- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Proposed Moon Mission Offers Little Value at Astronomical Cost
Posted on 2/10/18 at 7:32 am to OMLandshark
Posted on 2/10/18 at 7:32 am to OMLandshark
quote:
It's estimated that for every dollar spent on NASA that there is an $8.00 to $10.00 return
NASA concluded otherwise. From the Scientific American link:
quote:
In January 1993 NASA released an internal study that examined technology spin-offs from previous missions. According to the study, “NASA's technology-transfer reputation is based on some famous examples, including Velcro, Tang and Teflon. Contrary to popular opinion, NASA created none of these.” The report concluded that there had been very few technology-transfer successes at NASA over the previous three decades.
1
Posted on 2/10/18 at 7:34 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Here's the thing, and this will always be true, no one gives a shite about space flight if it doesn't involve a human being.
Plenty of people tuned in to watch Falcon Heavy.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 7:40 am to foshizzle
quote:
Plenty of people tuned in to watch Falcon Heavy.
Well, in fairness everyone knows it's a step toward manned flight.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 8:31 am to colorchangintiger
quote:
The amount of data we're able to gather ourselves is a thousand fold vs. unmanned missions.
That’s not even close to being accurate. At the end of the day humans would be using tech to gather data anyways, but that data can be gathered far cheaper by not requiring a human to be there to gather it.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:06 am to DavidTheGnome
I get what you are saying, but you are missing the forest through the trees. Yes, knowledge of the universe is a primary goal of space exploration, but the end game will always be getting man over the next horizon, and you can only develop this tech adequately with manned missions.
Of course unmanned missions will continue to play a huge role, but to say there's no room for manned missions is asinine.
Of course unmanned missions will continue to play a huge role, but to say there's no room for manned missions is asinine.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:12 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:And the advancement of artificial gravitational systems requires humans to be involved. We cannot gather the data on how the human body reacts in prolonged exposure to certain situations without, well, exposing the human body to certain situations.
That’s not even close to being accurate. At the end of the day humans would be using tech to gather data anyways, but that data can be gathered far cheaper by not requiring a human to be there to gather it.
We know what zero gravity does to human beings. We need manned missions for multiple reasons. One of them is to work out the question involved with generation of gravity while in space.
There is a place for both for an infinite number of reasons.
This post was edited on 2/10/18 at 9:14 am
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:23 am to J Murdah
How do you save money launching from moon? Don’t the supplies and humans originate from earth? So now you have a launch from earth to moon then from moon to mars. Moon to mars is easier but you still had to launch from earth.
Serious question.
Serious question.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:24 am to Scruffy
quote:
And the advancement of artificial gravitational systems requires humans to be involved. We cannot gather the data on how the human body reacts in prolonged exposure to certain situations without, well, exposing the human body to certain situations.
The need to simulate gravity just proves my point though. Creating a structure that spins requires a lot of mass and energy for what is essentially a life support feature. Unmanned wouldn’t require this. You get so much more bang for your buck when you don’t have to worry about life support.
One day we may have an affordable way off this planet. Until then it doesn’t make sense.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:26 am to DavidTheGnome
Tchump is an arse-clown. Let him man the next mission back to the moon and leave his ignorant arse there and sever all communications with the vessel. Let the next born child in the US immediately become President. Win for the US, especially in terms of both intellect and maturity.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:40 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
One day we may have an affordable way off this planet. Until then it doesn’t make sense.
That's the thing. The firsts for anything are expensive, but as you continue to do it, you get more efficient at it and can even eventually develop a cheap template. Better propulsion systems are going to come about because we are thinking about how to get man farther out in our universe not a robot. Even though we will definitely test it on something unmanned first.
And today, there's no way an unmanned probe can do the same research as an actual human. The day AI can equal or better humans in total decision making capabilities, we will be running into some other potentially species threatening problems.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 9:43 am to Guess
quote:
The day AI can equal or better humans in total decision making capabilities, we will be running into some other potentially species threatening problems.
That day is already here.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 10:02 am to Scruffy
Can y'all imagine how bad the HR Department would be on a moon base? I'm going with robots.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 10:05 am to DavidTheGnome
It's coming, but not here yet unless some AI is playing possum. I said total decision making. A super computer may be able to beat Kasprov at chess or become a Jeopardy champion, but those same computers often struggle with basic things a six year old could handle.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 11:28 am to lsu13lsu
quote:
How do you save money launching from moon? Don’t the supplies and humans originate from earth? So now you have a launch from earth to moon then from moon to mars. Moon to mars is easier but you still had to launch from earth.
Serious question.
A huge portion of the weight and fuel of getting things into space is actually due to the weight of the fuel itself.
The moon 1/6th the gravity of earth and also lacks the friction causing atmosphere that earth has =less fuel is needed to launch from the moon.
The moon is Also is rich in ice which can be converted to hydrogen-oxygen propellant there and used for fuel. That’s the huge draw.
Yes, you have to get things to the moon first, that’s obvious. But once you’re set up with a facility that can make fuel, you allow yourself to create a self-sustaining environment that can launch at < 1/6 of the cost and make its own fuel on the fly. Which allows much more resources to be spent on exploring, mining, etc.
It’s an investment initially that will pay dividends once it’s established.
The main financial goal is the mining of prescious metals and helium-3 which are getting harder to find on earth but are abundant on the moon/asteroids. That will pay for itself
Posted on 2/10/18 at 11:31 am to foshizzle
quote:
NASA concluded otherwise. From the Scientific American link:
It's putting everything into the equation. Your iPhone is thanks to technology that was built by NASA for the Apollo missions. When you really think it through, I don't think its asinine to say it.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 11:33 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
agree there is fuel there, I disagree that maintaining a moon base to extract it saves us money.
What type of fuel is on the moon?
Posted on 2/10/18 at 12:18 pm to Sparkplug#1
Hydrogen and oxygen via ice.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 12:39 pm to DavidTheGnome
Curiosity has been on Mars for a decade. A human would be able to gather more new info in the first 30
Minutes than it has for the past 10 years.
Minutes than it has for the past 10 years.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 12:44 pm to colorchangintiger
quote:
Curiosity has been on Mars for a decade. A human would be able to gather more new info in the first 30 Minutes than it has for the past 10 years.
You’re right, at many thousands of times the price.
Posted on 2/10/18 at 12:45 pm to DavidTheGnome
Would you post this if Hillary were president?
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News