The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Space Exploration! [to boldly go]
RUNN1NGMAN
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Today, this op-ed by Buzz Aldrin appeared in the Washington Post.
TLDR: The U.S. should start planning to colonize Mars. Now.
I found this fascinating for a number of reasons. First, the colonization of Mars has been the science fiction trope to beat all tropes. I have no idea how many short stories, novels, films, and TV shows have dealt with colonization of Mars in some way, but I bet it's a lot. Yet here it is appearing as a completely serious proposition in one of the country's largest papers.
Second, Aldrin talks about an American colony on Mars, not a "Federation" colony or whatever you want to call it. I doubt that Aldrin is proposing that space exploration should be the dawn of the second age of American Imperialism, but it kind of sounds that way. Especially when he talks about how we'll help other nations colonize the moon. Because obviously the U.S. will be the dominant space power and in the name of friendship we'll assist our fellow humans to move into space. We'll need people to staff the staging area for the Mars transports after all.
So, do you think this is possible in our lifetime? If it's possible will it happen? Would you move to Mars if you could? What will our glorious interplanetary civilization be like? And most importantly, when will first contact occur?
Time to Boldly Go Once More
By Buzz Aldrin
Thursday, July 16, 2009
On the spring morning in 1927 when Charles Lindbergh set off alone across the Atlantic Ocean, only a handful of explorer-adventurers were capable of even attempting the feat. Many had tried before Lindbergh's successful flight, but all had failed and many lost their lives in the process. Most people then thought transatlantic travel was an impossible dream. But 40 years later, 20,000 people a day were safely flying the same route that the "Lone Eagle" had voyaged. Transatlantic flight had become routine.
Forty years ago today, Neil Armstrong, Mike Collins and I began our quarter-million-mile journey through the blackness of space to reach the moon.
Neil and I walked its dusty ancient soil, becoming the first humans to stand upon another world. Yet today, no nation -- including our own -- is capable of sending anyone beyond Earth's orbit, much less deeper into space.
For the past four years, NASA has been on a path to resume lunar exploration with people, duplicating (in a more complicated fashion) what Neil, Mike and our colleagues did four decades ago. But this approach -- called the "Vision for Space Exploration" -- is not visionary; nor will it ultimately be successful in restoring American space leadership. Like its Apollo predecessor, this plan will prove to be a dead end littered with broken spacecraft, broken dreams and broken policies.
Instead, I propose a new Unified Space Vision, a plan to ensure American space leadership for the 21st century. It wouldn't require building new rockets from scratch, as current plans do, and it would make maximum use of the capabilities we have without breaking the bank. It is a reasonable and affordable plan -- if we again think in visionary terms.
On television and in movies, "Star Trek" showed what could be achieved when we dared to "boldly go where no man has gone before." In real life, I've traveled that path, and I know that with the right goal and support from most Americans, we can boldly go, again.
A race to the moon is a dead end. While the lunar surface can be used to develop advanced technologies, it is a poor location for homesteading. The moon is a lifeless, barren world, its stark desolation matched by its hostility to all living things. And replaying the glory days of Apollo will not advance the cause of American space leadership or inspire the support and enthusiasm of the public and the next generation of space explorers.
Now, I am not suggesting that America abandon the moon entirely, only that it forgo a moon-focused race. As the moon should be for all mankind, we should return there as part of an internationally led coalition. Using the landers and heavy-lift boosters developed by our partners, we could test on the moon the tools and equipment that we will need for our ultimate destination: homesteading Mars by way of its moons.
Let the lunar surface be the ultimate global commons while we focus on more distant and sustainable goals to revitalize our space program. Our next generation must think boldly in terms of a goal for the space program: Mars for America's future. I am not suggesting a few visits to plant flags and do photo ops but a journey to make the first homestead in space: an American colony on a new world.
Robotic exploration of Mars has yielded tantalizing clues about what was once a water-soaked planet. Deep beneath the soils of Mars may lie trapped frozen water, possibly with traces of still-extant primitive life forms. Climate change on a vast scale has reshaped Mars. With Earth in the throes of its own climate evolution, human outposts on Mars could be a virtual laboratory to study these vast planetary changes. And the best way to study Mars is with the two hands, eyes and ears of a geologist, first at a moon orbiting Mars and then on the Red Planet's surface.
Mobilizing the space program to focus on a human colony on Mars while at the same time helping our international partners explore the moon on their own would galvanize public support for space exploration and provide a cause to inspire America's young students. Mars exploration would renew our space industry by opening up technology development to all players, not just the traditional big aerospace contractors. If we avoided the pitfall of aiming solely for the moon, we could be on Mars by the 60th anniversary year of our Apollo 11 flight.
Much has been said recently about the Vision for Space Exploration and the future of the international space station. As we all reflect upon our historic lunar journey and the future of the space program, I challenge America's leaders to think boldly and look beyond the moon. Yes, my vision of "Mars for America" requires bold thinking. But as my friend and Gemini crewmate Jim Lovell has noted, our Apollo days were a time when we did bold things in space to achieve leadership. It is time we were bold again in space.
The writer was the second man to walk on the moon. He served as the Gemini 12 mission pilot in 1966, as well as the lunar module pilot on the Apollo 11 mission in 1969. His book "Magnificent Desolation" was published last month.
By Buzz Aldrin
Thursday, July 16, 2009
On the spring morning in 1927 when Charles Lindbergh set off alone across the Atlantic Ocean, only a handful of explorer-adventurers were capable of even attempting the feat. Many had tried before Lindbergh's successful flight, but all had failed and many lost their lives in the process. Most people then thought transatlantic travel was an impossible dream. But 40 years later, 20,000 people a day were safely flying the same route that the "Lone Eagle" had voyaged. Transatlantic flight had become routine.
Forty years ago today, Neil Armstrong, Mike Collins and I began our quarter-million-mile journey through the blackness of space to reach the moon.
Neil and I walked its dusty ancient soil, becoming the first humans to stand upon another world. Yet today, no nation -- including our own -- is capable of sending anyone beyond Earth's orbit, much less deeper into space.
For the past four years, NASA has been on a path to resume lunar exploration with people, duplicating (in a more complicated fashion) what Neil, Mike and our colleagues did four decades ago. But this approach -- called the "Vision for Space Exploration" -- is not visionary; nor will it ultimately be successful in restoring American space leadership. Like its Apollo predecessor, this plan will prove to be a dead end littered with broken spacecraft, broken dreams and broken policies.
Instead, I propose a new Unified Space Vision, a plan to ensure American space leadership for the 21st century. It wouldn't require building new rockets from scratch, as current plans do, and it would make maximum use of the capabilities we have without breaking the bank. It is a reasonable and affordable plan -- if we again think in visionary terms.
On television and in movies, "Star Trek" showed what could be achieved when we dared to "boldly go where no man has gone before." In real life, I've traveled that path, and I know that with the right goal and support from most Americans, we can boldly go, again.
A race to the moon is a dead end. While the lunar surface can be used to develop advanced technologies, it is a poor location for homesteading. The moon is a lifeless, barren world, its stark desolation matched by its hostility to all living things. And replaying the glory days of Apollo will not advance the cause of American space leadership or inspire the support and enthusiasm of the public and the next generation of space explorers.
Now, I am not suggesting that America abandon the moon entirely, only that it forgo a moon-focused race. As the moon should be for all mankind, we should return there as part of an internationally led coalition. Using the landers and heavy-lift boosters developed by our partners, we could test on the moon the tools and equipment that we will need for our ultimate destination: homesteading Mars by way of its moons.
Let the lunar surface be the ultimate global commons while we focus on more distant and sustainable goals to revitalize our space program. Our next generation must think boldly in terms of a goal for the space program: Mars for America's future. I am not suggesting a few visits to plant flags and do photo ops but a journey to make the first homestead in space: an American colony on a new world.
Robotic exploration of Mars has yielded tantalizing clues about what was once a water-soaked planet. Deep beneath the soils of Mars may lie trapped frozen water, possibly with traces of still-extant primitive life forms. Climate change on a vast scale has reshaped Mars. With Earth in the throes of its own climate evolution, human outposts on Mars could be a virtual laboratory to study these vast planetary changes. And the best way to study Mars is with the two hands, eyes and ears of a geologist, first at a moon orbiting Mars and then on the Red Planet's surface.
Mobilizing the space program to focus on a human colony on Mars while at the same time helping our international partners explore the moon on their own would galvanize public support for space exploration and provide a cause to inspire America's young students. Mars exploration would renew our space industry by opening up technology development to all players, not just the traditional big aerospace contractors. If we avoided the pitfall of aiming solely for the moon, we could be on Mars by the 60th anniversary year of our Apollo 11 flight.
Much has been said recently about the Vision for Space Exploration and the future of the international space station. As we all reflect upon our historic lunar journey and the future of the space program, I challenge America's leaders to think boldly and look beyond the moon. Yes, my vision of "Mars for America" requires bold thinking. But as my friend and Gemini crewmate Jim Lovell has noted, our Apollo days were a time when we did bold things in space to achieve leadership. It is time we were bold again in space.
The writer was the second man to walk on the moon. He served as the Gemini 12 mission pilot in 1966, as well as the lunar module pilot on the Apollo 11 mission in 1969. His book "Magnificent Desolation" was published last month.
TLDR: The U.S. should start planning to colonize Mars. Now.
I found this fascinating for a number of reasons. First, the colonization of Mars has been the science fiction trope to beat all tropes. I have no idea how many short stories, novels, films, and TV shows have dealt with colonization of Mars in some way, but I bet it's a lot. Yet here it is appearing as a completely serious proposition in one of the country's largest papers.
Second, Aldrin talks about an American colony on Mars, not a "Federation" colony or whatever you want to call it. I doubt that Aldrin is proposing that space exploration should be the dawn of the second age of American Imperialism, but it kind of sounds that way. Especially when he talks about how we'll help other nations colonize the moon. Because obviously the U.S. will be the dominant space power and in the name of friendship we'll assist our fellow humans to move into space. We'll need people to staff the staging area for the Mars transports after all.
So, do you think this is possible in our lifetime? If it's possible will it happen? Would you move to Mars if you could? What will our glorious interplanetary civilization be like? And most importantly, when will first contact occur?
RUNN1NGMAN on
0
Posts
There's an old documentary about space travel that ran on the Discovery channel like 7 years ago that I never got a chance to watch. It was called Exodus (I think...), I search for it every now and then but never find it.
This inspired me to search for it one more time.
I could see him finding parallels with Obama and Kennedy, but damned if I know how we're going to fund the thing.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
More space wars
From everything I've read/seen/heard, the proposed lunar missions are supposed to be sort of the dry run for Mars. They're not merely going to prance around, play golf, and return with dust. NASA is attempting to build a permanent settlement there, much like the ISS. Why? Because it's the perfect place to attempt to build an extra-terran planetary presence:
It's close to Earth and the ISS, so the astronauts aren't completely fucked if something goes wrong.
It has resources we can exploit to build future spacecraft.
It has conditions that future Mars settlers will need to deal with (low gravity, cold temperatures, solar radiation, dust, lack of food/water).
NASA isn't going back to the moon simply to redo the past. It's going to use the moon as a testbed for future Mars exploration.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Haha...mine or his?
edit: dur I am stupid.
And I think the aim of his article is to ensure the focus is on Mars and not just kept on the Moon as the more 'feasible' target that's picked at the expense of Mars down the line.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
This bit worries me sometimes. Because of NASA's budget constraints, what starts off as being well-intentioned--having nearly all your Martian challenges (except possibly for dust storms) near enough that you can send supplies in the event of emergency--can end up being "fuck the in-situ resource utilization, it's cheaper just to launch thousand-ton pallets of food."
I doubt that specific case would be true, but when it's politicians who are trying to nickel-and-dime you to death, missing the point gets to be an easy thing to do.
That's true. I don't think that risk can be avoided, though. The key, like always, is convincing the masses that, yes, space colonization is worth the money, and that the program should receive all the money it needs to succeed. The one part I agreed with Buzz with was his framing of the issue as an American one, to tie into that "We're the best country in the world - we can do anything" mentality. I'm not a huge patriot, but if the notion of colonization can only be sold by appealing to the nation's sense of patriotism (imperialism?), then so be it.
i kid i kid don't kill me
That said, if we say, for instance, "within 20 years, there will be a habitable colony area on the moon, and progress on gaining energy and providing production and launch space", I would be happier. Because frankly, we'd need to really do something, more than just re-creating the ISS, in order to justify going to the Moon when Mars isn't actually that much more difficult, barring time issues.
Unfortunately, I don't have much faith in NASA to get things done right now.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I think the basic idea is: America went to the moon within 8 years back when it was to prove America had the biggest donger. If we want to motivate America, or any country, to attempt something major with space exploration, we should slap everyone with our dicks and tell them to prove theirs are bigger.
But if we combine our dicks... Okay enough with that analogy. I suppose in a way competition is better than co-operation in terms of making progress, I just find the whole "Mars for America!" bit slightly distasteful. An international community of scientists on the surface of Mars just sounds so much better.
That, and I believe (although I may be wrong here) that the United States is the only country with a space program capable of feasibly doing a manned Mars mission anytime soon.
Getting the hell out so we can go eff up another planet without dying first?
Here's an idea: How about relocating industries that are heavy polluters off-world? We could dump all our pollution outside the bio domes on Mars or whatever.
Well, other than the fact that they would be utterly useless since it would take, what, eight months to go one way, it might create an atmosphere there... of some sort!
Okay...so what other benefits could there be?
Moving heavy industry so far away on mars seems counter productive. Why not just build one of these:
We would immensely further our knowledge of science and our place in the universe, and in the process develop countless new technologies that would have tremendous use in our everyday lives. See also: Velcro, computers, Tang.
In order to be sustainable, there would most certainly need to be some sort of terra-forming done as well, I'd think. Something like that could probably benefit our understanding of our own planet and how to "fix it".
if you really feel this way, there are a lot bigger money holes you could fill in before space travel.
The U.S. honestly spend such a tiny fraction of money on space stuff (a lot of it goes back into the economy in the form of contractors) that you really couldn't help solve any of the worlds problems with the money, but you would lose such a awesome and advanced program.
Not really exploration but part of the space program has given us countless satellites for TV, GPS, etc. There used to be some website with all of these things the space program has given us down here.
Plus there are only so many resources on this planet anyway, and an ever growing population. You have to start somewhere in order to get deep into space.
Plus eventually we can find some aliens to kill and hot alien chicks.
Arnold summed it up best when he said "Get your ass to Mars."
British publisher and writer Ernest Benn [1875-1954]
None of those things were invented by NASA or space exploration. On the whole my feelings are that space exploration is laregely too expensive for what you get. The money can be spent on more practical research on Earth.
Well, Tang was.
Edit: Oh damn, it wasn't.
This. Space exploration is essentially a broad, goal-driven public R&D program. It's cool, which helps get the public behind it and the big goals (see: moon landing) are pretty inspirational. Plus, TANG!
EDIT: Dammit.
Sadly, not Tang. =(
General Foods Co.