Thread Closed

moon landing

 
Share Thread Thread Tools
Jul13-04, 08:53 AM   #120
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus

moon landing


One thing to be said for manned missions...it inspires non-scientists' interest in science & the space program (y'know, the folks who are footing much of the bill). In the immortal words of Lockheed Martin (at least, by their new ad execs)..."To be human is to explore."

Of course, I realize/agree that much more can be accomplished with robotic missions at this stage in our space technology. But a little glory & pride can be a great motivator too.
 
Jul13-04, 09:28 AM   #121
 
Quote by Integral
Sending a man into space is not necessary to accomplish any meaningful science.
you do not think the spacestation is meaningful science ??
 
Jul13-04, 09:33 AM   #122
 
Mentor
Quote by bozo the clown
im not starting a rant i just got the feeling from integrals earlier posts that he feels there is too much money being spent on space exploration read more posts entropy before you jump to conclusions.
I pretty much share Integral's (and Dr. Park's) opinion, and you missed the point completely (as already mentioned). Integral's capitalization of the word "MANNED" was already pointed out, but lemme post for you a quote from the link (which you clearly didn't read):
It is not their view or mine that space exploration or research should be curtailed. On the contrary the opportunities for scientific discovery in the space program have never been greater. There is, however, almost universal concern among physicists that the priorities of the space program are seriously misplaced. Specifically, it is the official view of the American Physical Society that scientific justification is lacking for a permanently manned space station in Earth orbit.
Is that any clearer?

Now, this begs the question: where should the funding go? How about this: The Origins Program. Its one of the programs on the block due to Bush's ill-advised Mars initiative. IMO, its the single most important program NASA has - and it doesn't involve any manned missions (except maybe to launch the components).

edit:
you do not think the spacestation is meaningful science ??
Sigh. Are you reading anything we're posting/linking here? Yes, that is our position. If you disagree, there are a good half-dozen points made (which you have thus far ignored) that you can argue against.
 
Jul13-04, 09:34 AM   #123
 
Mentor
Quote by Phobos
One thing to be said for manned missions...it inspires non-scientists' interest in science & the space program (y'know, the folks who are footing much of the bill). In the immortal words of Lockheed Martin (at least, by their new ad execs)..."To be human is to explore."

Of course, I realize/agree that much more can be accomplished with robotic missions at this stage in our space technology. But a little glory & pride can be a great motivator too.
And that is, of course, the catch-22 to all of this. The only way around it (maybe) is through some pretty spectacular robot missions. The Mars rovers were good (what did they get, a billion hits on the website?), but how 'bout a Europa rover?
 
Jul13-04, 10:27 AM   #124
 
What I think is a waste of money are robotic missions costing billions of dollars piddling around the solar system probing planets that have absolutely no use to us. I mean who cares about the size of the debris in Saturn's rings.
If anything one should at least concentrate the money regarding Europa for a robotic mission.

According to NASA we will be going back to the moon using new craft that will be a lot more econmical. I was not born in 69 to see moon landing but I shall see the next one.
Bring it on.
 
Jul13-04, 11:44 AM   #125
 
What I think is a waste of money are robotic missions costing billions of dollars piddling around the solar system probing planets that have absolutely no use to us. I mean who cares about the size of the debris in Saturn's rings.
If anything one should at least concentrate the money regarding Europa for a robotic mission.
I do. We hardly understand how Saturn's rings and its 30+ moons are able to keep there orbit around the planet. If we can figure out how all these object have come to a stable orbit in this gravitational mess we could improve satellites, spacecraft landings/launchings, and learn about the nature of gravity itself.

Look NASA has good reasons for doing certain missions. Its not just "hey lets send a giant camera into space and take some pretty pictures!" Read up on some of NASA's current missions you have questions about and I think you'll find a scientific backing for it.
 
Jul13-04, 12:19 PM   #126
 
urm i think our current understanding of gravity out weighs working out the orbitals of Saturn, cassini is simply passing Saturn cause it may as well as part of its journey its discoveries regrading Saturn are just to satisfy the planet enthusiasts.
 
Jul13-04, 12:35 PM   #127
 
Mentor
Quote by bozo the clown
What I think is a waste of money are...
So what do you think we should do and what benefit would it have?
According to NASA we will be going back to the moon using new craft that will be a lot more econmical.
If we were to go back to the moon, the craft could be more economical. But so what? Why go back to the moon?
 
Jul13-04, 12:36 PM   #128
 
No your wrong. Maybe you should research it a little. We do not know how the rings of Saturn or some of it's moons mantain there orbits.
 
Jul13-04, 05:50 PM   #129
 
Mentor
Blog Entries: 9
Quote by bozo the clown
you do not think the spacestation is meaningful science ??
According to Dr. Park, everything that can be learning on the SSI has been learned. We have 20 yrs of data on the response of the human body to low gravity environments. Do you really think that there is any benifit to be had from 30yrs of data?

It is a shame that you can not read and respond objectivly to the infromation you are beening provided. So you think that I am simply anti space exploration..Period. This is simpy not the case. I have developed my views based on years of reading and my education. In my youth, I lived every minute of the Mercury, Gemni and Apollo programs, I watched and followed the development and early flights of the Shuttle (BTW, my older brother was part of the devleopment of some parts of Shuttle water recirculation systems). So I have followed manned space flights from the start, and even had some dreams of becoming a Mission specilist aboard the shuttle. My opinons are not blindly held nor have I always held them, they have been formed based on SCIENTIFIC fact. It is not an easy thing to drop deeply loved opinions, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
 
Jul13-04, 10:49 PM   #130
 
I have read the links and all these posts and I completely understand your point of views and on some parts I agree i.e when you mention inexhaustable energy supplies.
But I say to you, have you not spent money yourself on something in the pursuit of interest and wonder when you could have spent that money on something more productive.
By returning to the Moon then Mars we will procudce new technology that may benefit us in the long run it will be for me a fascinating spectacle, like I said earlier we can use money from the 'policeman of the world fund' to finance it.
entropy as for the garbage floating around Saturn it works on the same principals as garbage floating around any other planet does it not ?
 
Jul13-04, 11:25 PM   #131
 
Alright bozo, it seems to are completely inept to the point where you can do your own research. You don't even need to leave your computer. Go to google and type in "saturn's rings." BAM! Theres you're material.

http://ringmaster.arc.nasa.gov/saturn/saturn.html

The rings show a tremendous amount of structure on all scales; some of this structure is related to gravitational perturbations by Saturn's many moons, but much of it remains unexplained.
http://www.solarviews.com/eng/saturnrings.htm

Much of the elaborate structure of the rings is due to gravitational effects of nearby satellites. This phenomenon is demonstrated by the relationship between the F-ring and two small moons Prometheus and Pandora that shepherd the ring material. The F-ring shows a complex structure made up of two narrow, braided, bright rings along which "knots" are visible. Scientists speculate that the knots may be clumps of ring material, or mini moons.
In the mid 1980s Dr. Jeff Cuzzi noticed a wavy pattern in the ring material on both sides of the Encke gap. It was suggested that an unseen asteroid-sized moon in the gap caused the disturbance. Dr. Mark Showalter further analyzed the disturbance and used this "moonlet wake" pattern that resembled a motorboat wake, to determine the position and mass of the unseen body. The amplitude of the waves, he said suggested the mass of the unobserved object and the wavelength of the ripples revealed the moon's possible position. Using this mathematical model, Dr. Showalter was able to predict which Voyager images the moon would be in. In 1990 Dr. Showalter's work paid off and Pan was discovered within the Encke gap.
You see things aren't always so simple. When you have 30+ moons and those rings interacting the gravitational fields become complex and requires observation. See we don't know how Saturn rings mantain there orbits. You see just do a LITTLE research before you just assume things and go around acting like you know it all.
 
Jul14-04, 12:18 AM   #132
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Be nice. The question was innocent. Bozo is just trying to understand and participate in the conversation. My turn. We have limited [very limited] resources to spend to test theories and acquire new knowledge. People are very expensive cargo in space. They are fat and need life support. Machines do not. People do not cry when machines cease to function... unless you still have payments to make
 
Jul14-04, 01:04 AM   #133
 
hmm interesting bout those rings entropy maybe its not gravity, one explanation could be likened to a hula hoop dancer the dancer being saturn and the rings being the hoop.
 
Jul14-04, 07:41 AM   #134
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus
The hula hoop motion is determined by gravity and anglular motion. The angular motion is induced by couples induced by coordinated hip motions. Saturn has gravity and angular motion, but no hips.
 
Jul14-04, 11:37 AM   #135
 
Recognitions:
Gold Membership Gold Member
Science Advisor Science Advisor
Retired Staff Staff Emeritus
To all - - Let's keep this discussion a little more civil, please.

Quote by bozo the clown
What I think is a waste of money are robotic missions costing billions of dollars piddling around the solar system probing planets that have absolutely no use to us.
The gets into a debate of the practicality of pure research. Some people will argue that scientific research should only be conducted if there is a clear economic/health/etc. benefit. Others will argue that pure research is valuable in that it increases the overall body of scientific knowledge (a powerful, enabling thing) plus it can produce unexpected, practical benefits (e.g., new or spinoff technologies).

Understanding the other planets does have a use for us...it helps us understand our own planet. (I recommend starting a new topic if you want to pursue this point.)

I mean who cares about the size of the debris in Saturn's rings.
Certainly space enthusiasts, like the people in this forum, love this kind of stuff.

If anything one should at least concentrate the money regarding Europa for a robotic mission.
I think we all agree that a Europa mission is in order!

I think we all agree that a space program is good. The points being presented to you are simply that a bigger space program is possible when it is robotic (more science can be done). Given the huge expenses of a space program, it becomes necessary to closely examine the rationale for making something a manned or robotic mission.

I, for one, would love to see the first manned mission to Mars occur in my lifetime. The very idea is exciting. But I'm not really willing to sacrifice all the other great scientific programs to do so. Anyone want to triple NASA's funding?
 
Jul14-04, 02:26 PM   #136
 
Anyone want to triple NASA's funding?
Hell I say increase it 10 fold! Scrap some of are nuclear subs. Like we need to have a boat able to nuking half the world.
 
Thread Closed
Thread Tools


Similar Threads for: moon landing
Thread Forum Replies
Was the Moon Landing a Hoax? General Discussion 18
Landing on the moon General Discussion 22
faked moon landing (again...) General Discussion 0
moon landing General Discussion 9
Was the first moon landing a fake? General Astronomy 15