Besides the moral obligation to give our children the stars, you also need to remember that space exploration is the only governmental program that has paid for itself, and it has repayed said investment a thousand-fold. You can’t escape the spin-offs of the space race. There are hundreds of things you use everyday that, at one point in their development, were part of the space program.
On top of that little fact, even if you regard the space program as pure research…so what? Pure research has always paid off in human history. Maybe not in the manner originally thought, but it always has. No reason to think that it will be any different this time.
Ad astera per aspera!
By the way, I have absolutely no problem with Manifest Destiny writ large. Not one little bit.
Precisely. So why waste the resources for a manned flight when you can do more working out of the basic problems and do more exploration currently with unmanned?
I’m not permanently against manned flights. I just think that at this time they’re a waste of time, money and resources.
No, not being confrontational. I saw your post and it made me want to ask a question. You just tried to avoid answering it- and apparently don’t know of any. No big deal, it was just a question.
I know of plenty, but they’re mostly along the patriotic/propaganda lines, and encouraging people to become engineers and the like. I don’t regard that as important as “useless” things like Medicare.
In my opinion, it is mostly a big whopping waste of time and resources. There might be some limited commercial applications, such as mining of extremely rare metals or something in the immediate vicinity of earth. But there will never be interstellar space travel or anything like it. This isn’t like when everyone speculated about breaking the sound barrier, with wild guesses about the issue coming from everywhere. It is known — with a capital K — that you will never approach the speed of light, and therefore you won’t be going anywhere. And even if Q himself hurled you somewhere far away, you would still face the exact same problems of your sun expanding and burning you up. And finally, there will be nowhere to go when the universe either collapses into a singularity or expands into absolute entropy. It is hopeless hopeless hopeless, so forget about it. Even terraforming Mars is far too problematic. Because of its weak magnetic field, it cannot hold onto an atmosphere even if you create one with greenhouse gasses. The sun will blow it away. And you really haven’t gone far enough to escape the sun’s expansion anyway. The only way, barring supernatural intervention, that anything like human space colonization will be accomplished is if it turns out that the universe is not uniformly the same everywhere and does not “obey” the same physical laws everywhere, and if that is the case, then long journeys are just a crap-shoot at best. You won’t know what will happen to your ship when you enter B-space. Besides, man’s problem isn’t where he is because no matter where you go, there you are. If he is to progress, he needs to look within, not without.
While I am sure science has much more to discover, I’m also sure that there are realistic physical limitations - ie, we won’t find wormholes or FTL travel. Though it does make for some interesting science fiction, I have a feeling it will be looked back upon as more akin to the Egyptian’s life after death model. :-p
As far as Mars goes, I agree that it would be more of a bear to terraform than our dreams hope it to be. Also, if we can achieve terraforming on a global level, we’ll be able to control Terra’s atmosphere much more easily. Mars is a pipedream, as far as colonization goes. Oh, I’m sure it is POSSIBLE to do, on a limited level, but it would be more of a giant space station than Earth 2. Ditto with Luna.
In the end, that’s an awful lot of money to spend on something useless like finding out what %age of gasses Saturn is made out of or somesuch. I’d rather put all those eggheads to work on reversing desertification and rising salinity levels, and funnel that money into social programs.
Not until I have some reason to believe there are other races. Which is possible, but the Drake Equation has too many unknown and imponderable variables in it for us even to make an educated guess at this point. But we can be fairly certain there is no non-terrestrial life in this solar system. So if we start exploring and colonizing, we won’t be despoiling any other biosphere’s natural habitat. No need to let moral considerations stop us, not until we reach a star system that actually has indigenous life.
Probably not, but then the life on this planet we don’t leave unmolested, either. The only way we could do that is kill ourselves now so that everything else on the planet can ‘live in harmony’ as you seem to suggest.
[/QUOTE]
My sense of justice doesn’t stop at the human race. Can you say the same?
[/QUOTE]
Mine pretty much does and it would also include any other ‘sentient’ races out there, as long as they don’t come to Earth and get all uppitty. But then I can tell the difference between a sea urchin and a human and know why one is usually worth more than the other.
I also want us to solve our social problems, and restore the health of Earth’s biosphere, Zagadka. But has it not occurred to you that the solutions to some of those problems might be waiting for us out there? There’s a slogan of spaceflight advocates, which I’ve sometimes seen on message-buttons at science-fiction conventions: “The surface of a planet is no place for an expanding industrial civilization!” In other words, if we have to have an expanding industrial civilization (and I know many environmentalists question even that assumption), is it a good idea to conduct all our industrial operations on a planet that has finite resources and a finite capacity to absorb industry’s waste-products? Why not move it all into orbit, or even further away?
What kind of industrial application would be worth that kind of shipping cost? :-p
Yes, we have finite resources, but are you proposing creating industrial plants and mining operations on Mars, manufacturing goods, and shipping them back to Terra? Not only do we have a once-in-15-years window of opportunity for travel, the expense of setting up such an operation would be mind-boggling. As someone above said, it would be easier to mine Antartica.
As far as shooting our industrial waste products into the sun or deep space… I’m fine with that, provided you can find an efficient delivery system. As I understand it, the tonneage/cost ratio is far, far, far, far too high to make space a valid disposal medium (and that is just for getting it TO space, we’d need to spend more to move it sufficiently far away from Terra so it isn’t a danger).
Everything that can be invented has been invented."–Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
Charles there, he knew what he was talking about. A real forward thinker him. Kind of like you.
Or, because of its lower gravity, you could build massive bio-domes that could cover entire cities. It would probably not be any worse than living in Tokyo, or some similar place. As to why you’d want to do it? Well, why would you want to live in Tokyo?
Why is it a choice between one and the other. If you want to navel gaze that is your business, is in not? Me I’d like to see people on other planets, because there are too many people living on this planet still living in the dark ages and willing to drag us down to their level. They probably wouldn’t be allowed on a place like Mars, at least for a long time.
We aren’t talking about future inventions. We’re talking about LAWS of physics and thermodynamics and crap. If someone comes up with something that breaks the very laws of science, we have a few more problems than space travel.
Out of what? Bubblene?
Because there are jobs there?
If you want to stargaze, that is your business. I’d rather feed everyone on the planet.
Wait… you want space colonization so you can get your superior culture away from the barbarians? Sickening.
In the early decades of space colonization, the colonizing population almost certainly would be very limited and very selective – to officers, scientists, technicians, professionals – highly educated people. Immigrants to a given area usually adapt themselves to the culture of people who were living there earlier – the doctrine of “first effective settlement.” E.g., the early Englsih white settlers in America destroyed the indigenous Indians – but they did settle down and create their own “hearth culture” on the ground, and later waves of non-English immigrants mostly assimilated that culture. The first space colonists in our solar system (where there are no indigenous cultures to destroy) would establish a “hearth culture” that would set the tone for civilization there, and later, more indiscriminate waves of emigrants would adapt themselves to that culture. And it would be a very stable, highly scientifically literate culture – superior, in those respects, to many cultures now thriving on Earth (regardless of whether the space people mostly speak English, or Japanese, or Spanish, or Mandarin, or Hindi, or Arabic). Furthermore, space is a harsh environment where stupidity, ignorance and carelessness all are equally likely to kill you, and that wouldn’t change for several decades; which would reinforce the highly intelligent and realistic nature of space-based culture. So space-based society would, I think, be especially resistant to the waves of ignorant popular enthusiasms that at times threaten to destroy Earth-based societies. No jihads in space! At least, not for a very long time yet, not until extraterrestrial planets are terraformed to the point where fools can thrive. Which makes space ideal as a stable, lasting refuge for human civilization, no matter how stupid things get here on Earth.
