News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Perseverance Landing On Mars

Started by drunkenshoe, February 18, 2021, 02:27:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cassia

#15
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 24, 2021, 08:31:23 AM
The "we can only do one thing at a time" argument is fallacious.
Misallocation of limited resources is not fallacious
PS..OK..well this has me wondering now. How many years will it be before human beings will be able to self-sustain indefinitely in outer space? Maybe we are closer than I think. Do we really need a host planet?

Gawdzilla Sama

The resources aren't that limited. Fallacious again.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Cassia

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 24, 2021, 02:03:04 PM
The resources aren't that limited. Fallacious again.
Yeah, we have come so far, LOL. Whistling past the graveyard will end of its own accord.

Hydra009

Quote from: Cassia on February 24, 2021, 08:18:27 AM
Those pics sure look great, gonna stay tuned for a lot more. One thing that is concerning is the argument for ramping-up space travel because our planet is environmentally doomed...the human survival argument. This should not be our motivation for space travel. Of all the solutions, I think off-Earth colonies are the least realistic answer given the climate change time table we are facing versus our current abilities to survive long-term in outer space.
In the sense of "let's blast off to Mars because the Earth is fubar", it's utterly wrong.  Climate change is a massive and immediate concern and space colonization would take much too long and be heavily dependent on Earth for a very long time anyway.  We can't just discard the Earth like a hermit crab discarding its shell, that's totally unrealistic and beyond our ability.

In the sense that Stephen Hawking and others have put it, it's not crazy.   In the long term, we need to settle other planets/moons because a catastrophe could befall the Earth and we would be smart to hedge against that.  Though obviously, we need to get our own house in order, too.  The good news is that attempting to terraform other planets could yield insights to help us learn how to manage our own world.  The two endeavors don't necessarily have to be at odds, in fact, they could work in tandem.

Hydra009

#19
Quote from: Cassia on February 24, 2021, 10:25:56 AM
Misallocation of limited resources is not fallacious
While it's true that resources are limited, as I made note of earlier, space exploration funding in the US is pitifully low and other, much less useful/important/humane projects get much more funding.  We can (and regularly do) do much, much worse than funding rover launches.  So I'm not sure I fully understand this argument about misallocating resources.


QuotePS..OK..well this has me wondering now. How many years will it be before human beings will be able to self-sustain indefinitely in outer space? Maybe we are closer than I think. Do we really need a host planet?
No idea, but I can guess.  We already have people living for months at a time at the ISS.  That's a good start.  I expect a permanent moonbase within the next 50 years, though it will obviously not be self-sustaining.  I don't expect any colonies - moon, planet, or free floating - to become self-sustaining for centuries at the least.  Unless we unlock truly godlike tech like teleporters or replicators, I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future.

Gawdzilla Sama

Quote from: Cassia on February 24, 2021, 02:34:51 PM
Yeah, we have come so far, LOL. Whistling past the graveyard will end of its own accord.
You just moved the goalposts.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Gawdzilla Sama

We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

drunkenshoe

In my opinion, they will skip any kind of moon project and concentrate on Mars only.
"I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are good people and bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides." Havelock Vetinari

Gawdzilla Sama

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 25, 2021, 02:59:49 AM
In my opinion, they will skip any kind of moon project and concentrate on Mars only.
Launching missions from the Moon would be a tremendous advantage. We could make rocket fuel on the Moon that doesn't have to be lifted out of the Earth's gravity well for one.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Cassia

Quote from: Hydra009 on February 24, 2021, 03:52:53 PM
While it's true that resources are limited, as I made note of earlier, space exploration funding in the US is pitifully low and other, much less useful/important/humane projects get much more funding.  We can (and regularly do) do much, much worse than funding rover launches.  So I'm not sure I fully understand this argument about misallocating resources.

No idea, but I can guess.  We already have people living for months at a time at the ISS.  That's a good start.  I expect a permanent moonbase within the next 50 years, though it will obviously not be self-sustaining.  I don't expect any colonies - moon, planet, or free floating - to become self-sustaining for centuries at the least.  Unless we unlock truly godlike tech like teleporters or replicators, I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future.
Centuries, yes I agree. So the argument that space exploration is leverage against our current climate crisis is nonsense.
But if we do not ensure Earth remains a livable world for manyâ€"a crisis we can already capably addressâ€"what would be the point in aiming for the stars? We may want to produce oxygen to breathe on Mars and grow salads to eat on the moon, but “Earth does all these things for us” already, Massa says. Perhaps, she speculates, the troubles of living in space might make people better appreciate the things we take for granted back home.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-spaceflight-save-the-planet/

Frankly, I would not mind harnessing some of NASA's brain power along with other government agencies for a clear path. A novel scientific solution would be awesome. I am not sure the business world is gonna fix this. Society will pay any carbon tax until it becomes incredibly painful for everyone; then what?


Hydra009

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 25, 2021, 07:49:47 AM
Launching missions from the Moon would be a tremendous advantage. We could make rocket fuel on the Moon that doesn't have to be lifted out of the Earth's gravity well for one.
Exactly.  It's the perfect launch site.  Also, never have to abort a launch due to bad weather.  :)

Mike Cl

Heinlein tells all about launching from the moon in The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress.  Follow his plans. :)
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

drunkenshoe

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 25, 2021, 07:49:47 AM
Launching missions from the Moon would be a tremendous advantage. We could make rocket fuel on the Moon that doesn't have to be lifted out of the Earth's gravity well for one.

Quote from: Hydra009 on February 25, 2021, 12:26:16 PM
Exactly.  It's the perfect launch site.  Also, never have to abort a launch due to bad weather.  :)

Yeah it makes sense. I had never thought of that way.

"I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are good people and bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides." Havelock Vetinari

Gawdzilla Sama

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 25, 2021, 12:40:36 PM
Heinlein tells all about launching from the moon in The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress.  Follow his plans. :)
1. Throw rocks.
2. Repeat.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Mike Cl

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 25, 2021, 05:44:26 PM
1. Throw rocks.
2. Repeat.
The book--The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress--introduced this concept to me for the first time:
"A mass driver or electromagnetic catapult is a proposed method of non-rocket spacelaunch which would use a linear motor to accelerate and catapult payloads up to high speeds. All existing and contemplated mass drivers use coils of wire energized by electricity to make electromagnets. Sequential firing of a row of electromagnets accelerates the payload along a path. After leaving the path, the payload continues to move due to momentum."

Except in the book is what was used to get back to Earth.  And, remember, the ex-cons who were on the moon were going to use that as a weapon in their revolt against the Earth authority.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?