Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England
By STEVEN WEINBERG

In the federal budget released this week, President Barack Obama calls for increasing NASA's funding by 2% while cutting its manned space flight program. If enacted by Congress, the cuts will likely end plans to return astronauts to the moon. Some claim these cuts will damage America's capabilities in science and technology, but the president's spending plan will likely boost both.

The manned space flight program masquerades as science, but it actually crowds out real science at NASA, which is all done on unmanned missions. In 2004 President George W. Bush announced a new vision for the space agency: a return of astronauts to the moon followed by a manned expedition to Mars. A few days later NASA's office of Space Science announced major cutbacks in its important Beyond Einstein and Explorer programs of unmanned research in astronomy. The explanation was that they "do not clearly support the goals of the President's vision for space exploration."

Soon after Mr. Bush's announcement I predicted that sending astronauts to the moon and Mars would be so expensive that future administrations would abandon the plan. This prediction seems to have come true.

All of the brilliant past discoveries in astronomy for which NASA can take credit have been made by unmanned satellite-borne observatories, and there is much more to be done. By studying the polarization of cosmic microwave radiation, we may find evidence of gravitational waves emitted in the first fraction of a second of the big bang. By sending laser beams between teams of satellites, we should be able to detect gravitational waves directly from collisions between neutron stars and black holes. By correlating the distances and velocities of many galaxies, we should be able to explore the mysterious dark energy that makes up most of the energy of the universe.

None of this involves astronauts. The cost of all these projects would be a few billion dollars—not cheap, but nothing like the hundred or so billion dollars for a manned return to the moon, or the many hundreds of billions of dollars for a manned mission to Mars.

It is true that astronauts made a large contribution to astronomy by servicing the Hubble Space Telescope. But if Hubble had been put into orbit by unmanned rockets instead of the Space Shuttle, so much money would have been saved that instead of servicing a single Hubble we could have had half a dozen Hubbles in orbit, making servicing unnecessary.

In any case, the argument for using astronauts to service satellite observatories is now out of date. Current unmanned observatories like the brilliantly successful Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and the European Space Agency's new Planck satellite, which study an era of the universe's expansion before the origin of matter, are not in low Earth orbits like Hubble, but at L2. This is a quiet point in space that always remains on the other side of the Earth from the Sun and is a million miles from our planet, beyond the reach of astronauts. The successor to Hubble, the James Webb Space Telescope, will also be at L2.

Giving up on manned space flight doesn't mean we have to give up on the exploration of the solar system. The president's budget calls for spending $19 billion on NASA, and for much less than the cost of sending a few astronauts once to a single location on Mars we could send hundreds of robots like Spirit and Opportunity to sites all over the planet.

It is difficult to get reliable estimates of the cost of sending astronauts to Mars, but I have heard no estimate that is less than many hundreds of billions of dollars. The cost of sending Spirit and Opportunity to Mars was less than $1 billion. Unmanned exploration of Mars would not only be more useful scientifically; it would also yield more valuable spin-offs in technologies that are useful on Earth, like robotics and computer programs that can deal independently with unexpected obstacles.

The only technology for which the manned space flight program is well suited is the technology of keeping people alive in space. And the only demand for that technology is in the manned space flight program itself.

Mr. Weinberg received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1979 and the National Medal of Science in 1991. He teaches in the physics and astronomy departments of the University of Texas at Austin and is the author of "Lake Views—This World and the Universe," just out from Harvard University Press.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … st_Popular
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6439|what

Superior Mind wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Superior Mind wrote:

It's not so much about learning about the moon. What we need to do is learn how to live with the harms of space on a long sustained terrestrial situation.
Surely that would be best researched on, say.... I dunno..... a planet rather then a moon?
If we fuck up on Mars it's another several months/years before we can get another mission or rescue mission out. The moon is two weeks away. We can do research more cost effectively.
As above (thx John) - you don't send a rescue party for robots.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6979

AussieReaper wrote:

Superior Mind wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:


Surely that would be best researched on, say.... I dunno..... a planet rather then a moon?
If we fuck up on Mars it's another several months/years before we can get another mission or rescue mission out. The moon is two weeks away. We can do research more cost effectively.
As above (thx John) - you don't send a rescue party for robots.
We need to send humans to test living arrangements.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6961|Canberra, AUS

JohnG@lt wrote:

By STEVEN WEINBERG

In the federal budget released this week, President Barack Obama calls for increasing NASA's funding by 2% while cutting its manned space flight program. If enacted by Congress, the cuts will likely end plans to return astronauts to the moon. Some claim these cuts will damage America's capabilities in science and technology, but the president's spending plan will likely boost both.

The manned space flight program masquerades as science, but it actually crowds out real science at NASA, which is all done on unmanned missions. In 2004 President George W. Bush announced a new vision for the space agency: a return of astronauts to the moon followed by a manned expedition to Mars. A few days later NASA's office of Space Science announced major cutbacks in its important Beyond Einstein and Explorer programs of unmanned research in astronomy. The explanation was that they "do not clearly support the goals of the President's vision for space exploration."

Soon after Mr. Bush's announcement I predicted that sending astronauts to the moon and Mars would be so expensive that future administrations would abandon the plan. This prediction seems to have come true.

All of the brilliant past discoveries in astronomy for which NASA can take credit have been made by unmanned satellite-borne observatories, and there is much more to be done. By studying the polarization of cosmic microwave radiation, we may find evidence of gravitational waves emitted in the first fraction of a second of the big bang. By sending laser beams between teams of satellites, we should be able to detect gravitational waves directly from collisions between neutron stars and black holes. By correlating the distances and velocities of many galaxies, we should be able to explore the mysterious dark energy that makes up most of the energy of the universe.

None of this involves astronauts. The cost of all these projects would be a few billion dollars—not cheap, but nothing like the hundred or so billion dollars for a manned return to the moon, or the many hundreds of billions of dollars for a manned mission to Mars.

It is true that astronauts made a large contribution to astronomy by servicing the Hubble Space Telescope. But if Hubble had been put into orbit by unmanned rockets instead of the Space Shuttle, so much money would have been saved that instead of servicing a single Hubble we could have had half a dozen Hubbles in orbit, making servicing unnecessary.

In any case, the argument for using astronauts to service satellite observatories is now out of date. Current unmanned observatories like the brilliantly successful Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and the European Space Agency's new Planck satellite, which study an era of the universe's expansion before the origin of matter, are not in low Earth orbits like Hubble, but at L2. This is a quiet point in space that always remains on the other side of the Earth from the Sun and is a million miles from our planet, beyond the reach of astronauts. The successor to Hubble, the James Webb Space Telescope, will also be at L2.

Giving up on manned space flight doesn't mean we have to give up on the exploration of the solar system. The president's budget calls for spending $19 billion on NASA, and for much less than the cost of sending a few astronauts once to a single location on Mars we could send hundreds of robots like Spirit and Opportunity to sites all over the planet.

It is difficult to get reliable estimates of the cost of sending astronauts to Mars, but I have heard no estimate that is less than many hundreds of billions of dollars. The cost of sending Spirit and Opportunity to Mars was less than $1 billion. Unmanned exploration of Mars would not only be more useful scientifically; it would also yield more valuable spin-offs in technologies that are useful on Earth, like robotics and computer programs that can deal independently with unexpected obstacles.

The only technology for which the manned space flight program is well suited is the technology of keeping people alive in space. And the only demand for that technology is in the manned space flight program itself.

Mr. Weinberg received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1979 and the National Medal of Science in 1991. He teaches in the physics and astronomy departments of the University of Texas at Austin and is the author of "Lake Views—This World and the Universe," just out from Harvard University Press.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 … st_Popular
If anything the person who wrote this should make you stand up and listen. Weinberg is one of the finest physicists of the 20th century... and considering some of the other names in there that is no mean feat.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6508|teh FIN-land

HollisHurlbut wrote:

Because, in the words of the late, great Carl Sagan: "all species become either spacefaring or extinct."
lmao what a ridiculous quote! since every species ever known on earth belongs to the latter group it's totally meaningless.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6961|Canberra, AUS

ruisleipa wrote:

HollisHurlbut wrote:

Because, in the words of the late, great Carl Sagan: "all species become either spacefaring or extinct."
lmao what a ridiculous quote! since every species ever known on earth belongs to the latter group it's totally meaningless.
since every species has never become spacefaring. if you bothered to actually think about the logic of the statement you would find it to be 100% true - a non-spacefaring species has limited resources and has no means of escaping whatever inevitable celestial disaster (like the star dying), so is doomed to extinction. but a spacefaring species has access to essentially infinite resources and can escape basically whatever ills may befall a particular planet or star
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

JohnG@lt wrote:

Results will be expected. Perhaps you don't like the pressure of working towards an actual goal or result?
Yeah, tell that to the family of the Challenger crew.  A privatized space program will focus on profit instead of scientific endeavors. 

Ironically though, NASA was the one pushing for the launch, while Rockwell engineers wanted to hold off.  Interestingly, Safety is the number one corporate mantra these days for government contracts.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6961|Canberra, AUS

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Results will be expected. Perhaps you don't like the pressure of working towards an actual goal or result?
Yeah, tell that to the family of the Challenger crew.  A privatized space program will focus on profit instead of scientific endeavors. 

Ironically though, NASA was the one pushing for the launch, while Rockwell engineers wanted to hold off.  Interestingly, Safety is the number one corporate mantra these days for government contracts.
Ummm

what you forget that profit can turn into as big an incentive to do it right as any other - a private company whose astronauts die every now and then won't survive, just as an airline whose planes crash won't.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Karbin
Member
+42|6581
"Have you ever wondered how space exploration impacts your daily life?"

http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/nasacity/index2.htm
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7002

Karbin wrote:

"Have you ever wondered how space exploration impacts your daily life?"

http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/nasacity/index2.htm
Noice. But they've already made those so there isn't a point to a manned mission UNLESS they have future technology built already.

The airforce is already cutting back manned pilots for unmanned due to cost-efficiency, why would NASA do the complete opposite?
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6673
The commercial sector can easily handle freight transport to orbit, especially LEO, and will soon be able to transport people to space stations. Look for the Pfizer Space Station or things similar in coming years. Though things such as deep space exploration, colonization of planets and moons, search for life, etc, will depend on the government.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Commie Killer wrote:

The commercial sector can easily handle freight transport to orbit, especially LEO, and will soon be able to transport people to space stations. Look for the Pfizer Space Station or things similar in coming years. Though things such as deep space exploration, colonization of planets and moons, search for life, etc, will depend on the government.
i.e. the stuff that's only important to Trekkies.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

JohnG@lt wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

The commercial sector can easily handle freight transport to orbit, especially LEO, and will soon be able to transport people to space stations. Look for the Pfizer Space Station or things similar in coming years. Though things such as deep space exploration, colonization of planets and moons, search for life, etc, will depend on the government.
i.e. the stuff that's only important to Trekkies.
Or until extraterrestrial mining becomes profitable.
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6811|South Florida
ATG.

I am 18 years old. Im probably one of the last age of people to have entered the current system of the world.

Yes, a huge change is coming. I hope its a dismantaling of the US. I hate the polititians, i hate the republican vs democrat, i hate that fact that i honestly believe that very wealthy people run this country and parts of the world with the intent of stripping freedoms and basically enslaving the world.

I hate that i believe that, i wish it wasnt so god damn obvious.

Obama doesnt make the rules. Neither did bush. There is so so so so so so so so so much corruption on every level, it just has to be orchastrated in some way.

for fuck sake, The Federal Reserve is a fucking privately owned fucking company and NO ONE on ANY level of administration will fucking AUDIT THEM.

I do not believe that officials dont know all about the fed reserve.

Why wont anyone do anything about it. That is your root of power. Who is it that influences polititians and officials to just "ignore" things.

A good example of someone who has a fucking backbone is Ron Paul. His Audit the Fed bill is a FUCKING GREAT IDEA. But, it will NEVER get passed. Do you know why? Because the REAL people in power dont want it to.

Anyways.

We are fucked, i agree.

Which is why im not mentally okay with working for someone else for the rest of my life. I can't do that, i will own a business. I will be my own boss, and it will pay off eventually. I don't have the ability to just work a dead end job forever.
15 more years! 15 more years!
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Mitch wrote:

ATG.

I am 18 years old. Im probably one of the last age of people to have entered the current system of the world.

Yes, a huge change is coming. I hope its a dismantaling of the US. I hate the polititians, i hate the republican vs democrat, i hate that fact that i honestly believe that very wealthy people run this country and parts of the world with the intent of stripping freedoms and basically enslaving the world.

I hate that i believe that, i wish it wasnt so god damn obvious.

Obama doesnt make the rules. Neither did bush. There is so so so so so so so so so much corruption on every level, it just has to be orchastrated in some way.

for fuck sake, The Federal Reserve is a fucking privately owned fucking company and NO ONE on ANY level of administration will fucking AUDIT THEM.

I do not believe that officials dont know all about the fed reserve.

Why wont anyone do anything about it. That is your root of power. Who is it that influences polititians and officials to just "ignore" things.

A good example of someone who has a fucking backbone is Ron Paul. His Audit the Fed bill is a FUCKING GREAT IDEA. But, it will NEVER get passed. Do you know why? Because the REAL people in power dont want it to.

Anyways.

We are fucked, i agree.

Which is why im not mentally okay with working for someone else for the rest of my life. I can't do that, i will own a business. I will be my own boss, and it will pay off eventually. I don't have the ability to just work a dead end job forever.
It's nice that a kid that can't even pass the GED test feels he's intelligent enough to understand the world around him enough to pronounce doom.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

Welcome to the adult world Mitch.  The wealthy elite have always ruled the world.  Google J.D. Rockefeller.  Back then, it was Standard Oil and US Steel.  Now, it's the likes of GoldmanSachs.

Last edited by Ilocano (2010-02-05 11:56:19)

Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Ilocano wrote:

Welcome to the adult world Mitch.  The wealthy elite have always ruled the world.  Google J.D. Rockefeller.  Back then, it was Standard Oil and US Steel.  Now, it's the likes of GoldmanSachs.
Yeah, because what you have to say is so terribly important... What impact do you personally have on society? What impact did those whom you indict have on society? Yeah, they're evil men, or maybe they are listened to because they are in a position to effect millions of peoples lives. You, are not.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6673

JohnG@lt wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

The commercial sector can easily handle freight transport to orbit, especially LEO, and will soon be able to transport people to space stations. Look for the Pfizer Space Station or things similar in coming years. Though things such as deep space exploration, colonization of planets and moons, search for life, etc, will depend on the government.
i.e. the stuff that's only important to Trekkies.
So were stuck here forever? Granted terraforming a planet takes centuries, I don't expect it to happen now, but are you suggesting we stick here forever?
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

JohnG@lt wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Welcome to the adult world Mitch.  The wealthy elite have always ruled the world.  Google J.D. Rockefeller.  Back then, it was Standard Oil and US Steel.  Now, it's the likes of GoldmanSachs.
Yeah, because what you have to say is so terribly important... What impact do you personally have on society? What impact did those whom you indict have on society? Yeah, they're evil men, or maybe they are listened to because they are in a position to effect millions of peoples lives. You, are not.
Wow, stick up your butt aye?  Taking on the poster instead of the subject.  I thought you better "John".  I stand corrected.

Seriously, you admired JD Rockefeller?  He wanted to control the world's oil market.  Hahaha, listened too?  They are the power elite.  They are listened too because they are in power.   Why did Lehman Brother's fail, yet GoldmanSachs thrive?

John, I work for one of the major global engineering firms in the world.  It's in my best interest for my company to be profitable (ESPP   ).  But there are just things that the government has to lead, namely, projects that require significant amount of money and time to accomplish, that won't show any significant profit for decades or more.  Innovations that will eventually make it to the private sector and make profit.

Last edited by Ilocano (2010-02-05 12:23:25)

Commie Killer
Member
+192|6673

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

The commercial sector can easily handle freight transport to orbit, especially LEO, and will soon be able to transport people to space stations. Look for the Pfizer Space Station or things similar in coming years. Though things such as deep space exploration, colonization of planets and moons, search for life, etc, will depend on the government.
i.e. the stuff that's only important to Trekkies.
Or until extraterrestrial mining becomes profitable.
Great idea, but I don't so how it would ever be economically feasible to send things back to earth(except in the case of incredibly valuable items).
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

Commie Killer wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


i.e. the stuff that's only important to Trekkies.
Or until extraterrestrial mining becomes profitable.
Great idea, but I don't so how it would ever be economically feasible to send things back to earth(except in the case of incredibly valuable items).
That's why I said, when profitable.   Mass drivers and orbital elevators.  Only the government could fund such long term endeavors.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Welcome to the adult world Mitch.  The wealthy elite have always ruled the world.  Google J.D. Rockefeller.  Back then, it was Standard Oil and US Steel.  Now, it's the likes of GoldmanSachs.
Yeah, because what you have to say is so terribly important... What impact do you personally have on society? What impact did those whom you indict have on society? Yeah, they're evil men, or maybe they are listened to because they are in a position to effect millions of peoples lives. You, are not.
Wow, stick up your butt aye?  Taking on the poster instead of the subject.  I thought you better "John".  I stand corrected.

Seriously, you admired JD Rockefeller?  He wanted to control the world's oil market.  Hahaha, listened too?  They are the power elite.  They are listened too because they are in power.   Why did Lehman Brother's fail, yet GoldmanSachs thrive?
I wasn't taking on you personally at all. It was a generic 'you'. Lehman failed because there weren't any buyers for it's debt and it was in a far more precarious position than anyone else on Wall St. It wasn't a conspiracy to enrich Goldman.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

OK, I take it back.

Cutting and pasting my edit from above:

John, I work for one of the major global engineering firms in the world.  It's in my best interest for my company to be profitable (ESPP   ).  But there are just things that the government has to lead, namely, projects that require significant amount of money and time to accomplish, that won't show any significant profit for decades or more.  Innovations that will eventually make it to the private sector and make profit.  No single company has the resources, or should be given the resources, for such massive projects.  One private company having such control over such "humanity changing" projects would actually stifle innovation.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7002

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Welcome to the adult world Mitch.  The wealthy elite have always ruled the world.  Google J.D. Rockefeller.  Back then, it was Standard Oil and US Steel.  Now, it's the likes of GoldmanSachs.
Yeah, because what you have to say is so terribly important... What impact do you personally have on society? What impact did those whom you indict have on society? Yeah, they're evil men, or maybe they are listened to because they are in a position to effect millions of peoples lives. You, are not.
Wow, stick up your butt aye?  Taking on the poster instead of the subject.  I thought you better "John".  I stand corrected.

Seriously, you admired JD Rockefeller?  He wanted to control the world's oil market.  Hahaha, listened too?  They are the power elite.  They are listened too because they are in power.   Why did Lehman Brother's fail, yet GoldmanSachs thrive?

John, I work for one of the major global engineering firms in the world.  It's in my best interest for my company to be profitable (ESPP   ).  But there are just things that the government has to lead, namely, projects that require significant amount of money and time to accomplish, that won't show any significant profit for decades or more.  Innovations that will eventually make it to the private sector and make profit.
Rockefeller did donate a shit load of money and created several universities (Including U Chicago).

Who doesn't want to control the industries that they are in? You must admit he did lay down the network for railroads and oil, a very smart businessmen as well.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6953

Cybargs wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Yeah, because what you have to say is so terribly important... What impact do you personally have on society? What impact did those whom you indict have on society? Yeah, they're evil men, or maybe they are listened to because they are in a position to effect millions of peoples lives. You, are not.
Wow, stick up your butt aye?  Taking on the poster instead of the subject.  I thought you better "John".  I stand corrected.

Seriously, you admired JD Rockefeller?  He wanted to control the world's oil market.  Hahaha, listened too?  They are the power elite.  They are listened too because they are in power.   Why did Lehman Brother's fail, yet GoldmanSachs thrive?

John, I work for one of the major global engineering firms in the world.  It's in my best interest for my company to be profitable (ESPP   ).  But there are just things that the government has to lead, namely, projects that require significant amount of money and time to accomplish, that won't show any significant profit for decades or more.  Innovations that will eventually make it to the private sector and make profit.
Rockefeller did donate a shit load of money and created several universities (Including U Chicago).

Who doesn't want to control the industries that they are in? You must admit he did lay down the network for railroads and oil, a very smart businessmen as well.
I don't deny any of those.  But too much power in one hand begets corruption.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard