Sights are off the moon, and maybe put away for good.

  • News
  • Thread starter MotoH
  • Start date
  • #126
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
176
Scientist eyes 39-day voyage to Mars

Franklin Chang-Diaz, a former astronaut and a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), says

...His rocket would use electricity to transform a fuel -- likely hydrogen, helium or deuterium -- into plasma gas that is heated to 19.8 million degrees Fahrenheit (11 million degrees Celsius). The plasma gas is then channeled into tailpipes using magnetic fields to propel the spacecraft.

That would send a shuttle hurtling toward the moon or Mars at ever faster speeds up to an estimated 35 miles (55 kilometers) per second until the engines are reversed.

Chang-Diaz, a veteran of seven space missions, said this rapid acceleration could allow for trips of just 39 days instead of the current anticipated round trip voyage to Mars that would last three years, including a forced stay of 18 months on the Red Planet, as astronauts await an opening to return to Earth...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100226/tsc-scientist-eyes-39-day-voyage-to-mars-e123fef.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #127
YES! I'm so glad this nation is going to spend less money on stupid space exploration! Exploring space is stupid, there are too many problems here on earth. Its like, what are we going to find out there that is so important?
 
  • #128
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
185
80
That is the Mercury space suit, not meant for OVA's.:tongue2: They had concepts for suits on the science channel a long while ago, and they basically had a lot more swivels, and something else. Meh my memory is mercury.
Actually, that looks like Neil Armstrong in a Gemini space suit.

Space suits are good. They come in handy sometimes. Soyuz 11.
 
  • #129
2,985
15
YES! I'm so glad this nation is going to spend less money on stupid space exploration! Exploring space is stupid, there are too many problems here on earth. Its like, what are we going to find out there that is so important?
We should, like, spend it on English classes. This kind of comment belongs on the bottom of a Youtube video....
 
  • #130
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14
We could find large amounts of a resource that's rare here...
 
  • #131
19
1
We could find large amounts of a resource that's rare here...
Unobtanium perchance? :tongue2:
 
  • #132
37
2
Unobtanium perchance? :tongue2:
:rofl:

Why would it be a good thing if we found a resource in space that was rare on Earth?

It'd probably still cost more to go and mine it from the location in space than it would be to search for it and dig it up.
 
  • #133
19
1
Are meteors farmed from the asteroid belt worth just as much as ones that have impacted earth?
 
  • #135
19
1
Is anyone willing to help me build a rocket?
 
  • #137
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14
I'll help, Moto, but I'm broke. You'll have to buy the liquid oxygen and hydrogen.
 
  • #139
37
2
Is anyone willing to help me build a rocket?
Count me in... rofl. It can't be THAT hard to make a rocket to go to the Asteroid belt and capture a asteroid and bring it back home safely.

1/2km might be a small distance but that's a huge freaking piece of rock to capture lol.
 
  • #140
19
1
as long as we bring enough fuel to put it into a steady orbit around earth we will be fine!

We need someone who can calculate all of this, so mgb_phys, welcome to Op: BRBABTEFM.

The name of the rocket has already been decided on being called "Executor" after the name of Vaders flagship.
 
  • #141
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
13
A 1/2km sphere of nickel/iron would be about 2million tons
At $50,000/kg for the shuttle to put metal up there, it's worth an extra $100Bn to leave it in orbit.

To the poster complaining about wasting money in space, for the $700Bn admitted hand out to wall st - you could put 15million tons of iron into GTO with a fleet of shuttles or 50M tons using commercial launchers.
Not sure why you would to do this - but it probably makes more sense than giving it to Wall St.
 
Last edited:
  • #142
19
1
Well we can shop around while we are out there. There has to be asteroids with shiny bits on them that people will pay big bucks for!
 
  • #143
37
2
why so much? i thought most of NASAs costs were from labour.
 
  • #144
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"
 
  • #145
37
2
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"
Did any of these people see fortunes of their inventions during their lifetimes? :tongue:
 
  • #146
2,985
15
Some of the world's greatest inventions have happened when people said "screw cost-benefit, let's do it anyway!"
I'm curious as to what inventions in particular you had in mind.
 
  • #147
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14
Well... I'm sure someone did... just because I can't think of any doesn't mean there are none...

Seriously, though. Why go for a measly asteroid? I've heard rumors that Jupiter's core is a giant diamond. Go for THAT.

Hmm... guns couldn't have seemed very profitable at first...
 
  • #148
19
1
No, Jupiters core is a colony of Monoliths.

I for one like it to be completely dark at night, and not have a second sun where Jupiter used to be.


2010 references if anyone caught them!
 
  • #149
2,985
15
Well... I'm sure someone did... just because I can't think of any doesn't mean there are none...

Seriously, though. Why go for a measly asteroid? I've heard rumors that Jupiter's core is a giant diamond. Go for THAT.

Hmm... guns couldn't have seemed very profitable at first...
Let's not talk, for the sake of talking.
 
  • #150
skippy1729
A 1/2km sphere of nickel/iron would be about 2million tons
At $50,000/kg for the shuttle to put metal up there, it's worth an extra $100Bn to leave it in orbit.

To the poster complaining about wasting money in space, for the $700Bn admitted hand out to wall st - you could put 15million tons of iron into GTO with a fleet of shuttles or 50M tons using commercial launchers.
Not sure why you would to do this - but it probably makes more sense than giving it to Wall St.
Everything he said. +1

The total NASA budget 1958 to 2008 was only $416 billion, currently less than $20 billion per annum. It is nothing next to the wasteful spending habits of our Congress.

The question is who will survive longer: Earth or Homo Sapiens. Our days on Earth are numbered, of course we have no clue as to what the number is. 10 years, 100 years, a billion years?? Someday our descendants must leave or perish. I feel a greater moral obligation to pursue this goal than some new government giveaway to buy special interest votes or campaign contributions.

The ancient Romans used to buy votes but they had the decency to do it with their own money. Our elected officials continue the custom but do it with other peoples money. To cut the miniscule space budget for the sake of political grandstanding is shameful.

Welcome to the third world.
 

Related Threads on Sights are off the moon, and maybe put away for good.

  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
75
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
671
  • Last Post
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
Replies
12
Views
20K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
Top