Slashdot Mirror
NASA Policy Includes Mars, Moon Missions
TopSpin writes "The US House of Representatives passed a bill establishing NASA policy for the next two years. The bill is seen as an endorsement of President Bush's Vision for Space Exploration, including returning man to the Moon and eventually Mars. The House struggled with compromising other NASA initiatives against new manned exploration, eventually deciding to expand the budget enough to accommodate both prerogatives. The bill also endorses a servicing and repair mission to the Hubble Space Telescope."
I also think NASA ought to prepare the american people by making it clear human lives will be lost in this endeavor. With the last two disasters (Columbia and Challenger) each time it setback their mission years. In an industry such as this people must be made to understand it's not an accident, rather a probability.
"Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
was "man" captured from the moon?
What does your Credit Report look like?
So NASA is supposed to do all that in two years? or will the expenditures carry on until the next president has another "vision"?
What NASA does (or perhaps is forced to do) is waste money, because everybody knows none of these grandiose plans will ever occur. The Mars mission will be international or won't be at all, because there's no cold war to justify n-times the cost of sending some bozo to Mars where robots do just as well for cheaper.
So, like Slashdot just told me very accurately, nothing for you to see here, please move along.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
We can't return man there - that'd mean we were there to begin with.
.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
And, as we all know, the "Moon" is a ridiculous liberal myth.
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
NASA cant even get that off the ground and they expect to goto mars and the Moon ?
they probably could with a decent budget, but the military is more important in USA, killing people produces visible results, NASA on a crap budget backed by Bushes rhetoric will never achieve it
Not programmes. If you pay for programmes, you get programmes, not results.
Seriously, this is basically how all successful exploration has proceeded in the past.
Deleted
Politics, indeed. Since this is only one of the hurdles in getting the budget NASA needs to fulfill the promises by this administration, I am still wary. Ill believe it when I see cold hard funding translated into actual projects.
There is truth in humor.
"The bill is seen as an endorsement of President Bush's Vision for Space Exploration, including returning man to the Moon and eventually Mars."
Returning man to the Moon is nothing but returning man to Mars is what I really look forward. You are a true visionary, Mr. President.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
The way I see it, in order to get to mars, we are going to have to use the moon as a sort of launchpad. (Yes of course we could do it otherwise, but not as efficiently or as often, assuming we want to make it into a regular thing.)
Sloshdat Dictionary: peak - see pique. pique - see peak.
Oh well, what the hell...
I have to ask, why do we need to go back to the moon? Is there any real, scientific reason for it, or is it just our dear president trying to keep people's minds off other things with another moon mission?
How can man be "returned to Mars" when he has never been there?
Oh wait, are you one of those people who believe the supposed microbes found on that one Mars rock proves that all life on this planet descended from an ancient Martian civilization?
If you live in America, how can you justify that statement? The whole reason you're here is because someone thought it would be a good idea to traverse dangerous terrain at considerable risk and expense and evidently, liked it enough to stay. (and yes I count native americans in that group as well. Walking across a land bridge in the sub-arctic couldn't have been easy or cheap.)
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
... think about it; its been more than THIRTY YEARS.. there must have been more reason for going than beating the Russions = \
We need to get out there; the Moon and Mars offer vast, unused living space (provided we can set up appropriate life-support, which I feel we could), and the asteroid belt is a virtually unlimited supply of all kinds of minerals/metals used in industry today.
What's the hold-up?!
Neither Mars nor the Moon were available to comment.
You can't handle the truth.
Think of the irony that the resources we spend on trying to find new places to explore or colonize
Yes, if we weren't spending it on space missions we'd use that money to feed the starving, and to foster cute bunny rabbits and bring joy into people's lives. Or to build bigger bombs. Could go either way.
I must admit I am an angry American. Why don't we first fix our health-care, education and economic systems before we tackle the moon and Mars? As our infrastructure crumbles, and our schools decline, and we continue to export [manufacturing] jobs, not forgetting senseless wars we are fighting abroad with mounting casualties, it saddens me to see that our president and his administration do not see what needs to be fixed first. Do not forget that he once mentioned "...bring them on...they will soon hear from us...our only option is victory...we want him dead or alive...mission accomplished...! Mind you, this was more than 18 months ago! Some think we are bogged into a senseless war with no end! But we are spending US$ 1 billion per week on war while we have tax paying citizens without health-care coverage, and China is financing our spending by buying out bonds and T-bills.
I suggest the following: Let's explore the oceans looking for new life. Maybe that way, we might find sources for new drugs. I know my call is falling on deaf ears, but I am glad I said it.
It saddens me that our companies like Kodak, Ford, GMC and Boeing are becoming more irrelevant by the day, while Toyota, Nissan, Mazda and others are eating our cake. Our companies are already not as relevant in the electronics field. Where will our grandsons be?
Applying your example to Mars, that only strengthens my thoughts that it would be better to be the second colony to land than the first.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
as they say in Texas
which describes Bush and his "visions" perfectly
http://moon.google.com/
It may be a 'tear down that wall' thing. Reagan says it, later it happens, Reagan gets credit. GW says 'to the moon and mars!', later it happens, GW gets credit. It doesn't matter whether he contributes anything to the achievement, it's enough that he said it. Decades from now when humans land on Mars Republicans will say, "We owe this to the vision of G.W. Bush all those years ago."
Loose lips lose spit.
Nasa is by it's very nature too afraid to move on anything this quickly. To date, they've been too concerned with the possible loss of human life. if you look through history, america has made great progress riding on the corpses of great men who gaves their lives to the progress of success. Nasa should follow in these footsteps and begin launching rockets more often, with more emphasis on getting to the moon and staying there. Yes, i know i'm ripping on them, and they have done a lot. But oh well.
for free wallpapers, visit Sargosis.com
One day humans will set foot on Mars, but what should the new catch phrase be? "One small step..." was brilliant, but we'll have to do something new this time around. Any ideas?
to great places for Bush and Cheney to hide
It's always better/easier to be the second to something: its not longer unknown territory so you can spend your resources on precisely what you want to do, rather than exploring the possibilties...
Think of the irony that the resources we spend on trying to find new places to explore or colonize hundreds or thousands of years down the road would greatly increase the standard of living for the world's poor today?
If you want to increase the standard of living for the world's poor, why are you interested in the comparatively minor spending on exploration? The amount spend on space exploration and research is, and has always been, insignificant compared to the spending on defence, for example. Why not cut back on weapons spending and research? To suggest cutting back on space research is a silly as to suggest cutting back on education, when you consider how much money is spend elsewhere.
Our planet cannot support 6.5 billion people all living at the consumption rate of the USA. We need to find new places to colonize BEFORE we greatly increase the standard of living for the world's poor.
Federal, legislative support of NASA is refreshing given the saddening decline over the past decade. What I, however, would most like to see, is a collaborative effort between NASA and the fledgeling private sector space initiatives. Scaled Composities of X-Prize fame has some wonderful, far-sighted ideas. A collaborative effort might truly be the impetus for progress.
On another note, who here feels that there is a place for community-based, (OSS??) space projects? Precedent shows that grassroots efforts can and do work.
I am truly interested: what do slashdotters think?
Think? Yes
"Greatly increase the standard of living for the world's poor"
So would throwing huge ammounts of money/resources at the poor fix the problem? Tell me how to translate resources into "encouraging education and intelectual development, and tollerance", and I would agree that government funds such as these should be routed towards it.
Blind statements of "let's save the world first" are pretty ironic. Save the world from what? The world is what it is. We cannot create a utopia, becasue not everyone can agree on what that is. Yes, we can clean up our backyard, and *some* resources should go to that, but not all.
Manned space exploration is not something you do instead of cleaning up the situation, it is something you do in addition to. Programs such as this create the demand for the educated, because it is something that people WANT, and like to see.
Is it really true?
They'll keep Hubble in service? The article doesn't sound positive on that.
Maybe it's because the space shuttle isn't as reliable as first envisioned, but this is where Nasa could score; by offering monetary assistance to competing outside engineering firms who would come up with design improvements.
Maybe scrapping the shuttle is not realistic, but a redesign is.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_11
According to the HBO mini-series From the Earth to the Moon, Michael Collins made the following suggestion as to what Armstrong should say upon stepping onto the lunar surface: "If you had any balls, you'd say 'Oh, my God, what is that thing?' then scream and cut your mic."
Suppose that by making the world a better place and encouraging education, intellectual development and tolerance ... - it's just much easier to go to the Moon, Mars and Uranus combined than to do what you are proposing. And it is easier to measure what has been done by going somewhere than by changing life on this planet.
You can't handle the truth.
Mooo hooo Haa Haaa haaa (eeevile laugh)
It's the mind controll ray! It worked.
Maybe no one listens to you because you mistake a YODA quote for a SPOCK quote. I dont know how close your cradle was rocked to the wall but you wont win much favor with nerds with that.
If there is no extra money, and a long term cash commitment attached, then this is nothing but hot air. It is easy to SAY that we are going back into space, but it is only words untill they put the money where their words are.
"Does anyone else think of the irony that the resources we spend on trying to find new places to explore or colonize hundreds or thousands of years down the road would greatly increase the standard of living for the world's poor today?"
No. Hippie.
"Suppose that by making the world a better place and encouraging education, intellectual development and tolerance we create the sort of environment in which open research can flourish... would we end up ahead in the long run when we discover more efficient means of exploring space instead of expending all these resources today for minimal gains?"
You have a point. If we enable all the world's poor and almost poor people to reach their full potentials the Earth would be able to generate so much physical and scientific production that we might actually be able to do large scale space exploration and colonization instead of the tiny projects undertaken today.
Just see how much more production and engineering is being generated from india and china, and thats not result of them solving poverty but becoming just slightly less drenched in poverty than they used to be.
Erm, about your sig;
I do not think Dr. Spock said this. That was the baby doctor.
I believe you're thinking of Mr. Spock, the fictional First Officer of the Starship Enterprise.
Oh, and I disagree with your argument too.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
But the thing is... there's nowhere else we can live. Sure, we can build colonies and space habitats until we run out of asteroids to build them out of, but we can do whatever we like to this planet and it STILL will be the most human-compatible environment in the known universe.
I'm not arguing against space exploration, or even manned space exploration. But space exploration with a view to colonization seems premature when we can't even maintain what we already have: a planet which is as perfect for human life as one can conceivably get.
qntm.org
The House struggled with compromising other NASA initiatives against new manned exploration, eventually deciding to expand the budget enough to accommodate both prerogatives.
S.R. Hadden: "First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?"
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
Why do you assume that the parent poster isn't black?
So what is happening for / to the long lost orphans of NASA's deep space program?
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
We'll strip mine the other planets later
Not to mention that it was Yoda who said it, not Spock. GP is mixing SF franchises as well.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
There's elements on the Moon that are in relative abundance compared to the Earth. Stuff that would be worthwhile to mine off of it.
The Helium-3 is worth it alone, let alone the Titanium and Rare Earth Elements present there...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
First of all, that's not ironic.
Second, it's the risk-taking, exploratory, entrepreneurial spirit that endowed us with the resources -- and the drive -- we have to invest in further space ventures now. That same spirit is the most powerful tool we have to widely encourage education, intellectual development, and -- yes -- tolerance.
Specifically embodied, this tool is called democratic capitalism, which, incidentally, is exactly what the world's poor need right now. Not (the aptly-named) Band Aid or Live 8, not debt forgiveness, not handouts and smiles; freedom and economic development.
As many poor as there are in the world today, there would be many more without capitalism and the incentives it engenders. To curtail our endeavors by funneling their resources into even more charity drives that naively address symptoms rather than diseases, would be to do everyone involved a monumental disservice.
(The one caveat here is that our push farther into space should be a privatized effort, not a government-funded one.)
The Yuri's Night people have made some nice PSA ads to pique children's interest in space:
S TIONS.mov
http://www.yurisnight.net/_multimedia/Reach.mpg
http://www.yurisnight.net/_multimedia/MARSPSA_QUE
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
NASA should simply send an unmanned probe to Mars containing a well-sealed, well-protected capsule containing a check for $1,000,000,[insert your favorite number of zeroes here], payable to bearer.
The first person who manages to get there and collect it gets to keep it.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
"We'll put the Wal-Mart...THERE!"
The science for man walking on the moon is weak. There is no objective proof outside of NASA's hands. There are many holes in their story, well documented on the internet.
;-)
We need to stand up and demand that our schools teach the controversy, as they're being asked to do with intelligent design. Teach that the moon landings may have been faked! Put this idea where it belongs, standing side by side with intelligent design.
flamebait?
joke?
dude what are all the mods from america or what??
The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
If they decided to link drug selling to orkut, they might as well bring into accounts car manufacturers for providing cars and vans for these traffickers to move around in, and even paper bag companies for providing such a means to carry the drugs in.
Really, it's stupid. The moment google decides to start moderating their networks, is the beginning of the end of privacy and freedom.
I see the picture on newsweek already
"marsbase alpha decimated by excessive flatulence!"
I mean no politician would dream of making a promise like that that had a decent chance of failing so publicly.
I mean great idea, but humans are just too damn stupid on average to cope with life beyond earth (and usually earth).
The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
Parent makes a really stupid argument, and I'm ashamed to admit I share the same genetic code as a "Why are we in such a hurry to leave? Why don't we fix all our problems here first, INSIDE the cave?" type.
But it was topical, not abusive, and not especially redundant, and should not have been modded down like a goatse troll.
Pete Conrad, commander of Apollo 12, made a bet with a reporter who thought that Armstrong's words had been written by PR flacks. He told her exactly what he was going to say months before the launch:
"Whoopee! That may have been one small step for Neil, but it was a big one for me!"
He was also the shortest of all the Apollo Astronauts.
fsh
kodak, ford, and gmc are becoming more irrelevant because they are old stagnant american companies, with enormous bureaucracies, which are almost completely unable to realign themselves for new economic factors. the laws of capitalism dictate they should die, and painfully, but hopefully new american companies will arise and the cycle will begin anew.
What, you expected to lead the world forever? Read an economics book, this is part of capitalist life, like dying is a part of organic life. The resources and people those companies are using will be redistributed to other companies which are less terrible. Boeing is on the fence, but has some agility left, and enormous amounts of govt. money and trade clout, which means Airbus will have a fair fight to take over as commercial aerospace leader.
Also, teflon, kevlar, lots of radio and computer technology, lots of aerospace technology, some plastics, gps(part military), microwave ovens (i think), MRI, and thousands of other technologies have in some way been assisted in their development by the space program.
Humans only move faster than they have to when forced with a threat, and the soviet union gave us the threat we needed to push into new technology, otherwise all the money in the world wouldn't be able to keep people as healthy as they can be now without the knowledge and technology to back it up. WW2 was similar, we went from biplanes to v2 rockets, jet fighters, and atomic weapons in the course of 5 years of combat, easily the single most advanced technological progress the human race has ever known, all because we needed better ways of killing each other.
Btw, you're right about our fiscal irresponsibility, but the same political factors that cripple nasa make it "politically impossible"(god i love that phrase) to straighten our budget. There was a time during the clinton era that they said we may be debt free within 15 years and I was blown away... I miss that time.
The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
A Budgetary Analysis of NASA's New Vision for Space Exploration
The link for the next five years is the interesting one:
NASA's Current Five-Year Plan and Extended Budget Projection
About halfway down is a comparison of the 2004 and 2005 budgets. You can see that the increase is only $292 million, a small fraction of the overall budget. If you compare NASA's current funding with the funding from the Apollo Era (adjusting for inflation) you'll see that the funding levels are on a very similar footing. Of course in those days NASA's funding was about 4% of the federal budget, while today NASA is significantly less than 1%.
The point, however, is that this program is not increasing NASA's funding by much at all, which is its main selling point. That's why Bush Sr.'s plan failed miserably; it would have required about a 33% increase in NASA's funding. So yes, it's a very long range plan, but most analysts believe it has a very high chance of success.
fsh
Politicians like G-Duhb (Nixon, Ford, Regan, and ((yes Kennedy))) have prayed upon NASA discoveries as their own for years. I say go NASA. They have always played their political cards right and will get us Colonized on the moon as well as mars. Not to distract from wars...but to bring civilaztion to the next level...I hope((occasionally pray)).
Benjamin W. Jacobs
ben@rokusek.com
But space exploration with a view to colonization seems premature when we can't even maintain what we already have: a planet which is as perfect for human life as one can conceivably get.
Don't be absurd. Your previous statement about it being the most human-compatible in the known universe was obviously true but saying it couldn't conceivably be better is ridiculous. Have you noticed that most of it is covered in salt water?
Or alternatively find more environmentally-friendly ways to live on the planet we currently inhabit. It is perfectly possible to create dwellings which have next to no need for heating or air conditioning with the same level of comfort. If the construction is done with thought then the initial cost is actually less than dwellings with heating and air conditioning since those costly systems are not needed. I think that encouraging the use of such housing in the West and in poorer countries in preference to current Western style building would be very sensible. It would be interesting to see how the cost of going to Mars compares to a concerted effort on simply more efficient building methods or research into nuclear power generation. In terms of economics then the USA might have a lot to gain from being a world leader in efficient building technologies.
Could this be the push that is needed to revive the Orion project?
I'm not a physicist, not even sure I can spell "physicist". But it seems to me that travelling in space is more than just exotic technology and dealing with social problems on long flights. It's about enough energy to get you out there and back again.
The ground work for that was done in the late 50's and early 60's. The theorists thought a trip to Saturn by 1970 was possible.
Check out --Project Orion: The True Story of the Atomic Spaceship by George Dyson. I'd offer my copy, but I lent it to another Slashdotter and it hasn't been returned.
Hi, since you work for nasa, can you ask about the spectrometer data from Deep Impact?
Where's this data available...
When will it be available..
Thanks in advance.
One of these days...
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
Today, science and manned spaceflight are nearly mutually exclusive at NASA, unfortunately. I expect these initiatives will have the same effect on science that the Space Station had -- largely negative. The following is from http://nightquill.blogspot.com/ I started dissertation work when I was 23. I knew an astrophysicist was what I longed to be. I wanted to build satellites that gaze up at the stars, But Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. I hear there aren't very many bars. They won't let you bring cigarettes, or even fine cigars. Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. They said "Your research must support the Exploration Vision, And if you can't adapt to it, you might as well go fishin' ". But no one bought my argument that spaceflight would be over If astronauts encountered an uncharted supernova! Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. Don't want to show those NASA medics my appendix scars. They force you to relieve yourself in tiny little jars. Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. Now if we beg a thousand times they might just save the Hubble -- And leave the rest of science in a thousand kinds of trouble. And planetary scientists expecting great largesse Should think of all the science that gets done on ISS! Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. Don't care if lower gravity helps golfers shoot more pars. In space no one can hear us when we play on our guitars. Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. I still don't know just how we're gonna pay for it. But please don't take my little grants away for it. Look in on any campus and you'll see who will be hurtin' While all those no-bid moonbase contracts go to Halliburton! Oh Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars. Just count me with the "no we're nots" and not the "yes we ares", Let's keep on sending orbiters and funny little cars, But Mama, I don't wanna go, And there's no way I'm gonna go, Mama...I...don't...want...to...go...to..... [tune changes to "Rocket Man"]: Mars....ain't the kind of place to raise your kids..... [back to tempo]: So Mama, I don't wanna go to Mars! Six. Five. Four. Three. Two. One........No funds. --Anonymous
A sufficiently sized industrial laser can carve through rock, provided you have a reasonable strategy for cooling it and aiming it. You wouldn't even have to land it on the moon, it could do all of the digging from orbit prior to the robots arriving there.
You could carve out the outline of a room in the regolith with enough space for the kevlar habitat, ramps, hallways and such. Next, you would carve cross-cut slices into it in small enough sections that they can simply be pulled out by robots or people. You would need to carve at some diagonal angles to sever the pieces from the bottom, and there will be some pieces there that you just won't be able to pull out, so the very bottom is simply filled back in with dirt so that there are no jagged edges pointing up.
Once all of the larger pieces are moved to the periphery, the surrounding area is melted into a glassy surface. This solves the dust problem -- for the moment.
The people arrive with their habitat and plop it into the room container. Of course, the location will still need to be a place that is shielded from direct sunlight. At some point, a way of building a roof over it with the left over fragments might allow further flexibility as far as the location is concerned.
I think its great we go to the moon again sometime soon I hope to see a hotel on the moon one day. I think its great we got a R/C car on mars but until a faster purpulsion system is dsign in ut into use a trip there would take quite sometime. But WTG NASA for the succesful launch the other day!!!
I mean you know its cool to be a slacker and all but not when oversight has has already caused the deaths of the Columbia astronauts! Nasa is like the scinetific agency of scientific agencies but they are turning into slackers. They have had a butt-load of trouble with this discovery launch. On top of that they dont fix whats broken. I mean hey you're Nasa you can take a couple days or weeks to fix things but no why do that, lets rush the launch risking the lives of our astronauts. Im sorry but i dont think we have the ability to get to Mars or the moon. We have the technology but not the admin.