|
Keep Nation bragging and the political debate out. |
On August 06 2012 17:18 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 16:49 Yurie wrote:On August 06 2012 16:39 Bobgrimly wrote:
So yes if you are a scientist this would be interesting. I love the idea of exploring space but missions like this kill any belief it will ever happen. Put a man back on the moon! Then worry about mars. What would putting a man on the moon give us? Putting one of those rovers on the moon would be cheaper and give us more worth in exploration. Putting a man on Mars and then sending it back is the same thing, it gives us nothing a machine can't give us except PR and hopefully a change of attitude in people. Planning to put one there and not sending it back gives a whole lot since you have to solve how that person will stay alive without support from Earth for every little thing (as the space station get). What does putting a man on the moon give us? We have already been there.... have we? How many people on this site were alive when the last moon landing happened? Anyone been to the moon in your lifetime? Yet you give a crap about a robot on mars???? I would kill to see a man on the moon. Its never happened as far as I know. Not in my lifetime. Once a decade just to prove it can still be done and that mars is still a possibility wouldn't kill the budget if they honestly and successfully did it as many times as they say they did. And what is the robot going to give them that a man on the moon won't? Dirt samples? Put a man on mars and hell yeah we are talking. That guy can get a spade and take more samples in 5 minutes than that robot can do in its entire life. That guy can travel further and identify oddities quicker and inspect them. They could do a lot of things. But instead they waste time and money testing dirt and air on mars. It has no atmosphere that is survivable at the moment. Why bother testing it with a vehicle that can't dig deep enough or travel far enough to really find anything useful? Why not PROGRESS towards the goal of establishing a base there? You don't need the atmosphere if you have a sealed base. And a working livable base would mean a million times more effective study/testing/mining/exploring missions. So why go to the moon... because its a stepping stone that needs to be stepped on. For progress' sake.
Progress in this case is that NASA engineers developed a new landing technique using different mechanisms requiring more complicated and precise tools. It shows that such an idea is actually feasible and that NASA engineers have accounted for most unknown variables needed to pull this off.
EDIT: Teoita beat me to it.
|
On August 06 2012 16:15 Bobgrimly wrote:
May I ask why this is a big deal? They sent a rover a few years back. So they are sending another.... yay? Like the second one is going to come up with some earth shattering discovery.... no. If I was a geologist I would be slightly more interested. Or if they find large deposits of gold or other rare and valuable minerals and I am one of those new private space venture investors I might be happy. But otherwise why does this matter to anyone? There is no real gain or progress. Until they can maintain a base on the moon and travel to that repeatedly no mission to mars will ever happen. And anyone with half a brain will tell you even going back to the moon isn't likely to be viable.
Not sure if you are trolling or serious but you MIGHT be happy if they found gold on mars? really? Do you have any clue what is going on here? I can take your other argument a bit serious but that line just killed it.
|
On August 06 2012 17:20 IreScath wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 16:39 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 06 2012 16:17 stratmatt wrote:On August 06 2012 16:15 Bobgrimly wrote:
May I ask why this is a big deal? They sent a rover a few years back. So they are sending another.... yay? Like the second one is going to come up with some earth shattering discovery.... no. If I was a geologist I would be slightly more interested. Or if they find large deposits of gold or other rare and valuable minerals and I am one of those new private space venture investors I might be happy. But otherwise why does this matter to anyone? There is no real gain or progress. Until they can maintain a base on the moon and travel to that repeatedly no mission to mars will ever happen. And anyone with half a brain will tell you even going back to the moon isn't likely to be viable. troll detected. Anyone with half a brain sees this as a humongous achievement for mankind so what happened to yours? Wrong. Its been done before so there is nothing to achieve. They will get more accurate data on some dirt and the air. Yay. While I don't begrudge it happening I fail to see why so many people in this thread are excited about something that has been done before. Yes the USA should put their military budget into NASA and get some real progress. But this isn't progress. Progress would mean something new happens. 20 rovers on mars isn't progress. A thousand robots on mars just means we are really good at polluting two planets now. So yes if you are a scientist this would be interesting. I love the idea of exploring space but missions like this kill any belief it will ever happen. Put a man back on the moon! Then worry about mars. Arguing from ignorance is fun I hope.... New things in this mission: -The big one.. The SIZE of this rover is basically the size of a mini-cooper. The largest by a huge margin... Large enough that it needed an entire new way of landing on the planet. This landing method is how we would land humans on mars... So testing this, and seeing that it works.. Is ridiculously huge. Even ridiculously huge doesn't put it into perspective -Where it landed It has landed in a place that is ripe (or actually I should say 'the ripest for Mars) with the chance of finding evidence of life on mars. This is huge in determining if there is or was life on Mars. Things like this are essential for a number of reasons.. first.. If life was on mars.. and now its not.. Why?.. And how can we prevent what happened there, from happening on Earth, in order to save our own asses. -Progress in general.... Discoveries of the best kind happen in places that are different, and happen when you are not expecting them to. Electricity, lasers, gravity, penicillin, optics... Those discoveries themselves..or what caused the research to find them.. were accidents, and most dealt with frontiers. You do not progress by doing the same thing again (man on moon).... Until today (and other landers), if aliens came from another planet and looked at our history of space travel (IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)... They would see this: we use un-reusable rockets to go to space station - we use reusable shuttle to go to space station - we build a space station - we land on the moon!..
Thank you. This is the first post with something useful in it. But still... based on your last portion progress is getting back to where we were.... 40 years ago.
|
I love the idea that this would be worth it if we found gold on Mars. Because mining it with robots, then filling a spaceship with gold, pulling it out of the Martian gravity well and landing it safely on Earth is going to be super cost effective.
I am so proud of the ladies and gentlemen of NASA that pulled this off. What an incredible achievement. I'm so glad to see that even a tiny fraction of our resources are still going toward advancing what our species is capable of and expanding the boundaries of humanity. Next up, Mars colony!
|
This rover has the tools to determine if life was possible or existed on Mars.
If you can't figure out how significant that is then we cant help you really.
|
On August 06 2012 17:25 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:20 IreScath wrote:On August 06 2012 16:39 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 06 2012 16:17 stratmatt wrote:On August 06 2012 16:15 Bobgrimly wrote:
May I ask why this is a big deal? They sent a rover a few years back. So they are sending another.... yay? Like the second one is going to come up with some earth shattering discovery.... no. If I was a geologist I would be slightly more interested. Or if they find large deposits of gold or other rare and valuable minerals and I am one of those new private space venture investors I might be happy. But otherwise why does this matter to anyone? There is no real gain or progress. Until they can maintain a base on the moon and travel to that repeatedly no mission to mars will ever happen. And anyone with half a brain will tell you even going back to the moon isn't likely to be viable. troll detected. Anyone with half a brain sees this as a humongous achievement for mankind so what happened to yours? Wrong. Its been done before so there is nothing to achieve. They will get more accurate data on some dirt and the air. Yay. While I don't begrudge it happening I fail to see why so many people in this thread are excited about something that has been done before. Yes the USA should put their military budget into NASA and get some real progress. But this isn't progress. Progress would mean something new happens. 20 rovers on mars isn't progress. A thousand robots on mars just means we are really good at polluting two planets now. So yes if you are a scientist this would be interesting. I love the idea of exploring space but missions like this kill any belief it will ever happen. Put a man back on the moon! Then worry about mars. Arguing from ignorance is fun I hope.... New things in this mission: -The big one.. The SIZE of this rover is basically the size of a mini-cooper. The largest by a huge margin... Large enough that it needed an entire new way of landing on the planet. This landing method is how we would land humans on mars... So testing this, and seeing that it works.. Is ridiculously huge. Even ridiculously huge doesn't put it into perspective -Where it landed It has landed in a place that is ripe (or actually I should say 'the ripest for Mars) with the chance of finding evidence of life on mars. This is huge in determining if there is or was life on Mars. Things like this are essential for a number of reasons.. first.. If life was on mars.. and now its not.. Why?.. And how can we prevent what happened there, from happening on Earth, in order to save our own asses. -Progress in general.... Discoveries of the best kind happen in places that are different, and happen when you are not expecting them to. Electricity, lasers, gravity, penicillin, optics... Those discoveries themselves..or what caused the research to find them.. were accidents, and most dealt with frontiers. You do not progress by doing the same thing again (man on moon).... Until today (and other landers), if aliens came from another planet and looked at our history of space travel (IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)... They would see this: we use un-reusable rockets to go to space station - we use reusable shuttle to go to space station - we build a space station - we land on the moon!.. Thank you. This is the first post with something useful in it. But still... based on your last portion progress is getting back to where we were.... 40 years ago.
What do you mean? The stuff they used this landing is brand new.
You know, NASA doesn't have the funding they had back then, it's totally unreasonable to expect the same progress. Hell, it would be even if they had the same funding.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On August 06 2012 17:25 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:20 IreScath wrote:On August 06 2012 16:39 Bobgrimly wrote:On August 06 2012 16:17 stratmatt wrote:On August 06 2012 16:15 Bobgrimly wrote:
May I ask why this is a big deal? They sent a rover a few years back. So they are sending another.... yay? Like the second one is going to come up with some earth shattering discovery.... no. If I was a geologist I would be slightly more interested. Or if they find large deposits of gold or other rare and valuable minerals and I am one of those new private space venture investors I might be happy. But otherwise why does this matter to anyone? There is no real gain or progress. Until they can maintain a base on the moon and travel to that repeatedly no mission to mars will ever happen. And anyone with half a brain will tell you even going back to the moon isn't likely to be viable. troll detected. Anyone with half a brain sees this as a humongous achievement for mankind so what happened to yours? Wrong. Its been done before so there is nothing to achieve. They will get more accurate data on some dirt and the air. Yay. While I don't begrudge it happening I fail to see why so many people in this thread are excited about something that has been done before. Yes the USA should put their military budget into NASA and get some real progress. But this isn't progress. Progress would mean something new happens. 20 rovers on mars isn't progress. A thousand robots on mars just means we are really good at polluting two planets now. So yes if you are a scientist this would be interesting. I love the idea of exploring space but missions like this kill any belief it will ever happen. Put a man back on the moon! Then worry about mars. Arguing from ignorance is fun I hope.... New things in this mission: -The big one.. The SIZE of this rover is basically the size of a mini-cooper. The largest by a huge margin... Large enough that it needed an entire new way of landing on the planet. This landing method is how we would land humans on mars... So testing this, and seeing that it works.. Is ridiculously huge. Even ridiculously huge doesn't put it into perspective -Where it landed It has landed in a place that is ripe (or actually I should say 'the ripest for Mars) with the chance of finding evidence of life on mars. This is huge in determining if there is or was life on Mars. Things like this are essential for a number of reasons.. first.. If life was on mars.. and now its not.. Why?.. And how can we prevent what happened there, from happening on Earth, in order to save our own asses. -Progress in general.... Discoveries of the best kind happen in places that are different, and happen when you are not expecting them to. Electricity, lasers, gravity, penicillin, optics... Those discoveries themselves..or what caused the research to find them.. were accidents, and most dealt with frontiers. You do not progress by doing the same thing again (man on moon).... Until today (and other landers), if aliens came from another planet and looked at our history of space travel (IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)... They would see this: we use un-reusable rockets to go to space station - we use reusable shuttle to go to space station - we build a space station - we land on the moon!.. Thank you. This is the first post with something useful in it. But still... based on your last portion progress is getting back to where we were.... 40 years ago.
Going to the moon takes a couple of weeks. Going to Mars takes months. You can't just rebuild the Apollo and shoot it towards Mars saying "YO WE ARE SENDING PEOPLE THERE". Any mission heading to Mars is several times harder and more complex that a mission going to the moon, and even then it took roughtly 10 years of projects, robot explorers and test to start the Apollo program.
|
Yep, we should just fuck NASA because hell, we should just all die on Earth.
No, FUCK YOU.
Even if it's not in my life time, someday... I hope there are colonies in space.
|
On August 06 2012 17:26 AmericanUmlaut wrote:
I love the idea that this would be worth it if we found gold on Mars. Because mining it with robots, then filling a spaceship with gold, pulling it out of the Martian gravity well and landing it safely on Earth is going to be super cost effective.
I am so proud of the ladies and gentlemen of NASA that pulled this off. What an incredible achievement. I'm so glad to see that even a tiny fraction of our resources are still going toward advancing what our species is capable of and expanding the boundaries of humanity. Next up, Mars colony!
You may be happy to hear they are planing on mining asteroids.
http://www.planetaryresources.com/mission/
|
On August 06 2012 17:29 sirkyan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:26 AmericanUmlaut wrote:
I love the idea that this would be worth it if we found gold on Mars. Because mining it with robots, then filling a spaceship with gold, pulling it out of the Martian gravity well and landing it safely on Earth is going to be super cost effective.
I am so proud of the ladies and gentlemen of NASA that pulled this off. What an incredible achievement. I'm so glad to see that even a tiny fraction of our resources are still going toward advancing what our species is capable of and expanding the boundaries of humanity. Next up, Mars colony! You may be happy to hear they are planing on mining asteroids. http://www.planetaryresources.com/mission/
I know that they are. You're aware asteroids aren't hanging out at the bottom of a massive gravity well, right? And that you don't have to dig down hundreds or thousands of meters to get to the ore in them? The economics of mining minerals from asteroids are orders of magnitude more favorable than the economics of mining minerals from another planet.
|
On August 06 2012 17:31 AmericanUmlaut wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:29 sirkyan wrote:On August 06 2012 17:26 AmericanUmlaut wrote:
I love the idea that this would be worth it if we found gold on Mars. Because mining it with robots, then filling a spaceship with gold, pulling it out of the Martian gravity well and landing it safely on Earth is going to be super cost effective.
I am so proud of the ladies and gentlemen of NASA that pulled this off. What an incredible achievement. I'm so glad to see that even a tiny fraction of our resources are still going toward advancing what our species is capable of and expanding the boundaries of humanity. Next up, Mars colony! You may be happy to hear they are planing on mining asteroids. http://www.planetaryresources.com/mission/ I know that they are. You're aware asteroids aren't hanging out at the bottom of a massive gravity well, right? And that you don't have to dig down hundreds or thousands of meters to get to the ore in them? The economics of mining minerals from asteroids are orders of magnitude more favorable than the economics of mining minerals from another planet.
Yes? Did I miss something?
|
I realise going to mars takes a lot of planning and testing. But if we can't afford to put a man on the moon how do you propose we afford to go to mars? While I am glad at least one person answered my question of why this mission should even raise an eyebrow (thanks IreScath :-D) it still doesn't help really get us closer to mars. For people hoping for aliens.. you will be lucky for bacteria. And its unlikely you will get that in any verifiable way. (I don't trust government organisations to tell the whole truth so sue me)
I actually hope a valuable mineral is discovered in asteroids or mars etc so that private companies can justify the rediculous costs to mine them. That is humans best hope of any real progress. Without any monetary motivation humans won't progress.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51481 Posts
Any time frame on how long it may take before we know of anything significent curiosity has found?
|
On August 06 2012 17:37 Pandemona wrote:
Any time frame on how long it may take before we know of anything significent curiosity has found?
That depends on your definition of significance. If it's the same as a lot of other people in the thread: never. Otherwise it's impossible to tell, maybe in a few months to a year?
|
Its gone down recently because of a serious lack of funding.. which is terrible, and I always laugh and say the following when people say we can't afford it:
"The entire running budget of nasa since it was founded.. all those years, all those missions... costed LESS than the bank bailout during the recent recession."
I love the looks I get... Totally priceless.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51481 Posts
On August 06 2012 17:39 sirkyan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:37 Pandemona wrote:
Any time frame on how long it may take before we know of anything significent curiosity has found? That depends on your definition of significance. If it's the same as a lot of other people in the thread: never. Otherwise it's impossible to tell, maybe in a few months to a year?
Well significance as in, the ability to find out if it ever inhabited life, or if it was as dry as a bone. Or is life still there etcetc
|
FUCK YEAH
So stocked about this success :D
Can't wait for next version of KSP so I can try it myself now...
|
On August 06 2012 17:41 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 17:39 sirkyan wrote:On August 06 2012 17:37 Pandemona wrote:
Any time frame on how long it may take before we know of anything significent curiosity has found? That depends on your definition of significance. If it's the same as a lot of other people in the thread: never. Otherwise it's impossible to tell, maybe in a few months to a year? Well significance as in, the ability to find out if it ever inhabited life, or if it was as dry as a bone. Or is life still there etcetc
Some things we know..
There is Ice there.. There is very very very strong evidence there were lakes and rivers.. and some evidence it was almost earth like.
Recent imaging studies believe they have discovered mass oceans below the surface as well.
There is methane gas there... Of which there are many ways to make that gas, but most of the methods are a direct result of life.
|
On August 06 2012 17:18 Bobgrimly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2012 16:49 Yurie wrote:On August 06 2012 16:39 Bobgrimly wrote:
So yes if you are a scientist this would be interesting. I love the idea of exploring space but missions like this kill any belief it will ever happen. Put a man back on the moon! Then worry about mars. What would putting a man on the moon give us? Putting one of those rovers on the moon would be cheaper and give us more worth in exploration. Putting a man on Mars and then sending it back is the same thing, it gives us nothing a machine can't give us except PR and hopefully a change of attitude in people. Planning to put one there and not sending it back gives a whole lot since you have to solve how that person will stay alive without support from Earth for every little thing (as the space station get). What does putting a man on the moon give us? We have already been there.... have we? How many people on this site were alive when the last moon landing happened? Anyone been to the moon in your lifetime? Yet you give a crap about a robot on mars???? I would kill to see a man on the moon. Its never happened as far as I know. Not in my lifetime. Once a decade just to prove it can still be done and that mars is still a possibility wouldn't kill the budget if they honestly and successfully did it as many times as they say they did. And what is the robot going to give them that a man on the moon won't? Dirt samples? Put a man on mars and hell yeah we are talking. That guy can get a spade and take more samples in 5 minutes than that robot can do in its entire life. That guy can travel further and identify oddities quicker and inspect them. They could do a lot of things. But instead they waste time and money testing dirt and air on mars. It has no atmosphere that is survivable at the moment. Why bother testing it with a vehicle that can't dig deep enough or travel far enough to really find anything useful? Why not PROGRESS towards the goal of establishing a base there? You don't need the atmosphere if you have a sealed base. And a working livable base would mean a million times more effective study/testing/mining/exploring missions. So why go to the moon... because its a stepping stone that needs to be stepped on. For progress' sake. Because if we can't afford to put a man there... mars is never happening!
Obvious troll. Move along, nothing to see here.
I found a chart yesterday with schedules for when NASA was gonna do what with the rover, but I can't re-find it  . Anyone happens to have it?
|
All right, now I get it. So far reading this thread, and judging by opinion all over the internet, the reasons we need this mission to Mars are:
1. New technology - booster, crane, bigger rover, etc.
2. New knowledge on Mars and life
3. Achievement of humanity, uplift their spirit that they conquered space, make us dream, like what the African-American scientist Tyson says.
And these are my counter argument to end all arguments:
1. These are not new technology lol. Some were even developed in the military - boosters, parachute, etc. And on the crane technology that you all celebrate will be the new technology for future space mission, possibly for humans, lol! Did you forget how we deploy armies in the Iraq, Iran, and Afganistan, especially the Bin Laden mission? Guess how they did it, with the same crane technology lol!
2. Whatever new knowledge they gather there will be so insignificant to the realities of life on Earth. Really, what do we hope to learn? Formation of life? Nature of life? Formation of the universe? We really don't need this "information" right now that almost the whole world is in recession. It's stupid and irresponsible. Just like the wars our country bring to other countries.
However, if they discover this
+ Show Spoiler +
then let us spend all the Earth resources to these space missions.
3. If we need to feel happy and change out attitude and be fulfilled, then all we have to do is rerun the "Apollo project":
- build rovers, science machines
- train astronauts
- hype the whole thing to death for the whole world to see
- hire movie directors and crew and shoot the damn thing in an outback desert and broadcast it to all of humanity to show them how great USA is!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/551091_10152013157770078_1248162667_n.jpg)
