Register to reply

Why haven't we gone back to the moon?

by DruidArmy
Tags: moon
Share this thread:
DruidArmy
#1
Sep1-14, 10:59 AM
P: 25
Why haven't we gone back to the moon? Seems like we could save a whole lot of money and time if we were to go back and explore the moon rather than going to mars. A lot of the questions posted here could be answered if we had gone back.

Why aren't you asking this question yourself?
Phys.Org News Partner Astronomy news on Phys.org
The Great Debate over whether the universe is small or large
Smallest known galaxy with a supermassive black hole found
Mystery of rare five-hour space explosion explained
x BlueRobot
#2
Sep1-14, 11:07 AM
P: 22
Mars is a more likely candidate for the existence of life.
DruidArmy
#3
Sep1-14, 11:50 AM
P: 25
We could build telescopes, radar, place radio reflectors, mine, set up self sustaining biospheres, etc, etc, etc. on the moon. Big waste of time and big money just to find a microbe on mars.

Shyan
#4
Sep1-14, 12:33 PM
Shyan's Avatar
P: 936
Why haven't we gone back to the moon?

Quote Quote by DruidArmy View Post
We could build telescopes, radar, place radio reflectors, mine, set up self sustaining biospheres, etc, etc, etc. on the moon. Big waste of time and big money just to find a microbe on mars.
You don't talk like someone interested in science!!!
Actually even laymen understand the importance of discovering extra-terrestrial life!
In fact the applications of those things that you mentioned are only important to scientists but extra-terrestrial life, in addition to being very important to scientists, is important to humanity!
Doug Huffman
#5
Sep1-14, 12:51 PM
P: 102
We, US, back to the Moon? Can't afford it due to descent to regression to the mean.
vociferous
#6
Sep1-14, 01:44 PM
P: 307
The short answer is, because the Apollo project had one primary goal: that the first man to walk on the moon be an American. When we realized the Soviets had no interest in sending Cosmonauts to the moon or anywhere else beyond low earth orbit, we stopped going.

When Kennedy committed to going to the moon, it was beyond our current level of technology. We had to commit huge resources into developing the technology to make it possible, and even then, it was still barely within our ability to accomplish. The Apollo program was successful not just because of good engineering, but because of a lot of good luck.

The huge advances in engineering and the modest advances in science that came out of the program were just bonuses for us. The impetus of the space-race was an international pissing contest to prove Capitalism superior to Communism.
phinds
#7
Sep1-14, 02:26 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,511
Quote Quote by vociferous View Post
The impetus of the space-race was an international pissing contest to prove Capitalism superior to Communism.
Exactly, and no one that cares much about what's happening here on Earth would like to see money pissed away on another manned moon mission. It's a pipe dream to think otherwise.
vociferous
#8
Sep1-14, 02:50 PM
P: 307
Quote Quote by phinds View Post
Exactly, and no one that cares much about what's happening here on Earth would like to see money pissed away on another manned moon mission. It's a pipe dream to think otherwise.
I would support a manned moon mission or base as a stepping stone to Mars. I do not think that there is much utility in sending people in the moon just to prove that we can still do it. Any manned mission to Mars, especially one to set up a long-term station or colony might involve a practice run on the moon, or even creating a station there to manufacture fuel or some other useful enterprise.
skeptic2
#9
Sep1-14, 03:22 PM
P: 1,822
Quote Quote by DruidArmy View Post
... set up self sustaining biospheres, etc, etc, etc. on the moon.
This is the crux of the problem. How would you set up a self sustaining biospheres? Don't forget the moon has a two week long night. Not many plants can survive without light and heat for that long. Artificial light and heat? Powered by what, solar energy? Same problem.

How would you build such a biosphere without heavy equipment and without a vast supply of oxygen and nitrogen? I suspect a base on the moon won't be possible without portable nuclear generators.
phinds
#10
Sep1-14, 03:26 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,511
Quote Quote by vociferous View Post
I would support a manned moon mission or base as a stepping stone to Mars. I do not think that there is much utility in sending people in the moon just to prove that we can still do it. Any manned mission to Mars, especially one to set up a long-term station or colony might involve a practice run on the moon, or even creating a station there to manufacture fuel or some other useful enterprise.
Yes, but all of that is a pipe dream for the next many decades despite what you read in the popular press and what some entrepreneurs would have us believe.
vociferous
#11
Sep1-14, 03:42 PM
P: 307
Quote Quote by phinds View Post
Yes, but all of that is a pipe dream for the next many decades despite what you read in the popular press and what some entrepreneurs would have us believe.
We have the technology. It is all a matter of funding and, at least for the Mars mission, concerns about human health on long-term space-travel and long-term exposure to a planet with no significant atmosphere and no magnetosphere.
phinds
#12
Sep1-14, 03:54 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,511
Quote Quote by vociferous View Post
We have the technology. It is all a matter of funding and, at least for the Mars mission, concerns about human health on long-term space-travel and long-term exposure to a planet with no significant atmosphere and no magnetosphere.
Yes, I agree (although I think you have lets off a lot of other concerns), and my statement stands.
DruidArmy
#13
Sep1-14, 05:21 PM
P: 25
Not sure I got a good answer as to why no one has returned to the moon.

There are many scientific reasons to return. Real scientists would have hundreds, thousands of things they could do there.

Funding? Who knows, but this is not a good reason, if we can afford to go to mars, we can afford to go to the moon. Please dont argue this one after we've spent billions and billions on space travel.


Simply set up a little moon base and generate your own electricity and oxygen.

My word, think how much more a telescope would reveal if based on the moon.

I can give many reasons to go there and so could you.

Perhaps its political reasons, ie. who would have the rights to anything mined or placed there.

Wouldn't it be nice to explore the dark side of the moon, the side we never see?

Just rocks from the moon, would probably pay for the trip if sold. Ha ha.

Anyway, I want us to return to the moon!

I agree, colonization of the moon or mars, is way off. But it sure would be cheaper and easier to do it on the moon rather than mars. I think the idea of a small moon base is doable with our current technology.
phinds
#14
Sep1-14, 05:30 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,511
Quote Quote by DruidArmy View Post
Not sure I got a good answer as to why no one has returned to the moon.
The answer is funding. Period.

Simply set up a little moon base and generate your own electricity and oxygen.
SIMPLY !!! Are you serious? I have to conclude that you REALLY haven't looked into this. Who do you think will pay for it and why?

Anyway, I want us to return to the moon!
Good for you. Become a multi-billionaire and try to pay for it.


I agree, colonization of the moon or mars, is way off. But it sure would be cheaper and easier to do it on the moon rather than mars. I think the idea of a small moon base is doable with our current technology.
Sure, but it STILL isn't going to happen. FUNDING !!!
Chronos
#15
Sep1-14, 05:31 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,494
The moon underscores just how expensive manned space travel is - even to our nearest neighbor. The prestige of being first on the moon simply did not and could not justify the enormous expense. In the past couple decades, the potential of helium 3 as a fuel source has prompted renewed interest in returning to the moon. Assuming the technological issues in unleashing He3 energy are resolved, lunar colonization will become economically viable. The US is not the only nation that recognizes this, or has the ability to act upon it. China is rapidly becoming a serious player in this arena.
SteamKing
#16
Sep1-14, 05:45 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 6,754
Quote Quote by DruidArmy View Post
Why haven't we gone back to the moon?
Who's we, Kemosabe?

As part of their muscular presence in the world, the Chinese have apparently established a national goal to put a Chinese astronaut on the moon.

Last year, the Chinese successfully landed a robotic probe on the lunar surface:

http://www.space.com/23968-china-moo...r-landing.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese...ration_Program

Now, the planned date for a manned landing of Chinese astronauts on the lunar surface is at least a decade away, but the goal is there if the Chinese government wishes to attain it. Right now, they don't seem to have any problems funding their space program.
DruidArmy
#17
Sep1-14, 06:16 PM
P: 25
We - means Earthlings.
DruidArmy
#18
Sep1-14, 06:18 PM
P: 25
How much does it cost? How much does any country have to spend? I doubt , anyone of us can answer these questions?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
I'm 18 and haven't had a GF yet Relationships 54
Why haven't we launched any artificial satellites that orbit the Moon? Astronomy & Astrophysics 7
Dutch Tax Haven Current Events 2
How is the energy transfered back to the Moon Astronomy & Astrophysics 3
So I haven't been here in a while... General Discussion 13