Slashdot Mirror
NASA, European Space Agency Want To Go To Mars
coondoggie writes "NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) are aiming to cooperate on all manner of robotic orbiters, landers and exploration devices for a future trip to Mars. Specifically, NASA and ESA recently agreed to consider the establishment of a new joint initiative to define and implement their scientific, programmatic, and technological goals for the exploration of Mars. The program would focus on several launch opportunities with landers and orbiters conducting astrobiological, geological, geophysical, climatological, and other high-priority investigations and aiming at returning samples from Mars in the mid-2020s."
As long as they agree on one set of units it should be fine.
Pfft! If they give enough money to Nasa on difficult enough project, they'll solve all of those. Well, maybe not the deficit, unless you consider the possibility of martian gold.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Perhaps investing in developing the new technologies we would need to get our asses to Mars would create all sorts of new jobs.
Anonymous Coward: "This is slashdot. Accuracy is second class citizen here, unlike King Bias."
The price of gold isn't high enough to justify the cost of going to Mars and getting it (even if there were bars of it lying around on the surface.)
NASA's budget is such a small fraction of the overall budget ($17.318 billion out of $2.9 trillion in 2008) that it really has very little effect on the economy. If you want to worry about the U.S. economy, fighting two different expensive wars is a much bigger problem. Less than half a penny out of every tax dollar goes to NASA. 5 cents goes to the 'global war on Terror.' [see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ef/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png%5D
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
Euro agency is nothing to do with EU, but hey don't let that stop you!
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Okay, I know there are tens of millions of tons of gold on Pluto. Please send me a check and it is yours. Heck, I'll give you a fifty percent discount.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Oh good. Thanks for brightening my day.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Just Mandate that anyone taking government assistance must live on the moon or mars, this will solve ALL of our problems.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
I think that being able to establish a base on the moon FIRST would be more practical and give us good practice for preparing for a base on Mars. Gotta walk before you can run....
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
China seam to have more money to throw about, I hear Japan are pretty good at technology and russia seam to be the goto guys if you want something launched. If getting to Mars is a serious scientific venture and not a cock swinging contest, why not work with them as well?
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Just wait until you don't have to borrow the money to do so.
The US needs to figure out its side of the equation, what is more important, buying votes or science?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I disagree entirely with this comment but flamebait? I Think it is a valid concern, a stupid one given the NASA is a fraction of the US's Budget but not flamebait. stop modding by agree/disagree!
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Less than half a penny out of every tax dollar goes to NASA. 5 cents goes to the 'global war on Terror.' [see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ef/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png
And 5c/$ underestimates it quite a bit -- since DOD spending would also be vastly less without the GWoT, not to speak of DHS spending, big chunks of the Department of VA's costs, and the interest on the debt created by a half-trillion of GWoT-related costs in past budgets...
I think establishing a Casino on the moon is more practical.
For that matter, where does the U.S.C. give power to Congress to create NASA? Hmmm.
Well... Article 1, Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to...promote the progress of science and useful arts".
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I suppose for energy we could burn unemployed people as fuel.
Have you heard about Gagarin?
One that hath name thou can not otter
Your wholly invented figures have surely disproven his claim. And your specious* reference to parable of the broken window hammers it home.
*The point of the parable is that net economic gain of an action is the sum of the gross economic gain (work for the glazier) and the economic cost (reduced spending power of the cobbler), and therefore an action with an economic cost equal or greater than its gross gain is a net loss. Outside of your invented figures, you have not demonstrated this.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
But why walk when you can drive?
Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
Can't we just leave all the assholes? I suspect the amount of people we'd have to transport to Mars would be a lot smaller.
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
How about Lunar Gold, Silver, and Titanium? Mining the ore would only involve the act of bending over and picking it up.
Ironic choice of planet, and I'm wondering if it was intentional. From Wikipedia's article on Plutocracy:
The word plutocracy (Modern Greek: - ploutokratia) is derived from the ancient Greek root ploutos, meaning wealth and kratos, meaning to rule or to govern.
What the article fails to mention is that the world 'ploutos' is derived from the name of the Greek god Pluto (or vice-versa, not sure which was the cause and which was the effect).
Allegedly real newspaper headline from 1998:
Man Struck by Lightning Faces Battery Charge
I assume you mean Gagarin as in "Yuri" - first cosmonaut. Your point is....?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Good afternoon Sir, I represent Monster Cable® Future Investment Planning Committee. We are interested in providing the highest definition audio and video solutions to our customers, and as such we would like to project our interest in purchasing your stock of Plutonian gold.
As my old chemistry teacher used to say, "'ey you with the gold!!"
mmmm...
But how do I know you haven't already sold that to someone else?
see... see... I'm not falling to your scam.
NASA, European Space Agency Want To Go To Mars
Great, with NASA and ESA "gone to Mars," maybe we can get some fresh blood (competition) into space exploration? Like, from some private folks?
Hell, let them milk some millionaires for a few seconds in space to push space flight technology forwards.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Why not do both. if you look at somewhere like France they invest in "practical" research such as fusion reactors, blue-sky research such as CERN (15%) and the ESA (23%) which is somewhere between the two. The value of blue-sky research is hard to predict but taking a Thatcherite view and dismissing it altogether is naive and apart from slowing progress, it's not economically sound (I'm not saying spending too much on blue-sky is a good idea either). If you look at biological research I'd argue that much less progress has been done recently (compared to what could have been achieved) because too much funding is attached to direct studies like cancer research and not enough is being spread around to just see what happens (mapping the human genome style).
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Actually, I wonder the same thing with actual gold sales where you don't physically receive the product. How do you know it isn't some dude with a phone center and a good printer?
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
One of the reasons to go to Mars and explore, is to be able to understand this Spaceship Earth better. We might also be able to offload a few things from Earth to Mars in the future.
And - Space is a waste you say? Not compared to the so-called War against Terror.
This is blinging
Well, it was. Just imagine if we had invested that in something like alternative energy (REAL alternative energy like nukes and algae, not corn subsidies and windmills), or cheaper medicine, or something that could start a new industry. That might hurt in the short run (too big to fail doesn't mean the bank can't fail, it means too many others are so wrapped in it they can't safely fail), but in a few years, imagine what would happen to the economy if we became energy independent.
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"
Nice try....
Before NASA was NASA, that section was part of the US Air force.
Sounds like a good idea. Don't screw up Earth too much while the grownups are gone. I wonder who you'll blame when the problems of Earth keep on going despite the removal of everyone you thought was at fault?
they NEED commercial space. In particular, they need Bigelow to build their units and test them in space here as well as transporting to the moon, and then living on the moon. We need to have better tested equipment. Finally, we need to skip the idea of sending a mission there AND then coming back. It should be ONE WAY ONLY.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Parents can feed their kids. Most parents don't have the resources to start their own space program.
What the article fails to mention is that the world 'ploutos' is derived from the name of the Greek god Pluto
"Pluto" is actually a Roman god, adapted from the Greek god Hades.
"Ploutos" was the Greek word for wealth, with connotations of "gold and jewels", i.e. from underground. The Romans took the name of the underworld god Pluto from there.
(There was a Greek Pluto, but she was a nymph, and therefore aquatic. I believe it's unrelated.)
I'd rather see them dump the money into developing human-like androids to send to Mars than planning and paying to send humans.
I agree they should spend their time developing sex-bots. At least I think that's what you're saying... "Send to Mars" sure sounds like a euphemism to me...
The enemies of Democracy are
One with black jack and hookers, on second thought forget about the black jack.
I am not a nerd, I just play one in real life. My avatar thinks I'm a total loser.
Of course, if Heinlein is to be believed, then it is more like the first cosmonaut to get back alive. Considering all the Soviets who got killed in their space program, his story is not implausible.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Oil?
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
The thing about gold in space is that anyone can grab it and there's virtually no chance of your claim being recognized.
Like send Venusian Androids?
www.meneguzzi.eu/felipe
Well, the advantage of the dry gravity-cursed rock is that there are actually things you could use to build stuff on the moon. There's not much building stuff in near-earth orbit and the closest building stuff is in this really deep gravity well.
Personally, I think the Moon is an OK trade-off. You can mine asteroids but you'll have to take the raw materials somewhere else to actually build anything. On the Moon, you have "low" gravity (no, not as low as an asteroid but much less than the Earth) lots of materials, lots of empty ground to build stuff, and no environmental concerns (so you can launch nuclear-powered rockets to your heart's content).
NASA's budget of about 17 billion sounds like a fair amount - more so than any private venture could hope to raise.
However, consider that the US market for cell phones and related service is expected to top about 37 billion for 2009. Ringtones alone account for about half a billion.
Sales of Subway's "5 dollar footlongs" have amounted to around 2.6 billion so far.
I really do not consider money to be the issue blocking space access. Remember, the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and shuttle programs were all funded by US taxpayers. And if you want a better example, realize that we bought the Internet with only 2 decades worth of disposable income. The public is the real driving force behind funding these sorts of things. We spend more on cell phones in 4 years than the Apollo program did in 10.
This is why I am developing the Open Space Movement. Basically, a collaborative development environment + educational resource/reference library + vendor marketplace + funding aggregation point to allow people to publish any sort of project which may be tested, prototyped, and produced for use within a series of public space ventures.
If anyone is interested in this, drop a line to openspacemovement @ gmail.com
We have recently filed for incorporation, and will file for non-profit 501(c)3 status upon receipt of our paperwork. Our website is currently under development at www.osmdevel.org. Register and make use of the forums if you wish. We plan to migrate things to the live site within the next few weeks.
We hope this will be useful for everybody.
The price of gold isn't high enough to justify the cost of going to Mars and getting it (even if there were bars of it lying around on the surface.)
There is no test ban treaty on Mars right? Looks like Project Orion might have found a home and a goal!
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
That's just it: they won't. That's the idea because you are at fault you Beckite monkey.
I'm pretty sure they'll be able to find someone to blame. Maybe I'm beaming failwaves at them from my dark tower on Mars.
Actually, I wonder the same thing with actual gold sales where you don't physically receive the product. How do you know it isn't some dude with a phone center and a good printer?
Realistically, you could pull off such a scam by simply issuing gold notes. Lets say that the price of gold is $1000/ounce.
You collect $100000 from some guy and issue him a certificate stating that he has purchased 100 ounces from you which are his to collect within maturity of this note (or whatever language you want to include)
Now, you have $100,000 to work with. If Mr. Gold Buyer waits 10 years and wants to cash out his gold, all you have to do is outperform the gold market with that $100,000. You keep (or lose) the difference (ignoring taxes for simplicity)
There really isn't anything magical about the market... and come to think of it, why did I call that a scam? It's roughly what is going on in today's market with those notes. That's how most things are traded.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Diamonds are only that valuable because of the De Beers monopoly. Still at highest quality diamonds, assuming with just a whiff of delusion that these diamonds could be sold for $80k per gram no matter what, then sure, you could probably make a profit. $80 million per kg is a pretty good price for payload.
Flamebait? Some people are so weird.
Well, you can conceivably build things in zero G. The question would be whether it's easier to build things in zero G or where there's a bit of gravity. Gravity has some advantages: Drop something and it will hit the ground, rather than floating away. While building stuff in zero G looks way cool, I'm more interested in efficiency.
The problem with getting stuff from Earth is that it's at the bottom of a really deep gravity well, which limits how much stuff we can get out of it. So shipping water and building materials up to Earth orbit is expensive. Remember that, for x amount of fuel, you can ship 6X the weight from the Moon than you could from Earth.
The problem with getting stuff from Asteroids is political: you have the "what if something goes wrong?" crowd. "Let me get this straight--you want to go find an asteroid and send it toward the Earth?! What happens if you can't control it?! What happens if something goes wrong and it crashes into the Earth?!? Won't somebody think of the children?!?!"
You could mine it and process it on the asteroid and then ship it to Earth orbit for assembly. But we're back to the gravity issues: Mining and processing in negligible G (eg Ceres, the largest asteroid, is 0.03G) will have it own issues as well. On the moon, we have to deal with dust--imagine how much dust mining an asteroid will generate? This a problem we have to solve anyway, whether it's on the Moon or an asteroid.
As for water, I may be wrong but space is not only pretty darn cold, it's pretty darn hot. The ISS temperatures range from -250 F to +250 F, depending on whether it's in direct sunlight. So I would think water would melt. But I may be wrong.
Plus - most applicable objects in the solar system are probably piles of rubble, with gravity just enough to hold them together. Which presents its own kinds of problems if you want to move them or make any contruction work with them.
As for water - yeah, comets are a good example of what would happen to exposed water ice in close solar orbits, though I imagine you can use thin external shields to limit exposure to sunlight or perhaps turning water into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pykrete (lunar dust could work great for this?) But water has another problem - it's hard to build lightweight structures with it, limiting it's potential usage mostly to small radiation shelters on ships and...stationary bases not meant to be moved / launched. Like on the moon.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Well, you wrote your post like you were ignoring a bit that we are practicing near Earth for half a century already...
One that hath name thou can not otter
So...I take it it's even more plausible in the case of US space program, given that it actually lost much larger number of flight personnel?
One that hath name thou can not otter