Manned Space Exploration...Why?

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

And I will admit to being (in spirit at least, even if age prevents me from being so physically) a bit too curious and sure of myself. "Let's put 50 watts of 50kV power, water, and hydrogen gas together... what could go wrong?"

Oops...

The reality, though is that optimal lies somewhere between us. We must explore, we must press forward, or we are a doomed species... not from some unexpected extinction event, but from simple decay and atrophy. But we must also take care and not rush headlong into the unknown. In my case, those around me serve (very well) as a brake on excessive lack of caution.

TheRedneck

FCD, you are in the frame of mind of the early Europeans before Columbus. It can't be done, if we try we will die, there is nothing there, we will fall off the end of the world, but more importantly, it's impossible so we won't even try.
Yes at the moment we are not overpopulated, but sooner or later we will be and the only place for us to go ( after we have covered the land and the ocean floor) is space.
Just because we do not have the technology now there is no need to stop trying. Space colonization is only a matter of will after you take away mans greed. I'll ask again "how much did it take to put a man on the moon"? 1 billion, 2 billion. Nah, BS, mans greed. What if everywhere down the line everybody gave their materials and time for free. I mean everything.
Now how much did it cost? Zilch, nada, nothing.
When Columbus found America (don't be pedantic.. as there was someone there already) to Europeans America WAS another world, yet they found the means and went into their unknown.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: schuyler

Sorry, I disagree completely.

Clearly we are at opposite ends of the spectrum on this subject.

Oh, and it actually IS rocket science! In fact, that is exactly what it is, literally and metaphorically.

Good Lord. The IDEA that we could GO EXTINCT is NOT rocket science. Hello? The probability that an extinction level event will happen in Earth's future is 100%. If we are not off the planet and out of the solar system by then, we go extinct. Period. End of story. Now we either DO something about this while we can, or we sit around and proclaim we are helpless until the next comet strikes or the Sun decides to go nova, or just put out a few flares. I'm not willing to cede "your end of the spectrum" on this.

I guess flyingclaydisk you feel we should not have fun and learn something doing it .

That is a very limiting view on life . Space the Final frontier our mission to boldly go were no one has going before .
What would be more fun watching a star through a telescope or going there and seeing and learning for our self .
machines are fine but humans need to stay apart of what we do or one day a machine will produce your baby then what ?

Sex is just procreation or can it be something more ? Mite as well let a machine birth the baby . well looks like nature already gave the answer as many animals besides man do it for fun but that does not change the fact little animals are made that way .
there is alot more to science then numbers and letters .

there is the Human experience and EVEN AI could not give us that the only way to get it is do it our self .
By doing so we learn things no machine can ever tell us .
All I can say is humans learn more better faster when we are having fun tring to learn how to do it .
As for people who die trying that is a cost we are willing to except for all the stupid pointless reasons people die now alest that teacher who died in the shuttle died for something worth dieing for .

each day you could die in something as pointless as a failed traffic light iif we must risk death lets take a risk that brings us something from it .

lastly one day the sun will be old one day teh earth will die should we just site here like a dinosaur and wate ?

yes living on mars would be hard and cost many lifes but once done no one rock can do us in ever again .
and that rock is out there with earths name all over it . Space could be what keeps us from being a fossil taht alone makes it worth doing .

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Saint Exupery

Well, I'd counter it was you who kind of asked for a snippy rejoinder with your "stuff it!" remark preceding mine, but I digress.

Touché.

While this may surprise you (as you seem ready to get in an argument about this subject), but I'm actually not dismissing your argument or posture. You've said the same thing twice now. I used the word "Cool", but it wasn't intended to be sarcastic. 'Cool' was intended to imply a broader sense of 'curiousity', much like you have eluded to in a cat with string. Would you be happier if I used "human curiosity"?

Ah, yes. That does make sense. "Cool" did sound dismissive to me, and I was mistaken in your intent. My apologies for repeated snark.

What I am trying to distinguish here is the difference between human curiosity for the sake of understanding, and the concept of exploration for the sake of finding a planet for the human race to "escape" to. I've said this repeatedly. I have also repeatedly stated that I'm all for science and exploration (even in space), but I think including the human in the space travel equation only serves one purpose...to satisfy "curiosity", not to provide a viable solution for the human race. And further, including the human in the space travel equation actually hinders and exponentially complicates what SHOULD be the prime directive...exploration.

Why can't we do both? I suppose the answer lies in what we mean by "solution". Semantics again. *sigh*

Better?

Quite. I'm sorry for my rudeness.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

To see what's there. What ever other reason is given, it always, always, comes back to that simple sentence.

In 1969, I sat as a five year old little boy, entranced by Walter Cronkite coverage of the first two guys on the Moon, while sitting in front of a colossal black and white console TV...and have been entranced ever since.

Apollo. Voyager. Pioneer. ...and all the little machines that could that came after.

If man doesn't reach for that "what's beyond that far horizon" ring, we run the risk, as a whole, of becoming stagnant. Not saying it will happen, but it could happen.

Our destinies, lie along two paths...

1) We remain in our safe little nest afraid to don our wings and leave this sanctuary...and as with all good things, it will eventually become our prison. Metaphorical excess perhaps, but then again, maybe not.

2) Or, we don those wings and see what they've, and we've, got. Like Icarus, maybe we ultimately fail, but it'd be an epic failure.

I prefer number two. Though for me, perhaps it'd not be a big deal, as I'm quite unlikely to see the time when Man set foot on another planet, or orbits around another star...

But, our grandkids? Our great-grandkids? Men and women have, for eons uncounted, traveled great distances, endured great hardships to try and find a better life for themselves and their future progeny. Going to other worlds is in no way different, save in distances, than what people have been doing for eons.

Once upon a time, the world might as well have been the galaxy. Now, the galaxy could, and yet might, become our world... There's rather a nice symmetry to that.

a reply to: schuyler


Good Lord. The IDEA that we could GO EXTINCT is NOT rocket science. Hello? The probability that an extinction level event will happen in Earth's future is 100%. If we are not off the planet and out of the solar system by then, we go extinct. Period.

So. We find a suitable planet. How do the odds differ that an extinction event won't happen there? Or, along the way?

a reply to: TheRedneck

Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We got where we are because of yesterday, but at the same time, we got there because of tomorrow. We envisioned what we wanted our tomorrows to be yesterday, today is only part of the process.

On the shoulders of giants. We should not, however, ever forget that to those coming along tomorrow, we need to be the giants, too.

a reply to: Mach2

Ah, but you don't start with the "chevy factory".

It's outside of their frame of reference.

You start with, at that point, fire. From fire you go to smelting of various metals, then alloys of those metals. All within a reference framework they can understand...easier food collecting, warmer, and safer, shelter. Etc...

Transportation. Not chevy's, but wagons, with horses, or dogs, pulling them.

As their reference points improve, so your lessons do in complexity. Eventually, you will get the internal combustion engine, then you can contemplate the "chevy factory", or as TheRedneck said earlier, a Ford Model A.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Mach2

Ah, but you don't start with the "chevy factory".

It's outside of their frame of reference.

You start with, at that point, fire. From fire you go to smelting of various metals, then alloys of those metals. All within a reference framework they can understand...easier food collecting, warmer, and safer, shelter. Etc...

Transportation. Not chevy's, but wagons, with horses, or dogs, pulling them.

As their reference points improve, so your lessons do in complexity. Eventually, you will get the internal combustion engine, then you can contemplate the "chevy factory", or as TheRedneck said earlier, a Ford Model A.

Yes,

However this is a thought experiment. The intention being there is nothing in the mind or biology of humans 200k years ago that would be in the way of it. Most likely. Now there is genetic memory.

Take it in reverse you could take 100 babies from 200k years ago and raise them today and probably have a high percentage do just fine today.

My point was knowledge is the key. Memory on a biological level.

As we move towards primarily forced evolution the possibilities for human survival in space are even greater.

Consciousness and knowledge.

All the answers already exist. We just can't read the language yet. We don't have the recipe for new fire just yet. But we do have theories based on prior knowledge and hypothesis.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Ahhhh... just thinking about leaving all these swines behind..

That`s why.

originally posted by: crayzeed
FCD, you are in the frame of mind of the early Europeans before Columbus. It can't be done, if we try we will die, there is nothing there, we will fall off the end of the world, but more importantly, it's impossible so we won't even try.

Only the ignorant people thought that it couldn't be done or that people would fall off the end of the world, most people that knew about navigation thought only that India was too far to be reached by going west, and they were right.

But, as we can see on the Lusiads, a book printed in 1572, that at the time, like today, there were people that thought that exploring the seas was just a way of showing how important we are. Because of what is written in the Lusiads we call those people "old men of Restelo".

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Why?

One word: Evolution

Where would we be now if our early "fish-like" ancestors had stayed in the sea instead of hauling themselves out onto dry land? Likely eating mackerel and swimming with mentally challenged kids!

Space is just one more rung on the ladder.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Why men will travel to the end of the known world and beyond?

Because of one simple reason, to feed their mental illusionary concept of reality. An illusion of corporeal #me# needs a continuous convincing that #it# is a thing, thus the reason of travel beyond and beyond - just be able to compare the #self# with the non-self, finding differences, evolving in experience, therefore being different, being unique, being corporeal - solidifying the illusion of self.

And humanity needs solid #mes#, earthly solid, so solid that they will obey without hesitation whatever is asked, when threatened to be shattered. Try shatter the water, try fear the incorporeal, you will fail.

best regards,
-ego

Gosh, people here just can't get off this tangent of "because we can" and "because we want to", and because "we want to experience it personally", and because "it's important for human survival".

It just amazes me.

I'm sorry, but it's a selfish viewpoint, and it really is. Mankind is dragging science down, with his selfish desires to be part of it (personally). Seems some just don't get it. Honestly, I haven't read one argument yet which says anything other than "we want to go too...just to see what it's like...because we're explorers". I haven't heard one credible argument yet like "NO, you don't understand...humanity DEPENDS on us going along for the ride".

I think it's now become a symptom of our society; we've lost the understanding of the difference between "want" and "need".

It's a shame really. Humans aren't all that! They really aren't. Since when did human beings on planet Earth all of a sudden become so privileged? Scientifically humans are feeble, needy, beings. Humans are not survivors. Real trans-galaxy aliens would beat our asses on the playground and take our lunch money. You're foolish if you think differently.

The technology it would take to cross those distances so far exceeds anything humans have developed it's laughable.

But hey, we're already taking orders for Mars!

Good plan.

a reply to: ArMaP

Sorry, but once again, exploring planet Earth is a far different matter than exploring another planet.

You cannot compare the two as they are wholly different. The resources it takes to do the former pale in comparison to the resources it takes to do the latter. Going to the Moon is not anything like going to the North Pole...ask anyone who's been to the North Pole (or the Moon).

Seemingly everyone keeps going off on this tangent about exploring Earth, and comparing it to exploring space. They are two different 'breeds of cat' entirely. Can't anyone see this? I guess no one here has ever worked in the space program. I have. I've seen the challenges. I've seen the sheer scale of what it takes...it's staggering! Just staggering. Even to go into simple orbit around Earth with humans...staggering.

And we're going to go to Mars? To "escape" Earth? REally?

I don't think so.

Believe humans should colonize another planet because of...religion.

Believe humans should colonize another planet because of...human curiosity.

Believe humans should colonize another planet because...it's cool (or 'interesting', or 'feels good' or whatever adjective doesn't upset you).

But, NEVER believe humans have to colonize another planet...to survive! It's a fools errand!

Sorry, but it is.

Let's examine some realities for a moment, shall we?

Okay, we're going to Mars. We're going to take (10) people. The mission directive is to set up a habitat on Mars which will allow others to come to Mars. How many others? Ten (10) more?

On the best day it takes roughly (6) months to get to Mars, but before we can go there we've got to get all the 'stuff' it's going to take to build that habitat into orbit. That's more than one rocket (I won't go into the math, it's easy to find).

So it takes roughly 25-30 launches to get all the material to build this habitat into orbit. Then it all has to be connected together and packed for the journey. Okay, now we have this massive space station orbiting Earth, all ready to go. How are we going to accelerate that space station to Mars?? (hint: more rocket launches).

So after expending billions (likely trillions) in resources we get everything we need to go into orbit. And (10) "explorers" go to Mars. We won't even go into the difficulties of actually "landing" on Mars for the moment, we'll just assume we can.

Okay, so those (10) settlers spend six months of weightlessness traveling to Mars, and then they finally arrive. And then through some "FM" technology they miraculously successfully land on Mars (and live). (highly unlikely, but we'll just accept this for now). Then they send down (30) shuttles of gear to set up camp (and miraculously those survive too).

Fast forward...three months later they've made their camp. Life is good. They're converting CO2 to oxygen, they're melting Martian ice into water to drink. Everything is awesome.

All of a sudden a radio transmission reaches Mars...a gigantic asteroid is coming straight for Earth. It's an "ELE".

Okay, now it's time to move...7.6 BILLION people from Earth to Mars...and there's a whopping (10) people there, on the surface, to support all this. Okay, 7.6 billion can't go...then who can??? Only congressmen and senators? Who?

Think about the realities of all this, folks!! It's not possible! C'mon, please be realistic.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Lol. We don't need everyone to move..that was never the claim.

a reply to: luthier

Who are you???

Noah?? ...Hitler???

ETA..who's going to decide who gets to go, and more importantly...who gave them the authority??????