Why is space so unpopular!!!

I'm still amazed at how many people don't realize what has come directly and indirectly from the space program, not to mention how much we've learned about the earth itself like the atmosphere and the oceans and how it all fits into the solar system, galaxy etc.  And that one's lack of interest in the subject doesn't change it's impact. 

 Ahhhh but the reason I don't research that stuff to know that is because it's not interesting.

 Yeah yall will disagree with what I said but, I was just putting in my 2 cents.

Sturm,

You need to go and research what the space program has brought us. Miniature computers, cell phone technology, advances in medical science (the CAT and MIR scanners are direct descendants along with orthoscopic surgery techniqeus), lightweight metals, the list goes on and on.

Here's a link that will help explain: http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html 

Space is so unpopular because nothing happens in space, and it doesnt effect us. Oh wow, we have a flag on the moon, or we discovered a new planet (That we can't get to, but we have pictures!) I mean for the money thats put in NASA we want more than some pictures, them telling us Pluto's not a planet, and a crew of dead astronauts that burned up in the atmosphere for absolutly no purpose at all, and they died because NASA didnt check some freakin panels on there space shuttle. Space simply isn't worth the cost.

 And people  dont relate to space. Everyone has cars, they're status symbols, and most people have relatives who have fought in wars, so it's natural to have an intrest in it.

 You may disagree but thats  just what a 15-year old thinks, my Grandmother loves space because it was big when she was growing up, but I have yet to see any good in it.

I really don't think we have that level of comitment anymore.  We are too much driven by the "fast food" mentality and demand immediate gratification.  Like I had mentioned in a previous post, we are too cautious as a society now.  When something goes wrong, we set up hearings, investigations, commitees, and law suits to discover, deny and place blame on everyone and anything that we can.  Think about how things stopped during Columbia and Challenger.  The only people, it seems, that understand that what they do is dangerous are the very people who do the job.  The people who, for the most part, are clueless to the perils are the ones who stnad in their way.  All in the name of safety and to prevent lawsuits.

But then again, I could be completely wrong.

I hace to disagree with Mortar Magnet's (See reply on page 2 of this post) assessment that Space is not exciting.  The STS may not be the most aerodynamically sleek and sexy looking flying craft out there, but a "bus" it is not.  

Let's think about this for a second.  Five to seven people strap themselves onto a tank full of liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen with two candlesticks full of solid rocket propellent - a small amount of which could level a house - and go from 0 to 17,000+ mph in less than 5 miutes.  I think that would get most people's adrenaline pumping.  Yes, some of the things we do up there may seem boring looking at it from a terrestrial perspective.  Just think of growing grass in zero gravity in an environment that would kill you in an instant if not for that little metal "bus".  Also, youmust remember, though, someone growing grass in zero G today has implications 20+ years from now.  

That is the key.  Return on investments for space items needs to be measured in tens of years rather than tens of minutes.  In the almost instant world we live in today that fact seems to get lost.  And it's not just the twenty somethings that forget this...Congress and the public in general have forgotten.  It took Americans almost 10 years and the motivation of a slain President to get us to the moon, with many failures and sacrifices along the way.  To go back to the moon and beyond will take the same level of patience and commitment.

That's just a few from me.

Eric - LOL! Methinks you just might be a pessimist!

BGrigg - Alas, no, I don't work for NASA.  I'm more the university/academic type...sort of...  Years ago, I worked under a NASA grant on part of the SETI project (searching for planets around other star systems) but I have never worked directly for NASA. Maybe some day?  But, in some ways, they really don't need astrophysicists as much as they need engineers. With the advances in modern tech I'm now able to do my research in my own back yard with a CCD camera, computer systems, and a relatively small telescope (compared to the research behemoths of yesteryear).  Like I said, it's very strange how the times have changed!

-Ro

Persephones_Dream wrote:

Eric, Heh! Politicians have invented everything. That's how they get votes - especially from the people who don't bother finding out the facts first. ;) I'd have to slightly disagree with you about there being no colonies on the sides of volcanoes. There are quite a number of them in the world whose slopes are populated, sometimes rather extensively - such as Mt. Etna and Mt. Vesuvius.  And, let us not forget Pompeii. One of my favorite quotes of all time is related to both of the above: "Archeaology is the art of uncovering the Truth about the past whereas Politics is the art of covering the Truth about the Present." Cheers! -Ro

...like the long and broad shadow of Vesuvius, Etna and St. Helens, the vastness of space beckons us to dwell within but offers nothing but darkness on the other side in return...

Watch out guys, we're in danger of a group hug!

Don't forget Hurculaneum, which is what Naples is built on top of, and every bit as destroyed as Pompeii and by the same eruption. Hawaii, Japan, Indonesia, the western coast of the Americas, Iceland. There are many places at risk of volcanoes, and if the smoke, lava, floods and ash doesn't get them, there's the earthquakes and tsunamis! Oh my, the cyclones, hurricanes, tornadoes, mud slides, forest fires, floods, avalanches. The list of earth borne dangers is huge, why would anyone want to continue living in such a dangerous place?

Malaria could be cured if not for the ban on DDT. Interesting article about that very subject in the new National Geographic, in fact.

Curing starvation is entirely within our ability, but that nasty resolve thing gets in the way. No-one seems to have the fortitude to complete the task and make sure that those who are starving get food. Instead they spend millions on aid, and all but a small percentage gets diverted into the coffers of the local war lords. Such is humanity! 

Ro, LOVE that quote! Astrophysicist, eh? Probably work for NASA (hawk, spit). Don't get alarmed, I'm mad at the bureaucrats at NASA, not the working stiffs like you! One of my daily stops is to see what marvel the Astronomy Picture of the Day has to offer. My desktop is currently showing today's pic of NGC 2903. NASA does some very good work, but it could do more if it had a clearance on some management types.

Eric,

Heh! Politicians have invented everything. That's how they get votes - especially from the people who don't bother finding out the facts first. ;)

I'd have to slightly disagree with you about there being no colonies on the sides of volcanoes. There are quite a number of them in the world whose slopes are populated, sometimes rather extensively - such as Mt. Etna and Mt. Vesuvius.  And, let us not forget Pompeii.

One of my favorite quotes of all time is related to both of the above: "Archeaology is the art of uncovering the Truth about the past whereas Politics is the art of covering the Truth about the Present."

Cheers!

-Ro

...yes, sometimes things come across not as intended, appreciate the clarification...

...interesting comment about the "bottom of the ocean" and "sides of volcanoes"...there aren't any colonies there, either...and I can explain why: It isn't practical, given our current state of technology and risk factors...

...now, we can go in circles about exploration driving technology, sort of a chicken and egg question, but I will conceed that space exploration, like every human endeavor, advances the knowledge of man...and I totally agree with you about politicians and what NASA has become...

...by the way, didn't Gore invent geosat relays?

Eric,

I wasn't "patronizing", I was joking.  Some things just don't come across well on these boards. Apologies if it seemed otherwise.

However, fyi, in *Real Life* I'm an astrophysicist, so I do have a clue about the sun and solar system's ultimate destiny, especially since I study stellar development   I am also a very large supporter of space exploration and colonization for very obvious reasons.  Unfortunately, we have inept governments managing our attempts to make science useful to all.  Politicians do not see beyond the elections.

BGrigg,

You make some interesting points.  Most people don't realize that one major airline crash kills more people than have ever lost their lives in space (at least, so far).  Space is dangerous and a very hostile place - but so is the bottom of the ocean, the sides of volcanoes, the rims of tectonic faults, etc.  They just have different dangers for the most part.  Humankind by nature is curious and explorative. Without something to explore, we would wither away.  Some people don't have this drive to discover and understand, so they really don't get the whole idea behind others desires to explore and colonize.  It's just that nature of us as individuals.  Of course, more than likely, our friend in the Ukraine's post to this board found its way here via geosat relays....without which, we would not be having this debate.

-Ro

...you know, you actually make some very good points, and articulate them well...I can't say that I am in disagreement with the fundamentals of your position, and I certainly appreciate your passion...I guess my point is that maybe we should solve some of the "simpler" problems here on Earth before we begin looking for another "cosmic condo" to lease.  Let's get our act together here before we take it on the road, so to speak. I mean, solving world hunger is not rocket science (pun intended). Shoot, more people die in ONE day in car accidents than in the entire space program. But there are a lot more drivers than astronauts...do you know how many folks die from malaria each year--MALARIA !!! I don't think I can, in good consience, help pay for a moon colony while people die here on earth for lack of a 10 cent dose of medicine to prevent their blindness or polio...

Apollo 13, now there is a story that should inspire anyone who reads about it or watches the very well made movie (IMO) starring Tom Hanks. Disagree or not, you gotta love that story.

I guess we are!

I only edited out the bit about the patronizing remark, as it wasn't germaine to the post.

I no longer consider the Russians to be much of a threat in space, but the Chinese are still inscrutable. I don't think either would be a very nice landlord from space, and we would pay with blood and treasure regardless. I'm surprised that a person with the Ukraine as a location would think that the Russians could be a good landlord.

As for resolve...

When Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee burned to death on the launchpad during Apollo One, there was hand-wringing, but not to the extent that there was during Challenger or Columbia. The dangers of space travel was evident. In fact, it was considered so dangerous that Apollo One was a test mission, the Saturn 1B wasn't even fueled for launch. It was "merely" an onboard problem that caused the oxygen aboard to combust tragically. One the dust had settled, they went back to the beginning and found the problem and continued with the mission.

When Apollo Thirteen malfunctioned (that pesky oxygen again!) and scrubbed the scheduled lunar landing, the fire was put out and Lovell, Swigert and Haise knuckled down and brought the ship back against many odds. It didn't stop them from launching Apollo Fourteen a mere eight months later. Which, of course, landed safely on the Moon and created one of the most historic memories I have.

Remember the quarentine chambers? I do. I recall there was much discussions of the dangers of the space mission, and how the astronauts could be subject to myriad diseases. That didn't stop them from volunteering to go into space.

I say we lack resolve because we aren't continuing the mission and colonizing the Moon. "It's too expensive, it's too dangerous, it's too whatever!". 

More people died today in car accidents than have died during the entire space program. 

I'll probably never convince you that pushing into space is necessary for our specie's survival, but I believe that to be true with all my heart. 

This view

(or one like it, I ripped this out of Google Earth, technology made possible by the space program. Like how I show Europe & Africa instead of North & South America?) has done more to convince people of how fragile our planet is, and why we should be better stewards of it. Of course, we wouldn't have that image, if not for... oh you get the picture!

I say we lack resolve because too many people like yourself send a clear message to politicians that they had better not "waste" taxes on space. So instead of covering ourselves with glory (and I don't mean NASA or the ESA, I would prefer to see the entire world get behind the space program for the betterment of ALL mankind) we let them continue their wasteful ways and fritter away our tax dollars on corruption, greed and war.

But, I'll not likely convince you, either. Better we just keep agreeing to disagree on this subject and get back to our hobby! 

Bgrigg wrote:

edited for clarity However, I will say that you are talking all theory where I tend to think of space in pragmatic terms. Sure, there are theoretically endless resources in space. Why don't you go get some for us---LOL. Aint' gonna happen. And oxygen being plentiful on the moon. Fine, too bad we can't breathe it....hmmmmmm.....minor technicality, I guess. And FYI, the earth, and all of the planets, in our solar sytem will eventually burn up as our sun ages (turns into a supervova) and dies out...so you are correct, the end for all of us, and earth, is only a matter of time. And Bush will have had nothing to do with it. ALL exploration has been theory. If we waited for the pragmatists to act we would be building models (in stone) of stone tools! It was a theory that Columbus could sail around the world. Remember that his trip was an abject failure (he DIDN'T complete the journey), but by pushing the limits he discovered a whole new world!  We'll get those resources, the moment the Gov't decides that floating at the upper limits of our gravity well is not getting the job done and actually start building space rockets again. I suspect that the Chinese will be beating us to space this time, instead of the Russians. And yes, breathing the oxygen available on the Moon or Mars IS a minor technicality. We already have many tools to assist us in colonizing both planetary bodies. All we lack is the resolve to get there.

...are we having a "gentleman's disagreement" again? "edited for clarity"--LOL...I say LET the Russians or Chinese "beat" us to the moon, or wherever you want to set up shop...let them pay with blood and treasurre for a change...so has it come down to a testosterone race now?

Why do you think we have a lack of resolve to colonize the moon? I am curious.

edited for clarity However, I will say that you are talking all theory where I tend to think of space in pragmatic terms. Sure, there are theoretically endless resources in space. Why don't you go get some for us---LOL. Aint' gonna happen. And oxygen being plentiful on the moon. Fine, too bad we can't breathe it....hmmmmmm.....minor technicality, I guess. And FYI, the earth, and all of the planets, in our solar sytem will eventually burn up as our sun ages (turns into a supervova) and dies out...so you are correct, the end for all of us, and earth, is only a matter of time. And Bush will have had nothing to do with it.

ALL exploration has been theory. If we waited for the pragmatists to act we would be building models (in stone) of stone tools! It was a theory that Columbus could sail around the world. Remember that his trip was an abject failure (he DIDN'T complete the journey), but by pushing the limits he discovered a whole new world! 

We'll get those resources, the moment the Gov't decides that floating at the upper limits of our gravity well is not getting the job done and actually start building space rockets again. I suspect that the Chinese will be beating us to space this time, instead of the Russians.

And yes, breathing the oxygen available on the Moon or Mars IS a minor technicality. We already have many tools to assist us in colonizing both planetary bodies. All we lack is the resolve to get there. 

Rand,

Nope, not missing it at all. As evidenced by this sentence:

I dislike Mr. Gore for many reasons, but I concede that Al Gore, and his High Performance Computing Act, did much to make what became known as the Internet accessible to the common man.

I am VERY aware of Mr. Gore's work in this regard, as I am with the history of computing in general and in detail. I been mucking about them since punchcards, though I didn't have access to ARPANET back then.

Bill 

Persephones_Dream wrote:

There is a huge difference between exploration and colonization.  One of the main and very best reasons to colonize the moon and/or Mars is as backup insurance for the survival of the human race, if nothing else. This is an often overlooked fact when it comes to these kinds of discussions.  If something were to happen to Earth - manmade or otherwise - where the human race was wiped out (and, yes, it *could* very well happen - ask the dinosaurs), the end result would be as if the human race never existed.  All of our history, our cultures, everything, would be gone forever - and with no one left to know/read/tell about it, it would be as if we never existed. Manstein - you are incorrect about there being a lack of oxygen out there.  Oxygen is the most common element on the moon.  It's just not in readily breathable form (though rather easily made into such).  The resources available in space far exceed anything here on Earth.  You are both incorrect in saying and/or insinuating that Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet.  Read your history boys. When it comes to tax dollars being wasted, let us look at Iraq - a place costing us 10 times (so far) what the entire Apollo project cost and with far less return on the dollar.  NASA's annual budget is less than 1% of the entire budget of our country.  Space costs us pennies per person.  The return benefits have far exceeded any of this.  Your grandchildren will be paying off the debts of the current administration.... -Ro

...oh, boy...here we go again...

I won't comment on the patronizing remarks you made about me and Bgrigs as he set you pretty staright on the net thing.  However, I will say that you are talking all theory where I tend to think of space in pragmatic terms. Sure, there are theoretically endless resources in space. Why don't you go get some for us---LOL. Aint' gonna happen. And oxygen being plentiful on the moon. Fine, too bad we can't breathe it....hmmmmmm.....minor technicality, I guess. And FYI, the earth, and all of the planets, in our solar sytem will eventually burn up as our sun ages (turns into a supervova) and dies out...so you are correct, the end for all of us, and earth, is only a matter of time. And Bush will have had nothing to do with it.

LOL! Must have been frustrating to have us young pups come along later with our superior technology and have whole words appear all at once on the screen.

And without the space program driving the technology, where would we be today? The military had no real need for miniaturization like Apollo did. I have a Treo 650 Smartphone that can do more than my first five computers put together, and it easily fits into my pocket. Now if only my eye could read the screen without primitive technology (reading glasses) being used!

Bgrigg wrote:

Ro, Neither Mannstein's Revenge, nor I, believes Al Gore invented the internet. Both of us were merely repeating the oft told joke that he claimed he did. Al Gore did not invent the internet! He did, however, attempt to take much of the credit for it with this statement: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.” This at the very least is a very self-serving remark to make. I am hardly a "boy", and I do read history. It's a passion of mine that extends far beyond this hobby of plastic and paint. I've also been knocking about this "internet" for many years now. My first entry was on BBS's more than 20 yrs ago using my trusty Hayes Supermodem, with its blistering 2400 baud performance! Perhaps a refresher of the history of the internet is in order? ARPANET, which was the Army's means of having a communications background that was supposed to be impervious to damage by massive amounts of servers that could quickly re-route past any physical damage. The universities that were involved in experimentation and research for the Army demanded use of this communications device to allow massive amounts of data to be quickly accessed by each other, and people wanted access to the "tax funded" network. As a CongressCritter, Al Gore was a vocal supporter of computer technologies, and he supported that endeavour. I dislike Mr. Gore for many reasons, but I concede that Al Gore, and his High Performance Computing Act, did much to make what became known as the Internet accessible to the common man. An early receiver of funds from that Act was Marc Andreesen, who co-authored the Mosaic browser, which of course became Netscape, and helped start Mozilla, the creators of the Firefox browser with which I am typing this post. However, ARPANET, the Advanced Research Projects Agency NETwork was begun by DARPA, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency. The agency was created in 1958 to organize and fund research into military technology and was started in response to Sputnik being launched. The concept of a global network for computers was first postulated in 1962, and serious work was started by 1966, with the actual network being in place by 1969. By the time Mr. Gore was elected to public office much of the internet was already in place, though limited to employees of the DoD and select Universities. I do find it difficult to accept his "took the initiative in creating the internet" statement!

Always a good thing to relist the history of the internet for the young pups here.  Most people I run in to actually believe Al Gore created the internet (though he was the first person to use the Iridium network).  Hard to believe, isn't it?  I suspicion Al's commentary was meant to be taken some other way than how history has handed it down to us plebes. 

Alas, my friend, you will have to survive as a  "boy".    Just kidding. My first modem was a Hayes 300 baud monster!  Got ya beat by 2,100 baud!  LOL!  It was so much fun actually watching the characters form on the screen....one.....by......one.....  The first "hard drive" I ever worked on was a drum drive, about the size of an old coffee can and it held a whopping 6,000 bytes.

Times have certainly changed, haven't they?

-Ro

Ro,

Neither Mannstein's Revenge, nor I, believes Al Gore invented the internet. Both of us were merely repeating the oft told joke that he claimed he did. Al Gore did not invent the internet! He did, however, attempt to take much of the credit for it with this statement:

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

This at the very least is a very self-serving remark to make.

I am hardly a "boy", and I do read history. It's a passion of mine that extends far beyond this hobby of plastic and paint. I've also been knocking about this "internet" for many years now. My first entry was on BBS's more than 20 yrs ago using my trusty Hayes Supermodem, with its blistering 2400 baud performance! Perhaps a refresher of the history of the internet is in order?

ARPANET, which was the Army's means of having a communications background that was supposed to be impervious to damage by massive amounts of servers that could quickly re-route past any physical damage. The universities that were involved in experimentation and research for the Army demanded use of this communications device to allow massive amounts of data to be quickly accessed by each other, and people wanted access to the "tax funded" network. As a CongressCritter, Al Gore was a vocal supporter of computer technologies, and he supported that endeavour. I dislike Mr. Gore for many reasons, but I concede that Al Gore, and his High Performance Computing Act, did much to make what became known as the Internet accessible to the common man. An early receiver of funds from that Act was Marc Andreesen, who co-authored the Mosaic browser, which of course became Netscape, and helped start Mozilla, the creators of the Firefox browser with which I am typing this post.

However, ARPANET, the Advanced Research Projects Agency NETwork was begun by DARPA, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency. The agency was created in 1958 to organize and fund research into military technology and was started in response to Sputnik being launched. The concept of a global network for computers was first postulated in 1962, and serious work was started by 1966, with the actual network being in place by 1969. By the time Mr. Gore was elected to public office much of the internet was already in place, though limited to employees of the DoD and select Universities. I do find it difficult to accept his "took the initiative in creating the internet" statement!

There is a huge difference between exploration and colonization.  One of the main and very best reasons to colonize the moon and/or Mars is as backup insurance for the survival of the human race, if nothing else. This is an often overlooked fact when it comes to these kinds of discussions.  If something were to happen to Earth - manmade or otherwise - where the human race was wiped out (and, yes, it *could* very well happen - ask the dinosaurs), the end result would be as if the human race never existed.  All of our history, our cultures, everything, would be gone forever - and with no one left to know/read/tell about it, it would be as if we never existed.

Manstein - you are incorrect about there being a lack of oxygen out there.  Oxygen is the most common element on the moon.  It's just not in readily breathable form (though rather easily made into such).  The resources available in space far exceed anything here on Earth. 

You are both incorrect in saying and/or insinuating that Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet.  Read your history boys.

When it comes to tax dollars being wasted, let us look at Iraq - a place costing us 10 times (so far) what the entire Apollo project cost and with far less return on the dollar.  NASA's annual budget is less than 1% of the entire budget of our country.  Space costs us pennies per person.  The return benefits have far exceeded any of this.  Your grandchildren will be paying off the debts of the current administration....

-Ro

Ha ha!  Okay, we are in close agreement that governments tend to waste tax dollars, and have collectively failed their people by not insuring proper distribution of wealth. And we'll agree that technological advances are typically the result of unsavory military expansion (on Earth or Space!). And we'll agree to disagree that we need to invest more monies in space for the future benefit of mankind.

I'm sure we can also agree that poverty, starvation and genocide are strictly human endeavors and not the result of mis-spent tax dollars due to space exploration.

The US Army did indeed invent the basis of the internet (ARPANET), Al Gore just took credit for it! As is his wont.

"Pardon my naiveté, but can we not pay the farmers to grow the food and give it to the people who are starving?"

You make my point. We can't even get it right here on earth...yes we could, but we don't...but rather get in a tit for tat exchange, I'd rather say we both agree on more than we disagree, just have a different opinion on whether or not we have stretched the limits of practical space exploration for now...as far as where technology is being driven from, we again, are in agreement more or less...hmmmm...where did the internet come from, the US Army? Or was it Al Gore who invented it? LOL... 

Well, when it comes to the US Space Program, neither of us have any tax issues! You are probably on the tax hook for the ESA, however! While we are on the subject of tax dollars, I would prefer to see some of those dollars "wasted" in an attempt to colonize the Moon and Mars so that we can put dangerous technologies there, instead of Bhopal, India. I have a vision of clean and sustainable power due to large array solar satellites, but it seems we are insisting on draining the last drop of oil before we move onto the next (earth bound) fuel source. I would much rather see billions spent on reviving the space program (and not by NASA, they've turned into a massive bureaucracy), rather than on paying farmers not to grow their crops. I would rather see 3 or 4 "privileged" astronauts pushing out our boundaries and expanding our knowledge, then knowing that hundreds or thousands of farmers aren’t growing food. Pardon my naiveté, but can we not pay the farmers to grow the food and give it to the people who are starving?

Plenty of people died while trying to circumnavigate the globe, or explore darkest America, so while there might be oxygen and food, that didn't guarantee survivability. We also have explorers climbing mountains, crossing the Arctic and Antarctic and diving to the bottom of the oceans, none of which harbors much life.

There are plenty of technological advances from both the Space Race and the Arms Race, however, not as many of the advances from the Arms Race has trickled down to the average person. The Space Race has provided us with transistors, miniaturized computers, titanium wheel chairs, carbon fiber, and medical advances, just to name a handful. The simple fact is that the line between the two is blurred, as any advance in Space can also (and should be) considered an advance militarily and vice versa. Of course, we shouldn’t lose sight of the simple fact that the space program was primarily an US Air Force program.