SPACE - Bush kind of got it - Obama truly visionary

[dilloduck]

I understand where you are coming from, but at the same time, I'm wondering if you see the "big" picture.

As long as "NASA" goes it alone, the cost will be unsustainable. It's when we begin to exploit space as a "resource" and open it up to making money (the Republican mantra) that we will see innovation.

For instance. Alloys in low gravity. Imagine salad oil and vinegar. No matter how much you shake it, after two minutes, it separates. NOT in zero G. As long as they are in zero G, they will stay perfectly blended.

Now imagine taking two metals on earth that normally never combine because of gravity and creating an alloy that has high conductivity and low resistance or is especially strong and durable or resistant to chemicals. The metals can be melted, but as they solidify, gravity always causes them to separate at least some, and that could be enough to make it lose that quality.

Also, high end transistor silicon crystals are always purist when grown in zero G. We already know this.

And what is the potential or developing new drugs in zero G.

Imagine we put some big old factories up there and we need a way to get to them, do you think new rockets won't be developed? If we can find a profit up there, you will have companies throwing money to develop new rockets to make it happen.

Sure. We'll get rockets designed to function only in low-Earth orbit, fueled by currently available chemical compounds, and manned by crews trained and equipped solely for short-haul space trucking. And at minimum half of those "factories" will be or harbor miltary installations.

You apparently have no concept of the difference between short haul low-Earth orbit flight and a Moon shot, let alone the engineering and technology required to solve the problems with interplanetary travel. Anyone who tells you this is the way to develop the space program for Mars is selling you beachfront property in Kansas.

I'll take a moon shot for $500, Alex !

 

[rdean]

I understand where you are coming from, but at the same time, I'm wondering if you see the "big" picture.

As long as "NASA" goes it alone, the cost will be unsustainable. It's when we begin to exploit space as a "resource" and open it up to making money (the Republican mantra) that we will see innovation.

For instance. Alloys in low gravity. Imagine salad oil and vinegar. No matter how much you shake it, after two minutes, it separates. NOT in zero G. As long as they are in zero G, they will stay perfectly blended.

Now imagine taking two metals on earth that normally never combine because of gravity and creating an alloy that has high conductivity and low resistance or is especially strong and durable or resistant to chemicals. The metals can be melted, but as they solidify, gravity always causes them to separate at least some, and that could be enough to make it lose that quality.

Also, high end transistor silicon crystals are always purist when grown in zero G. We already know this.

And what is the potential or developing new drugs in zero G.

Imagine we put some big old factories up there and we need a way to get to them, do you think new rockets won't be developed? If we can find a profit up there, you will have companies throwing money to develop new rockets to make it happen.

Sure. We'll get rockets designed to function only in low-Earth orbit, fueled by currently available chemical compounds, and manned by crews trained and equipped solely for short-haul space trucking. And at minimum half of those "factories" will be or harbor miltary installations.

You apparently have no concept of the difference between short haul low-Earth orbit flight and a Moon shot, let alone the engineering and technology required to solve the problems with interplanetary travel. Anyone who tells you this is the way to develop the space program for Mars is selling you beachfront property in Kansas.

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

 

[dilloduck]

thrusting continually is sorta like a moon shot

 

[goldcatt]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

 

[del]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

you're just not visionary enough, dammit.

once we perfect zero g vinaigrettes, tourists will flock and we use THAT money to go to mars. simple.

ask any republican scientist, they'll tell you...

 

[dilloduck]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

Putzing continually really can't be called a moon shot. I'm talking about real thrusting here.

 

[rdean]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

you're just not visionary enough, dammit.

once we perfect zero g vinaigrettes, tourists will flock and we use THAT money to go to mars. simple.

ask any republican scientist, they'll tell you...

Now that's funny.

I'll be sure to ask the first Republican Scientist I find. Of course, they are harder to find than a Republican who believes in the science of evolution.

 

[del]

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

you're just not visionary enough, dammit.

once we perfect zero g vinaigrettes, tourists will flock and we use THAT money to go to mars. simple.

ask any republican scientist, they'll tell you...

Now that's funny.

I'll be sure to ask the first Republican Scientist I find. Of course, they are harder to find than a Republican who believes in the science of evolution.

you might have more success finding things if you pulled your head out of your ass once in awhile.

just sayin

 

[rdean]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

Putzing continually really can't be called a moon shot. I'm talking about real thrusting here.

Speaking of "moon shot", I didn't even know Australia had a "space program":

 

[goldcatt]

Which is why we need NASA to concentrate on the Big Picture and not waste time with old technology.

LightSail - The Future of Solar Sailing - What We Do | The Planetary Society

turning the run-of-the-mill duties of shuttling astronauts into low-earth orbit over to private companies and shifting NASA’s focus to “"advance robotics and other steps that will help to inspire Americans and not just return a man or a woman to the Moon but undertake the longer range research that could succeed in human spaceflight to Mars."

NASA Budget: Constellation Officially Canned, But The Deep-Space Future Is Bright | Popular Science

NASA breaks ground on new deep space network antennas

You gotta be able to talk.

Deep Space 1 — NASA Science

The most heralded of these was the first use of ion propulsion. This type of engine uses xenon gas which is ionized by bombarding it with electrons. The positively charged ions can than be used to produce a very small amount of thrust but by thrusting continuously over time, acceleration builds.

---------------------------------

I'm pretty sure I kinda get it.

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

you're just not visionary enough, dammit.

once we perfect zero g vinaigrettes, tourists will flock and we use THAT money to go to mars. simple.

ask any republican scientist, they'll tell you...

Of course it's NASA who will be concentrating on Mars while the venture capitalists and private firms are busy perfecting the perfect zero-g space cruise for fun and profit. And building huge space factories making dirt cheap prescription drugs in space so we can lower our health care costs. Two birds with one stone there.

And those private companies are just ready and willing to step up to the plate now, today, so NASA can concentrate on Mars.

Those crafty republican scientists!

 

[dilloduck]

Hell with Mars---I'm going for Uranus

 

[goldcatt]

Putzing continually really can't be called a moon shot. I'm talking about real thrusting here.

Sounds like those Republican scientists are leaving you high and dry.

 

[dilloduck]

Putzing continually really can't be called a moon shot. I'm talking about real thrusting here.

Sounds like those Republican scientists are leaving you high and dry.

This is about science ?? n/m

 

[goldcatt]

Hell with Mars---I'm going for Uranus

I hope you were talking to del.

 

[dilloduck]

Hell with Mars---I'm going for Uranus

I hope you were talking to del.

Del dumped me along time ago-----you didn't hear ??? I'm shocked

 

[goldcatt]

Hell with Mars---I'm going for Uranus

I hope you were talking to del.

Del dumped me along time ago-----you didn't hear ??? I'm shocked

I'm always out of the loop.

 

[eagleseven]

I understand where you are coming from, but at the same time, I'm wondering if you see the "big" picture.

As long as "NASA" goes it alone, the cost will be unsustainable. It's when we begin to exploit space as a "resource" and open it up to making money (the Republican mantra) that we will see innovation.

For instance. Alloys in low gravity. Imagine salad oil and vinegar. No matter how much you shake it, after two minutes, it separates. NOT in zero G. As long as they are in zero G, they will stay perfectly blended.

Now imagine taking two metals on earth that normally never combine because of gravity and creating an alloy that has high conductivity and low resistance or is especially strong and durable or resistant to chemicals. The metals can be melted, but as they solidify, gravity always causes them to separate at least some, and that could be enough to make it lose that quality.

Also, high end transistor silicon crystals are always purist when grown in zero G. We already know this.

And what is the potential or developing new drugs in zero G.

Imagine we put some big old factories up there and we need a way to get to them, do you think new rockets won't be developed? If we can find a profit up there, you will have companies throwing money to develop new rockets to make it happen.

Replace "NASA" with "National Healthcare Administration", "low-gravity" with "medicine", and you've made the argument against nationalized healthcare.

Thank you for pointing out the intellectual inconsistency of this administration.

 

[rdean]

And putzing around in low-Earth orbit for a decade or so servicing commercial and military ventures will encourage development of new technologies suited for long duration spaceflight how, again?

you're just not visionary enough, dammit.

once we perfect zero g vinaigrettes, tourists will flock and we use THAT money to go to mars. simple.

ask any republican scientist, they'll tell you...

Of course it's NASA who will be concentrating on Mars while the venture capitalists and private firms are busy perfecting the perfect zero-g space cruise for fun and profit. And building huge space factories making dirt cheap prescription drugs in space so we can lower our health care costs. Two birds with one stone there.

And those private companies are just ready and willing to step up to the plate now, today, so NASA can concentrate on Mars.

Those crafty republican scientists!

The 6% of scientists that are Republican aren't going to waste their meager talents at "NASA". They have ID to study.

 

[goldcatt]

The 6% of scientists that are Republican aren't going to waste their meager talents at "NASA". They have ID to study.

I'll explain this very slowly and carefully so even you can understand, rdean.

What you're proposing is that the US Government, through NASA, bleed billions of dlollars and years of valuable time into developing and perfecting low-orbit space flight, orbital labs (ISS, anyone?) and orbiting manufacturing facilities for commercial applications. Applications, I might add, which do nothing to advance technology necessary for use in Solar System exploration.

Then, after spending the time and money on these ventures, we are to turn them over to private entities so they can build burger bars in space. Oh yeah, and use all that low overhead of an orbital factory to make things like prescription drugs and silicon crystals. Since of course we all know transportation expenses and the exorbitant salaries space workers would no doubt demand would lead to an affordable, competitive, profitable alternative to what is on the market today.

A small handful of private companies are at the stage where they can launch a satellite. A very few others are already working on experimental low-orbit commuter planes. We should just take all the R&D out of their hands, spend the money from the US Treasury, THEN turn it back over to them to make their profits while we turn our attention and billions more to Mars.

I'm all for spending the money on the space program, but why do it twice and privatize any returns - assuming private concerns would even be capable and interested in taking it over when and if the time finally comes? If they are and somehow do make a profit, what on Earth or out of it will be an incentive to them to pour the money into any new technologies when these things can all be serviced by the old?

Never mind the perennial internal feud over the balance between scientific, commercial and military uses for NASA. The military uses of NASA are operated out of a different, hidden part of the budget and are of course classified, nobody in the general public knows the full extent of what is being done, when or how. It may be little, it may be a lot. But this blueprint going forward makes it very easy for the military to get a permanent foothold in orbit. And militarizing space is a whole other topic, but the short answer is it's a very, very bad idea.

rdean, I can't believe you of all people are advocating privatizing and militarizing space simply because it came from this Administration. Another Apollo is what we need now, for the jobs it creates as well as the science it generates. Mars!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama's a fucking Muslim Marxist Macaca who killed NASA.