Commentary By Ron Beasley
I have been a big fan of science fiction for years. Not so much the movies but novels by scientists who understand that space is a very hostile place for carbon based life forms. As I pointed out here we don't know enough to even think about an expedition to Mars.
As you can see there are many obstacles that must be overcome before
we can even consider space travel far from earth. The best place to
solve these problems is in Earth's orbit. Instead of a trip to Mars the
resources should be invested in the International Space Station and new
platforms. That should also include capturing space objects for raw
materials and volatiles for manufacturing in space.We should continue to send robotic missions to Mars and beyond so we
will have as much knowledge as possible if and when we are ready for a
manned mission.
We need to learn what we need to know close to Earth. With our current knowledge and technology a trip to Mars could be a one way trip since after months and years of exposure to cosmic and solar radiation and weightlessness the astronauts would not live long after their return. And there is simply no reason for man to return to the moon - it was a propaganda stunt the first time and won't be anymore now. Yhere is so much wrong with this:
Obama Sees Manned Missions to Mars
President Barack Obama boldly predicted Thursday his new plans for space exploration would lead American astronauts on historic, almost fantastic journeys to an asteroid and then to Mars -- and in his lifetime -- relying on rockets and propulsion still to be imagined and built.
''I expect to be around to see it,'' he said of pioneering U.S. trips starting with a landing on an asteroid -- a colossal feat in itself -- before the long-dreamed-of expedition to Mars. He spoke near the historic Kennedy Space Center launch pads that sent the first men to the moon, a blunt rejoinder to critics, including several former astronauts, who contend his planned changes will instead deal a staggering blow to the nation's manned space program.
''We want to leap into the future,'' not continue on the same path as before, Obama said as he sought to reassure NASA workers that America's space adventures would soar on despite the impending termination of space shuttle flights.
And this is so wrong:
The Obama space plan relies on private companies to fly to the space
station, giving them almost $6 billion to build their own rockets and
ships. It also extends the space station's life by five years and puts
billions into research to eventually develop new government rocket ships
for future missions to a nearby asteroid, to the moon, to Martian moons
or other points in space. Those stops would be stepping stones on an
eventual mission to Mars itself.
How Republican of him - privatize space exploration. Privatization has been a disaster every where it has been tried and this would be no different. Obama sounds more like a Republican everyday.
Agreed, mostly. But it seems to me that spending some time on the moon is the logical first step in figuring out how to spend more time in space and perform the daily needs of human life.
ReplyDeleteI think that the moon is where it's at: doable but still a great challenge that could be a place where nations come together as humans.
As for Mr. Obama's plans, i pretty much tune them out at this point. I cannot convince myself that he has the best interests of his constituents at heart, so even when the words sound good, i assume that they're hollow.
I generally agree with your argument, but you're wrong about the necessary length of a mission to Mars. The VASIMIR engine now being tested is theoretically capable of getting us to Mars in 39 days if powered by an on-board nuclear reactor.
ReplyDeleteBut, of course, that kind of technology is going to have to be tested and deployed first in near-Earth orbit, so your basic point remains.
I have been a big fan of science fiction for years. Not so much the movies but novels by scientists who understand that space is a very hostile place for carbon based life forms. As I pointed out here we don't know enough to even think about an expedition to Mars
ReplyDeletePerhaps. But then again, we really had no idea what we were doing when Apollo started up. We are more prepared to send a man to Mars now than we were to send a man to a moon in 1951.
How Republican of him - privatize space exploration. Privatization has been a disaster every where it has been tried and this would be no different.
But it might just work here. The essay to read on this count (and I really cannot recommend it enough for anybody interested in the slightest on issues of space exploration) is Radn Simberg's piece for the New Atlantist, A Space Program For the Rest of Us." It is a long read, but it is worth it.
Oops. Meant to write "1961" there.
ReplyDeleteVirginauts!
ReplyDeleteIf private companies are going to be launching rockets into space I would like to suggest their employes are members of the Space Workers Union of Planet Earth. When the Sago Space Mining Corporation decides to launch there had better be some freaking oversight.
ReplyDeleteRon, I put up a post just now inspired by the link left by commenter T. Greer above. It's not as "Republican" as you might imagine. I rather like what Simberg says and how he presents his ideas. You might want to take a look.
ReplyDeleteI will be watching to see how the Grand Old Party of NO tries to come against notions what so loudly they hailed at the twilight's last gleaming.