It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who should explore space: Man or Machine?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I think both

Robots should be the vanguard of space exploration. But the ultimate goal of space travel should be the expansion on humans into the galaxy. Otherwise the human race goes the way of the other 99+% of all life that has ever lived on earth and goes extinct.




posted on Oct, 27 2005 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Machine - its our destiny. Machines / AI is at it infancy atm. I'm sure in 100yrs or so - it will be a different reality.

Lets face it, homo sapien is an advanced design, but wouldn't do to good in the extreme conditions found in space - for long periods.

And no - I haven't watched too much sci fi.

I think short trips in space & some planet hopping will be OK, but the real explorers will be machine with our sigs on them. Representatives for humans. - Nothing wrong with that.

HAL your thoughts please!



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
In space you get one hell of a view.....In the ground...not so much.
Inflatable structures are the way to go, for space, and Mars.

Due to absence of a sufficiently thick atmosphere, life in space, on the moon and on Mars would have to be underground or severely shielded to be protected from solar storms, cosmic radiation and meteorite impacts. All space would need to be minimal as the material costs for larger space would be maximal. At best you'd get a few compartments that do have a few small windows with great view, like used to be the case on Mir.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666

Originally posted by Murcielago
In space you get one hell of a view.....In the ground...not so much.
Inflatable structures are the way to go, for space, and Mars.

Due to absence of a sufficiently thick atmosphere, life in space, on the moon and on Mars would have to be underground or severely shielded to be protected from solar storms, cosmic radiation and meteorite impacts. All space would need to be minimal as the material costs for larger space would be maximal. At best you'd get a few compartments that do have a few small windows with great view, like used to be the case on Mir.


Inflatable structures can handle meteorites, they wont pop or anything.

We do need to increase spending on finding a good light thin flexable material that can hold up to massive radiation. I would also like it if they work on doing it magnetically...like the earth does...but a tricky part would have it be so it doesn't f-up there computers as well.


They hope (on the moon) to get water/ice, so they can use the moons resources ans the water, to make concrete...which of course can stop radiation dead in its tracks.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I'm with JRA on this one. Although ultimately it won't make a huge difference. If a probe goes in first to check it out, then a person could go would be quite good, just like with the Mars probe.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
Inflatable structures can handle meteorites, they wont pop or anything.

But they will leak.



Originally posted by Murcielago
We do need to increase spending on finding a good light thin flexable material that can hold up to massive radiation.

That's pretty useless, that's the domain of nuclear physics and we know by now that you need a certain material thickness. Some materials (polyethylene) are better than others though.



Originally posted by Murcielago
I would also like it if they work on doing it magnetically...like the earth does...but a tricky part would have it be so it doesn't f-up there computers as well.

Only works on charged particles upto a certain speed, plus adds a lot of weight for the magnets powering it.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 06:21 PM
link   
People are missing the essence of exploration. In the past, explorers undertook the mission with a goal fully knowing that they could and in all probability would die. Man has been brainwashed into becoming a coward. To top it all off, you need permission to fly a kite nowadays.
I do think that machines should play a role, albeit a secondary one. Just sending them to do our job negates the purpose and also is what has slowed our evolution or natural progression. We need actual brains at work up there.
I know that the eventual dilemma will arise on what about the no-return missions. I think that we could find someone with no attachments such as children or needy kin. Hell, if my son wasn't just born in July, I would volunteer. As long as information was constantly being sent back to earth then one could not put a price on the mission.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   


You have voted Infra_red for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


That Infra_red, is by far, one of the best and truest posts I have had the pleasure of reading.



posted on Oct, 28 2005 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666

Originally posted by Murcielago
Inflatable structures can handle meteorites, they wont pop or anything.

But they will leak.

No they wont. Because the meteorites wouldn't make it threw the layers of materials that make is up.

Infared - I agree, the media is whos really to blame. and the government for overstepping boundaries. Like: If someone built a new aircraft conept, and wanted to test fly it themselves...they would have to go through all steps, and have to be certified, and have approval, and yada yada yada...ans when ever something goes wrong...the media covers it say "the government shouldn't of let this man fly this unstable aircraft".

I think people like risks...it makes them feel more alive, but the gov and press will continue to make taking risks...harder.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Send robots as scouts. Then if a moon or a planet looks interesting and is deemed safe for human exploration and is realistically in reach, then send humans.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infra_red
People are missing the essence of exploration. In the past, explorers undertook the mission with a goal fully knowing that they could and in all probability would die.


LOL! Are you an astronaut or were you ever an explorer? LOL!


Man has been brainwashed into becoming a coward.


Yes, one man, you.


I do think that machines should play a role, albeit a secondary one. Just sending them to do our job negates the purpose and also is what has slowed our evolution or natural progression. We need actual brains at work up there.


Negates what purpose? Slowed evolution? Explain.


I know that the eventual dilemma will arise on what about the no-return missions. I think that we could find someone with no attachments such as children or needy kin. Hell, if my son wasn't just born in July, I would volunteer. As long as information was constantly being sent back to earth then one could not put a price on the mission.


Yes, and this thing without attachments is called a robot: welcome to the 21 century.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
As interesting as exploring space may be, we have yet to explore our home planet. Hell we can't even keep the earth healthy. Huge wastes of money to actually send man into space when we can just upgrade our scopes to see further. Where the hell are we gonna go anyway?



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by I See You
As interesting as exploring space may be, we have yet to explore our home planet.


Most of our planet has been explored. and its not like its not getting its share of attention.....example: Global Warming.
Nasa and other havn't stop launching satellites that watch the earth...but its the ones above the planets we know little about that grab the headlines.



Hell we can't even keep the earth healthy.

theres nothing wrong with the earth.




Huge wastes of money to actually send man into space when we can just upgrade our scopes to see further.

Do you not want the human race to expand?



Where the hell are we gonna go anyway?

ISS, Moon, & then to Mars.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
As interesting as this man -vs- machine discussion has been, I don't think a lot of respondents comprehend the difference in cost between a manned and an unmanned mission--you are talking about a difference of near 1000 to 1. Think about that for a minute. Think of the number of exploratory missions that could be undertaken by machines that mankind will probably never be able to make. Sure machines are dumb compared to humans, but you could launch about a 1000 times as many. I'm relatively certain mankinds role will be limited, at least initially, to missions that machines just can't do and/or to missions that serve to galvanize support & funding for future activities.



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Originally posted by I See You
As interesting as exploring space may be, we have yet to explore our home planet.


Most of our planet has been explored. and its not like its not getting its share of attention.....example: Global Warming.
Nasa and other havn't stop launching satellites that watch the earth...but its the ones above the planets we know little about that grab the headlines.



Hell we can't even keep the earth healthy.

theres nothing wrong with the earth.




Huge wastes of money to actually send man into space when we can just upgrade our scopes to see further.

Do you not want the human race to expand?



Where the hell are we gonna go anyway?

ISS, Moon, & then to Mars.


A great deal of the earth has not been explored. We have never come close to the depths of the sea nor the vastness of the seas itself.

The earth is healthy? If you say so...


How will the human race expand by this? We may learn our heritage or being but to expand will take alot longer than you think.

So going back to the moon and mars will do what for us? More headlines for the USA so we can go into another space race with other nations like what had happened with Russia.

No I think there are many other things that are farrrrr more important than exploring space. I'm highly interested in space and always have been but I try to think before I act on such things.

[edit on 29-10-2005 by I See You]



posted on Oct, 29 2005 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Hey frosty, whats up with you? These are grown folks talking. Stay in your place.


No I have never been a astronaut. Have you? Have you ever anywhere on your own no better yet out of your room? I've traveled the majority of the eastern seaboard before i was 18 not to mention BY MYSELF since I was 14. And i don't mean visiting family or friends. I'm talking about just deciding to go to Florida one day at the age of 16 and jumping on a bus from New Jersey with no parents or anything. No security blanket, not knowing what will happen when I get there. I have an explorers spirit.


Only a coward would take pot shots over the internet when unprovoked. You must be a lame person. Sorry for you.


As for the machines slowing our evolution, they have. We "evolved" to the point that we made use of crude machines but now we have become so dependent upon them that our brains have ceased to develop or at least slowed down in use. Machines are used to create new machines so actually they are evolving.
The purpose, in my belief, of exploration is to go out and discover new things about new places. Also to try to test the mettle of human inteligence, ingenuity, and determination against the unknown.

Lastly, if the governments of the world can create armies who are willing to die even though they have attachments such as children or elderly family, then it shouldn't be too hard to find the same type of person for the benefit of the entire human race.




posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infra_red
The purpose, in my belief, of exploration is to go out and discover new things about new places. Also to try to test the mettle of human inteligence, ingenuity, and determination against the unknown.

Lastly, if the governments of the world can create armies who are willing to die even though they have attachments such as children or elderly family, then it shouldn't be too hard to find the same type of person for the benefit of the entire human race.



Hey Infra_Red, while I agree with your posts, I am looking at it from and evolutional perspective too.
Why did we create machines in the first place?

I still think the human spirit in exploration will always be there, and I can't see that dying, because as long as there are questions, our being will drive us to seek the answers. How we find the answers is up to us.

If this means sending a machine to do the "dirty" work first, well so be it.
It was our desire to build a machine and then put it on Mars.

I think spontaneous decisions etc will improve and looking further down the evolutional track, I'm tipping machines will become sentient. I think its a certainty. The set of instructions they follow now are written/designed by humans - a flawed & limited being when dealing with conditions in space.
Wait till 'they' write their own.... lets hope they don't make us do "their" dirty work..



[edit on 3-11-2005 by one_small_step]



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infra_red
Hey frosty, whats up with you?

Only a coward would take pot shots over the internet when unprovoked. You must be a lame person. Sorry for you.


Oh, I see...it is wrong for me to take shots at you in response for calling me and my generation a bunch of brainwashed cowards, but ok for you to just come out without any references or sources and state that I and my generation are a bunch of cowards?

Please learn to think about what you are typing, especially if you do not want people taking shots at what you say.

Hopefully me and my brainwashed companions will somehow learn from the mistakes of your generation, but we probably can't since we are too brainwashed.



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Currently, by far the cheapest means is via robotic exploration. Less adventure more safety and boring.

The evolution of the human spirit has been thru expansion of our horizons. The next valley, the next hill. Why limit ourselves to just one planet when we weren't content with just one hemisphere?

Exploration either internal or external is in human nature. Not only the land, but the oceans... I think Magellan did a great circumnavigation of the earth personally.

Undersea? Definately but, why not both. There are wonders of life in the sea but for some of us the wonders of imagination lie beyond the thin veil of atmosphere that keeps us safe.

Not adrenaline hounds but, those that desire to grasp that feeling of awe and wonder, looking back at the beautiful blue/green jewel of our cradle the earth.

It's finally time for us to test the waters outside of the tiny confines of the earth / moon system and swim deep into the unknown.

Or we get a pop tart and watch an old Sienfield? Who knows....



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   

i see you
A great deal of the earth has not been explored. We have never come close to the depths of the sea nor the vastness of the seas itself.

The earth is healthy? If you say so...

How will the human race expand by this?

really??? the Mariana trench is the deepest part of the ocean...which was first seen back in 73'.

Give me a credible link that says the earth is unhealthy.

The human race will expand its hold in this solar system, earth / moon / Mars / ect. We should keep pushing the boundaries of what we can do.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join