The Space Program

29 posts

Flag Post

The U.S and Europe spend large amounts each year into the exploration of Space.

I have no problem with this untill i consider the benifits of it and where that money could be going.

For example the money could be used for charity, or to stabalize the economy which is spiralling out of control.

It just seems like we dont need to advance into space yet when we have enough problems here on planet earth.

Please share your viewpoints, and i didnt write this to offend anybody.

 
Flag Post

I completely agree with you there has been 0 benifits from travelling to the moon. The money has been wasted

 
Flag Post

Unless they hope to meet a friendly alien species or kill a hostile one, it’s a waste. If there ever was life on Mars that will still be the case if and when we get hyperdrive technology.

 
Flag Post

There are some medical and technological advances that have been achieved thanks in part to the space program, but I don’t think they’re worth the money. The only way I can see the space program justifying its existence is if it eventually allows us to intercept an asteroid or something.

 
Flag Post

You could make exactly the same argument about building massive particle accelerators.

Personally, I think both are good ideas ;)

 
Flag Post

so you think risking the earth is a good idea?

 
Flag Post

Risking the Earth? This is progress. You sometimes have to risk things like money and even people (yes, I do tend to think that death sometimes is justified). People invest money in something hoping for it to become useful. That’s simple business.

 
Flag Post

maybe they explore space to get away from all the trouble on earth and to see if we can move on to a new planet that doesn’t have poverty and global warming on it.

 
Flag Post

You could make exactly the same argument about building massive particle accelerators.

I guess you could! I suppose getting knowledge for its own sake is fine, but I guess I’d prefer the money to be spent on something with more practical applications.

 
Flag Post

The space program is an absolute necessity and has given us huge leaps in technology we wouldn’t have had yet. By your criteria we’d only venture into space if everyone on the planet were happy and fed, and by that time the population size would be such that no one could be happy and fed. It’s clear that eventually some of us will leave Earth, and the space program is the groundwork to make that happen down the line. There’s a good argument that private industries will soon be the forefront of space exploration, and if that’s the case, more the better, but there will still need to be a non-profit just-for-science organization that continues its work.

 
Flag Post

^ thats a good stance to take…

 
Flag Post

>The space program is an absolute necessity and has given us huge leaps in technology we wouldn’t have had yet.

war calims the title of Mother of Invention. Not only violent conflict though – the space race does represent one facet of the cold war. Necessity seems hyperbolic to say the least, and it’s given us huge leaps in technology? While the space program research has provided us with useful results (along with all other areas of scientific research, to an amount according to the amount invested, I imagine) who’s to say we wouldn’t have benefitted as much or more if those minds and that money hadn’t been allocated to other ventures?

Exploring space and all that is great, but it’s not something taxpayers should be responsible for. Many Brits donated money towards our part in the mars effort by choice.

Funny story; the Americans spend millions of $ developing a pen that can write upside down. Everyone else uses pencils.

 
Flag Post

Funny story; the Americans spend millions of $ developing a pen that can write upside down. Everyone else uses pencils.

That’s actually an urban legend involving a pen company who wanted a good PR story.

Necessity seems hyperbolic to say the least, and it’s given us huge leaps in technology? While the space program research has provided us with useful results (along with all other areas of scientific research, to an amount according to the amount invested, I imagine) who’s to say we wouldn’t have benefitted as much or more if those minds and that money hadn’t been allocated to other ventures?

Ventures that someone else would just say was not worth it unless you were feeding the hungry. The point here is that the OP’s meaning was that any time or money not spent on directly solving a social or survival problem is wasted.

Here are some benefits the space program has given the world: http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

 
Flag Post

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2006/aug/06/ben_bova_nasa_has_given_us_much_more_moon_rocks_an/

Regardless of it’s comparatively low cost and economic benefit, I personally believe that NASA would be a completely justified organization even if it was nothing more than a hole in our collective pockets. The search for better understanding of our universe is well worth the money. Some ventures are quite worth it even if not economically beneficial.

 
Flag Post

The money is well spent, the entire economy of the western world is based on out sciences. Without continually pushing forward in those areas we simply cannot compete with the cheaper labour and materials in the rest of the world. Besides the direct benefits to our economies, supporting the leadership of large portions of our high-tech industries, it’s beneficial to humanity as a whole.

 
Flag Post

Funny story; the Americans spend millions of $ developing a pen that can write upside down. Everyone else uses pencils.

“Everyone” also gets graphite dust in their lungs, and broken pencil tips shorting out their electronics.

 
Flag Post

No one uses pencils, everyone uses specially made pens. This has been true for a long while now.
Pencils are far too dangerous.

 
Flag Post

I do know that we are having serious trouble with our economy, but with the advances in space exploration, we can be safe from whatever. In another thread we where talking about the end of the world in 2012, and it made me think that if we could just live somewhere else, we would have the chance of surviving everything. Scientists have already found a planet that would be suitable for human life, but all we have to do is get the technology to travel faster than light. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/may2007/plan-m29.shtml
It is estimated 20.5 lightyears away, and could be a good place to live with water, and a good temperature.
I am not saying that I beleive in this stuff, but it would be great to know that we have a place just in case the world does happen to have some trouble. Remember that there is a possibility of the destruction of the whole human race.

 
Flag Post

Unfortunately, traveling faster than light is the stuff of science fiction.

 
Flag Post

I know it seems impossible, but once we believed that we couldn’t fly, we proved that. We thought we could never get to the moon, we proved that. We thought breaking the sound barrier was impossible, we did that. And we also thought that creating anti-matter was impossible, but we did. It costs a bundle of money to create though. I wouldn’t be surprized if we go faster than light.

 
Flag Post

Yes, slasher, but at what cost? Twelve planes from the wright bothers crashing, the MASSIVE plants needed for antimatter?

 
Flag Post

most of are tech now are from space so without it mabye cancer will ever be cured thankjthat
about

 
Flag Post

Space exploration is expensive – primarily because of the energy it costs to escape the effect of gravity. But it’s not a question of money, it is our biological imperative for being aware of the space/time matrix to go out there and to colonise it.

To keep things in perspective, compare USA’s expenditure in Iraq ($1,300Bn 1 between 2002-2008) with NASA’s stipend ($108Bn 2 over the same period).

Yeh, I know… money well spent on bringing freedhum and democrashy to the Iraqi people at the expense of scientific knowledge and anthropic sustainability which half the US voters don’t seem to give a damn about.

1 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/16/AR2007111600865.html
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_budget

 
Flag Post

Nasa does some pretty cool shit, other than space exploration.

Take this video for instance:

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IT2AQC3X5bk&amp;hl=en" width="425" height="355"></embed>

 
Flag Post

I know it seems impossible, but once we believed that we couldn’t fly, we proved that. We thought we could never get to the moon, we proved that. We thought breaking the sound barrier was impossible, we did that. And we also thought that creating anti-matter was impossible, but we did. It costs a bundle of money to create though. I wouldn’t be surprized if we go faster than light.

It’s not the same – from both a physical and mathematical sense, traveling at a speed above that of light is impossible. While perhaps we’ll eventually be able to utilize wormholes or otherwise manipulate spacetime to our advantage (and thusly create “shortcuts” in the fabric of space – allowing traversal of the universe beyond the rate at which light would traditionally be able to traverse it), traveling at a velocity higher than that of light just doesn’t make sense; it would require literally infinite amounts of energy.