Is it just me, or is space technology going backwards?
You've all seen 2001: A Space Odessy, right? I was on Space.com this morning and thought, what the fuck? It's 2006 and our space program is a joke. They're talking about going back to the moon in the next 300 years or some shit. (It always seems like they shoot farther ahead than they have to.) And the "new" space vehicle they're sending looks like something built in the 60's! They say it's, "The Apollo mission on steroids." Oooo, like that's supposed to excite the public? It's like sending an Edsel cross country. Big fuckin' deal. How is the American public supposed to jump on the space bandwagon when NASA keeps setting rediculous timelines and using old, recycled technology? There's many reasons to develop better space technology. Like untapped resources, overpopulation the pioneering spirit. So why the fuck are we dragging our feet?! I know why space technology/exploration hasn't gone anywhere...nobody cares. I just wanted to bitch about it.
Here's a sneak peak at NASA's new spacecraft:
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/060329_techwed_nasa_tech.html
Here's a sneak peak at NASA's new spacecraft:
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/060329_techwed_nasa_tech.html
posted by Jack T Briggs at 4:51 AM
.JPG)
.JPG){kind=link}
9 Comments:
Have you been following the X-Prize competition? There was a nice chunck of change for the first person to get a private craft into space. Now they're looking at the moon. The government won't get us there. NASA started things but it's up to private enterprise.
Science fiction movies always seem to over-estimate how quickly humans could advance technologically. "2001" was made in 1968... and at that time interplanetary travel 33 years in the future might have been a reality. The bottom line is that the best technological advances come about during times of war. Think of all the things that were developed from 1938 thru 1945. Then there's all the advancements trying to keep up with the Joneses (Soviets) during the Cold War. That's pretty much the only reason we "raced" to the moon. At the rate we were developing space technology in 1967, we should've been building Command Centers and Spaceports on Mars by 1999. The only way we're going to see really cool space stuff in our lifetime is if we get invaded by Vorlons or Shadows.
This is funny... In "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" Khan's ship, Botany Bay supposedly launched from earth in 1996. Maybe that ship actually did leave, and it took Ricardo Montalbon's career with it.
War was a necessary motivator before capitalism. Now self interest will get us there. The problem at the moment is that it isn’t cost effective to do much of anything in outer space. Once that’s not the case it’ll happen and happen fast. Terraforming will happen after population pressure becomes a lot worse. When there’s congestion in northern Canada or central Montana we’ll start looking to colonize mars. Unless there’s a breakthrough.
Simon has been talking about developing a cold fusion reactor... so maybe there'll be a breakthru soon.
Of course, he also wanted to develop a perpetual motion machince using magnets. So don't hold your breath for that cold fusion anytime soon.
As far as space travel being cost effective: diamonds would probably be the only material worth the time and resources. But, if Arthur C. Clarke was right, the core of Jupiter is a diamond the size of the earth (I highly doubt that). That might motivate some entrepeneurs to get off their asses.
You're not thinking it through Jim, if there were lots of diamonds in space the value of diamonds would drop. They're only valuable because they're believed to be rare.
Self interest will take us there as soon as it can.
I'm no precious metal expert, but it seems to me that the discovery of a vast deposit of diamonds in an unattainable location wouldn't cause the current price of diamonds to drop. Rather, it would really motivate people to develop the technology to go after them. The discovery of vast amounts of gold in North America didn't necessarily decrease the value of gold in Europe. Rather, it motivated the Spanish to traverse the ocean using bigger and better ships, and rape, pillage, and plunder.
It's like this: say you could spend a bunch of money, fly up to space, bring back tons of diamonds and sell them to make a fucking gigantic profit? Now, consider the entities that would actually be able to finance such an endeavor. Mineral and oil companies aren't stupid, they know better than to inundate the market with their products. They only put out enough to make lots of money while keeping demand high. Economics 101.
To me, profiteering is just another word for self-interest.
Jim, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing with me on the utility of mining precious metals and gems in outer space. You illustrated my point though. If diamonds aren’t scarce anymore then they won’t cost much money anymore.
Incidentally, when they went looking for gold in the new world gold was used as a currency. The discovery of massive gold deposits lead to rapid inflation and was bad for the European economy. Unless you found the gold, then you were okay.
Profiteering is typically defined as making excessive profit during times of scarcity. It’s a nice debate about if profiteering is a crime or not. It all hinges on what exactly you mean by excessive.
Related issue: Does anyone here have opinions about the gold standard?
Simon, the prize was enough to get several people to do it. Plus now you’ve got your own space craft. And that’s just cool.
The point I was trying to make was that the development of interstellar technology would be put in "hyperdrive" (pun intended) if there were huge profits to be made. Whether or not inflation would occur is irrelevant. The important thing would be the new spaceships, etc.
To illustrate my point: what do think would get us to Europa quicker- the discovery of some aquatic slugs, or rare metals? I don't think SETI can come close to amassing to funding that DeBeers can.
I think we're completely in agreement here, just can't come to terms on the wording. The inflation bit was just interesting historical trivia.
Post a Comment
<< Home