True. The human body isn't made for space. A human needs to take his environment with him in order to survive in space. For interstellar travel, there MUST be gravity, for example. People will die without it in the long run.
Mission to Mars
- Thread starter Deckerd
- Start date
True. The human body isn't made for space. A human needs to take his environment with him in order to survive in space. For interstellar travel, there MUST be gravity, for example. People will die without it in the long run.
Just because you don't like the bald truth doesn't make it an "unsupported dictum" whatever that's supposed to mean. A human being can survive on Earth except in the most extreme conditiions without any technology. A human being cannot do that in any other known environment in the solar system. I only said that comparing Earth exploration with space exploration was not valid, not that space exploration is not possible.
In any large camp like the supporters of space exploration, you will always have factions that don't agree on what should happen next. I could see three Elon Musk types, one of them funds the creation of a manned, scientific Moon base, another funds a permanent settlement on Mars, and a third funds a robotic asteroid mining operation. They might not "get along" as in agreeing about what should be done, but they acknowledge that space is big enough for multiple players and different priorities.
I just don't think it wise to bank on private systems--not buying Ayn Rand hoo-ha
In the news, some fusion progress we hope http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Support_Fusion_Propulsion_Research_999.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/bubble-fusion-could-be-real-prior-oak.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/07/darpa-funds-1-million-to-design-better.html
Deep asteroid scan
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/using-cosmic-ray-scattering-to-map.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/printing-biomaterials-out-of-thin-air.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/new-nasa-advanced-concepts-such-as.html
Deep asteroid scan-breakthroughs
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/using-cosmic-ray-scattering-to-map.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/printing-biomaterials-out-of-thin-air.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/new-nasa-advanced-concepts-such-as.html
http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?145508-The-world-according-to-Itskov
In the news, some fusion progress we hope http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Support_Fusion_Propulsion_Research_999.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/bubble-fusion-could-be-real-prior-oak.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/07/darpa-funds-1-million-to-design-better.html
Deep asteroid scan
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/using-cosmic-ray-scattering-to-map.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/printing-biomaterials-out-of-thin-air.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/new-nasa-advanced-concepts-such-as.html
Deep asteroid scan-breakthroughs
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/using-cosmic-ray-scattering-to-map.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/printing-biomaterials-out-of-thin-air.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/08/new-nasa-advanced-concepts-such-as.html
http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?145508-The-world-according-to-Itskov
Las Vegas is locate on top of a marsh, that why people have been living in the area for thousands of years. Under the city there is a rather extensive flood control system, heavy rains every year.
The reason the early city was built there in the first place is because the old steam trains stopped there for water.
Without technology the community would be much smaller, but people would be living there.
I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you suggesting that government agencies invented all the things you have linked articles on? A photo caption from the first article states: "Volatile NASA funding makes it vital that alternate sources of funds are obtained."
The US government has historically shown a great lack of foresight in many important technologies, scrambling to catch up when it is almost too late.
I don't think you actually understood anything I posted. It's quite remarkable in its own way.
Las Vegas is locate on top of a marsh, that why people have been living in the area for thousands of years. Under the city there is a rather extensive flood control system, heavy rains every year.
The reason the early city was built there in the first place is because the old steam trains stopped there for water.
Without technology the community would be much smaller, but people would be living there.
Without technology (starting with fire, etc) people would live in a cave in Africa. They could not have arrived at Las Vegas in the first place, nor could they have survived the cold nights/the winter, have had enough food, etc.
PS
Deckerd, apparently you can only come up with unsupported dictums - and ad personams.
DARPA/CERN are proof of the opposite. They gave us the internet.
People have this religion that private funding is any more stable.
The Dodgers were caught up in a nasty divorce proceeding
http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/...rank-mccourt-jamie-mccourt-reach-divorce-deal
Now, thankfully, it didn't get quite that nasty for Elon:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/29/divorce-wars-justine-musk_n_841761.html
But is easily could have.
You need a gov't institution that cannot be hurt by any one divorce, death, etc. Rickover was a major force in the founding of the Nuclear Navy, but le left a system whereby it would continue on after him.
A lot of folks talk about the problem being NASA centers looking out for themselves, "standing armies," etc..
But that is a benefit you see. These form constituencies that vote, and support space funding, even in areas opposed to gov't spending for other things.
Now imagine that all the NASA centers were put into one state--Florida being the best example. No more Houston control, MSFC, etc.
Then imagine if Musk made all the rockets.
You think--"Hey! That's smart! That will save money!"
That would be the worst thing to happen, in that NASA would just seem to be pork for that one state--and that one person--and funding my drop what with less folks looking out for it.
Social Engineering is very important.
After all, Musk may marry a Melinda Gates type one day who wants her man to dump space for food relief or something.
You don't rick humanities future in space that way. Now you may not always like the direction--but the breadth of support will always be there. What space needs isn't so much an Elon Musk, but a Curtis LeMay. A brazen military man who dared carve out his own branch of the service, making USAF the leading Pentagon budget customer.
Space advocates here in the USA are too nice by half.
The ruthless, Stalinist Soviet Chief Designers were never so retiring. Even though von Braun had more money to work with, rocket men actually rose higher in importance in the Soviet military. Nikita knew that he could spend less on trying to match America Blue Water Navy for Blue-water navy, bomber for bomber--if he supported missiles first and foremost.
Remember Ukraine's president poisoned by dioxin soup? His predecessor was one of Barmin and Utkin's men: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Kuchma
Asif Siddiqi, Bart Hendrixx and others wrote about Glushko--and one of his followers who worked on Energiya tried to overthrow yeltsin in a coup.
Over here, about as good as it ever got was Pete Worden. The USAF was so successful a pilot's union that space advocates got edged out.
We need an American Kuchma.A ruthless space advocate who will push for space like Rickover pushed for the nuclear Navy--like how LeMay pushed for the USAF. That is what we need--not Rand Simberg.
The closest we ever got to a Chief Designer was Mike Griffin--and I miss him.
Last edited:
These people seem way more ethical than the Mars One thing I just posted about. At least this one doesn't involve dying on Mars.
From the Fashionably Form-Fitting Spacesuit department, we have Mars Explorer Barbie.
