do you think it would be a good idea to colonize another world when ours looks the way it does ? We'll just do the same mistakes all over again in another place. So how about before we rush into the "Final Frontier", we first fix whatever we can here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't edit once again... so here goes.

Did NASA invent barcodes, quartz clocks, or smoke detectors?

Barcodes were not invented by NASA. NASA developed a special type of barcode for inventory of space shuttle and other space system components that could endure harsh environments, but this should not be mistakened for the original barcode. Similarly, NASA was not the first to use quartz as a piezoelectric material for timekeeping. The first quartz clock dates back to 1927. However in the late 1960s, NASA partnered with a company to make a highly accurate quartz clock. This clock was on the market for a few years but is no longer available. Further, NASA did not invent the smoke detector. NASA?s connection to the modern smoke detector is that it made one with adjustable sensitivity as part of the Skylab project. The device was made commercially available by Honeywell. The consumer could use it to avoid ?nuisance? alarms while cooking. Like the quartz clock, this device is no longer available.

To develop the drill, NASA chose a company that has since become well known for its cordless products: Black and Decker.

Technically B&D did, the necessity for the cordless drill did its thing and voila, although it would have been created later either way, it's just too obvious, space program or not, people would find other reasons to want a cordless product.

The quote above is a bit confusing to me, because it implies that B&D already have the reputation for creating cordless tools, not that invented it AFTER NASA asked them.

Also, B&D patented the cordless drill at 1917, that's like 43 years before the conception of the idea of going to the Moon..

Another one from the same site:

Did NASA invent cordless power tools?

No. The first cordless power tool was unveiled by Black & Decker in 1961. In the mid-1960s, Martin Marietta Corporation contracted with Black & Decker to design tools for NASA. The tool company developed a zero-impact wrench for the Gemini project that spun bolts in zero gravity without spinning the astronaut. Black & Decker also designed a cordless rotary hammer drill for the Apollo moon program. The drill was used to extract rock samples from the surface of the moon and could operate at extreme temperatures and in zero-atmosphere conditions. Before the zero-impact wrench and rotary hammer drill could go into space, they needed to be tested in anti-gravity conditions. Black & Decker and NASA tested the tools either under water or in transport planes that would climb to the highest possible altitude and then nosedive to simulate anti-gravity conditions. As a result of this work, Black & Decker created several spinoffs, including cordless lightweight battery powered precision medical instruments and a cordless miniature vacuum cleaner called the Dustbuster, but cordless power tools predate the Space Agency?s involvement with the company.

Did NASA invent Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)?

No, NASA did not invent MRI technology, but it has contributed to its advances over the years, and elements of NASA technology have been incorporated into MRI techniques. In the mid-1960s, as a prelude to NASA?s Apollo Lunar Landing Program, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory developed the technology known as digital image processing to allow computer enhancement of Moon pictures. Digital image processing has found a broad array of other applications, particularly in the field of medicine, where it is employed to create and enhance images of the organs in the human body for diagnostic purposes. Two of these advanced body imaging techniques are CT or CATScan and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).

Good for them to contribute though.

Then there's the water filter, that wasn't created by NASA either, only contributed by them, again nothing but a by product of necessity. Would have been invented without NASA.

Insulation, I can't believe they include that, from what it says there NASA made that smart insulation thing, but the "base" was already invented ! How can you take credit for insulation ?!

I do give them credit for the new technology, though.

It sure does look like I'm nitpicking, but I'm genuinely interested in this now, at least for today :p

I won't go through everything and write about every single item on that page, there are things that NASA did invent, and they are due to Space programs, but I still think they could have been, no - would have been invented even without NASA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is sad news :(

Once the initial outlay was done to move material up there and set up a base there could be quite a few advantages.

Another possibility that New Scientist magazine had an article on was setting up a base on Phobos, a moon orbiting Mars. This could make it easier to send and control unmanned missions down to Mars. Currently control of Mars robots is very slow because you can't do it in real time, it's just too far away.

Seeing far back into the ancient past is important. Given the arguments people have over religion and where we come from, I can't imagine how anyone could claim this stuff doesn't matter to people.

That's not really a good argument anyway. Just because it's not important to most people does not mean it's not actually important. Most people are not able to think ahead as demonstrated by their poor decision making.

Space research and development has also led to many useful inventions and discoveries back here on Earth, a source of innovation would be cut off if NASA died.

I doubt many people would dispute that setting up a lunar colony wouldn't advance science. The point is that NASA's budget hasn't got smaller, instead of money being spent on manned flight it will be used for other projects. These other projects can yield far more in the fields of rocketry and exploration than a moon base ever could. There's so much we can do by increasing rocket payloads for example that I don't feel like we're wasting time by not pursuing manned space flight. We've done all we can in that area for the moment (unless funding gets increased drastically because operating a moon base on NASA's current budget would be impossible).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The moon would of made a great launch bed for getting in to deep space build a shuttle on the moon and launch from there uses less fuel and you can go furthe.

also we want to go to mars the moon is the perfect test place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

NASA isn't doing manned spaceflight. It doesn't mean nobody in the United States will be.

Look at Space Exploration Technologies, http://www.spacex.com NASA is funding their effort for a re-usable Progress-type cargo module, which can be fitted as a manned capsule. There is also at least two other companies with serious plans for manned orbital spaceflight, not including Virgin Galactic.

SpaceX's first launch of their Dragon module is currently scheduled for March 2010. The rocket, Falcon 9, just finished all its test firings. Its docking system was tested on STS-127.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't go through everything and write about every single item on that page, there are things that NASA did invent, and they are due to Space programs, but I still think they could have been, no - would have been invented even without NASA.

Ah, but they weren't. NASA created them or contributed to their creation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

It sure does look like I'm nitpicking, but I'm genuinely interested in this now, at least for today :p

I won't go through everything and write about every single item on that page, there are things that NASA did invent, and they are due to Space programs, but I still think they could have been, no - would have been invented even without NASA.

That's BS. The contributions NASA has made to science, engineering - and to just our basic understanding of our place in the Universe has been immense. Who says if we don't spend the money we'll be better off anyway? We'll be poorer as a species certainly, since our curiosity and willingness to explore is one of the most meaningful things we do - and in any case what else will we do with the money other than buy guns and bombs and squander it by fighting wars and invading other countries?

Personally I think it's tragic. It would be less tragic if we could believe Obama's plans that he wants to use the money to explore further afield. But he hasn't provided any means to do this. There's no planned replacement for the shuttle and no planned replacement for Constellation. Instead NASA it seems must depend on other countries, or on private enterprise (which is still a highly speculative thing) if it wants to go to space at all. The problem with this is that unless we're pushing to go somewhere, it's likely we will never go anywhere at all.

I don't mean this in any racist sense at all, but I do think it's possibly a little ironic that an African American has effectively cancelled the US human spaceflight program. I have often heard many African Americans say that they just didn't 'get' the whole idea of space and that the money would be better off spent at home 'feeding the poor' and on social programs. Well that's fair enough, but having a full belly isn't all that's useful about being alive. You can either be fed and remain ignorant, or always be hungry and desirous for more insight and greater levels of understanding. I know which I would prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.