Phil at the Bad Astronomer breathes a sigh of relief that an amendment by Barney Frank to prevent NASA from spending money on a manned mission to Mars has been defeated in the House. I haven’t been following this issue closely, so I’m not precisely sure what the amendment says, but from the looks of it I completely disagree with Phil. If I understand it correctly, the bill would not have cut NASA funding at all, just have prevented it from being used for the specific purpose of studying the possibility of sending astronauts to Mars. There is a huge difference between those two things.
Right now NASA is seriously underfunded, and there are three huge drains on the budget: the shuttle program, the Space Station, and the Moon/Mars initiative, all of which are mismanaged money pits. What is being hurt in all this is real science, which is being cut to the bone — essentially all of the Beyond Einstein missions (to study black holes, dark energy, and inflation) have been delayed, some essentially indefinitely. Studying Mars is interesting and fascinating. Spending money now on the idea of sending human astronauts to Mars is a politically-motivated boondoggle. There used to be a sensible procedure by which priorities were set, in which high-powered National Academy panels would look over the possibilities and use sensible scientific criteria to decide what was both interesting and feasible. The Bush administration has made a shambles of that process, and it has to stop.
Astrophysics in space, the one thing that NASA does well, is being killed off. The Moon/Mars initiative, according to people who know a lot more about the political wrangling than I do, is directly to blame. Sorry to hear that the amendment didn’t pass.
I am in agreement with Sean… and Robert Park at APS. This is a wasteful boondoggle of the highest order. I say get rid of the Space Station and the Shuttle. Focus on the robots.
Hi Sean, MK, Bob E, et al, I seem to recall Columbus had to wait until after the ‘reconquest’ of Spain, before the Queen would fund the three ships for his (dream) voyage of ‘discovery’ to the ‘new world’
Which part of this planet did you say the US Administration and NASA need to reconquer first, before they fund (dream) voyages of discovery to new worlds. – Q.
I still don’t understand the criticism of Constellation-X. So they make a slightly exaggerated claim on their public website. But if they could really test GR by observing infalling gas near a BH horizon, I say go for it!
Or let’s hear what more worthwhile project could be pursued that is currently being left high & dry by astrophysicists.
Other comments amply demonstrate what sentimental claptrap and / or obvious nonsense is regularly deployed in favour of manned missions with no scientific purpose. So sending astronauts to Mars makes your heart swell and you feel good to be alive. Can you really not get that feeling without spending billions of taxpayer dollars and exposing people to mortal risks?
We’ve already sent lots of unmanned missions to the Moon and Mars, and we could send dozens more with the money that would put even one person there. They haven’t found any trace of life, they found barren surfaces with huge temperature fluctuations and no oxygen. What makes anyone think that a guy in a spacesuit could spot lifeforms with the unaided eye, when the sensors and cameras on the unmanned probes found no trace of it?
Leaving aside the bullshit factor of ‘voyages of discovery’ (did unmanned probes discover nothing? is something only ‘discovered’ when a human foot rests on it??) – yes, much of this planet does need to be reconquered, specifically the parts that are likely to be regularly hit by extreme weather events rather soon, if they aren’t already.
If you think that the future of humanity is to colonize nearby planets, there are two inconvenient facts: first, the technology to do so on any scale is still a long way away; second, the human race has to stay here until it is ready, and quite a bit after that, given the probable costs of sending even one person up.
I also believe the Hubble telescope could have been repaired, and even deployed, by unmanned missions: it was just expedient to give the job to the Shuttles to lend them a spurious air of usefulness.
I’m just a taxpayer. I’ve always thought that manned space travel was a waste of money after we landed on the Moon. I have one question. Has anybody figured out yet, how a person could survive the radiation they would be exposed to on a trip to Mars? Or is that what they need to spend all the money on?
I think a cure for paralysis due to spinal cord injury or a method to prevent Altheimer’s Disease would be a better use of my money, than a trip to Mars.
Q, I was compelled to reply until I read Thomas Dent’s comments. I couldn’t do better.
Cheers.
Thomas D & Mike S
Next time you spend ‘your’ money on whatever it is you spend your money on, I’m sur you won’t want anyone to philosophise on the merits of what you spend your money on.
You sound like a couple of guys living in the caves, asking why we need to invent a ‘wheel’ you would have probably asked Pharaoh why he needed to build pyramids, and asked Columbus why he needed to travel west to India.
Well I don’t know where you happen to live, but my guess is that if someone wouldn’t have ventured into the ‘unknown’ or across the Atlantic – you guys wouldn’t be here talking about it.
My guess is that you guys like many others would have probably balked at the Wright brother’s idea of flight, at dreams of jumbo jets, or any other achievement …
we won’t debate the pros and cons of some of the achievements like enough missiles to destroy the planet several times over, or the explosion in car ownership in China and India, set to double demand for Oil and emissions of CO2.
But you can bet your bottom dollar that if mineralogists found one ounce of something that you could use on earth manned or robotic missions to whatever planet would start.
What neither of you have done is point out the impact that may be caused by sending matter in any significant quantity (whether people or goods) out of this planet, or bringing matter (ores, minerals) from another planet to this one.
Since when has it been a matter of this or that. Your claims to altruism are null and void. Sure put more people onto looking at diseases and cures for diseases. Funny everone wants a well paid job doing some ‘pathetic’ excuse for research, which your computer can dowhile you are sleeping, yet increasingly fewer people have time to give time for personal care of patients or sufferers. Before you go ranting about diseases tell me how many hours a week to you, yes you personally, dedicate as a volunteer to any charity or care of the sick & elderly.
Do we need to travel space? Why don’t you ask me if we need motzarella cheese sticks? Do we need chocolate? do we need tobacco? do we need cars? Do we need fizzy drinks or beer? Do we need tv, video gaemes, laptops or mobile phones.
No we don’t need them, we could spend all that time effort and money on cures for diseases. But because someone made the effort to create those things, they are now there and we all (in varying degrees) use them.
If you wanna say you wanna live without clean running tap water fine, if you wanna live without instant hot water on demand or deodorant, and smell like they used to smell in previous centuries fine. But if you enjoy the creature comforts progress brings, despite some of its more obvious minuses (or negative impact on the environment) fine.
But I tell you ONE thing. Better the US, Russia, China & Europe collaborate on space travel, than to have future governments decide we need to reduce population growth by ‘enforced’ sterilization like some governments have attempted before, or enforced limits on childbirth, or worse someone deciding another good war is what we need. With Israel making it extensively clear that they are getting impatient, that they want their land, and that a Palestinian state, and the palestinian people are a hindrance to their ‘ambitions’ how long do you think it is going to be before people with twitchy fingers on triggers start kicking off. The US already boasts that it dropped more on Iraq in three days than it did in Europe during the whole of World War II which lasted years. The next war may not be as onesided as Gulf Wars I & II.
So get real, get with it, and stay focussed. Better to dream the impossible dream, than to have people in the Pentagon planning possible war scenarios, land grabs or ethnic cleansing. Because they have no more interest in your ‘precious’ altruism than you have. For some people in your administration, the old or the sick, are just something you have to pay lipservice to. For some people in your administration there are too many blacks in Africa, too many chinks in Asia, and too many arabs anywhere. Wakey, wakey, reality check – which planet or parallel universe you guys living on. Q
Well Q, you completely missed my point, but you made a point. We have lots of problems right here on Earth that need to be solved. When Columbus crossed the Atlantic, and when the pioneers pushed west across the North American continent, they didn’t have to expose themselves to a fatal dose of radiation. Sure, they encountered problems, and they solved those problems, but their goals were within reason.
When us taxpayers see money being wasted on things like elevators to space or manned trips to Mars, we can’t help but feel our elected representatives are being scammed. My question remains unanswered. Has anybody figured out how a person can survive the radiation they would be exposed to on a trip to Mars?
Q, are you suggesting that we should pursue manned spaceflight because it will help reduce population growth on earth? If so it seems to me that your argument is based more on science fiction than on practical realities. Once europeans discovered the americas, the ships needed to transport large groups of people there were not really all that expensive, and of course they didn’t require extensive life-support once they got there (and someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the number of people leaving europe was ever great enough to make much of a dent in population growth there–I think the population growth in the americas had more to do with new kids being born to the descendents of small groups of colonists rather than to huge streams of new colonists arriving from europe). In contrast, getting colonists to Mars or even the moon and keeping them alive there for years is going to cost billions of dollars per person…maybe the cost could eventually be driven down by future breakthroughs in technology like the space elevator or self-replicating factories which can churn out new ships from raw materials in the asteroid belt, but manned spaceflight today isn’t going to bring about such technologies any quicker. In any case, it’s always going to be cheaper to colonize Antarctica or the bottom of the ocean than to colonize space–if you’re worried about population growth, wouldn’t it make more sense to focus on those more acheivable (but still fairly silly, IMO) goals rather than colonizing other planets, whose only advantage seems to be that it would be more exciting and science fiction-y than trying to build cities in Antarctica?
Mike S, Jesse M
Hi there, you both prove my point that just as “beauty” is in the eye of the beholder, “meaning” is in the ear of the listener or the eye of the reader, or rather in the mind (mind-set) which processes the information: light, sound waves or pixels on a screen.
And these can be different or even diametrically opposite to those intended by the ‘conveyor’ speaker or writer.
(1) I am not suggesting we need to control population growth, after all the 20th century provided the means for ‘voluntary’ population control (the pill + condoms). I am suggesting that population IS growing, that space, land and resources are limited, not as some Malthusian or Darwinian argument, but as a reality and the logical conclusions deduced from historical readings of what happens when man (animal) is in competition for space, land and resources.
(2) I am well aware of the real difficulties of space travel, I was (am?) sceptical of the Moon landing, why was it not followed by more manned flights and moon landings. Don’t give me any ‘naive’ arguments about costs and taxes. The government prints money, and you receive wages, buy goods/services and pay taxes with that money. Not viceversa. Or did you + you ‘create the money. The government can build dams, highways, nuclear plants, accelerators and colliders or aircraft carriers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines or B2 bombers and Space shuttles to its hearts content. As long as it has approval from The Senate, – yes you are living in a replica, carbon copy or mirror image of a 2000 year old “Roman” Republic,- and as long as public and international confidence continues in the greenback or dollar $US, you can add ad infinitum
(3) Relative relativity. If 300 million north americans descended from european settlers who moved to USA north america lived in Europe, and we hadn’t had world wars I & II – the population of ‘old’ Europe would almost rival that of India & China, yes 7-800 million human beings. I’m not convinced the EU can sustain that kind of population growth without wars and conflict.
(4) It took Da Vinci’s ideas for a girocopter and ‘winged’ flight almost 500 years to ‘materialise’ so we know we are in it for a long haul, highly unlikely to occur in a 20-30 year timescale as proposed or ‘wished for’ by Stephen Hawking, unless someone is ‘researching’ propulsion at the ‘speed of light’
(5) Yes space is the most hostile arena, more hostile and forbodding or impenetratable than the Artic, Antartic or the bottom of the Ocean. By all means build Atlantis style cities in the Sea – the Sea is a big ‘expanse’ – but do not suggest that we should therefore not explore space and even travel space. You’ve all seen science fiction films. you’ve all heard William Shatner’s joke about these things that fit in the palm of your hand called ‘mobile’ phones, fiction and fantasy 30 years ago. And no, we are nowhere near teletransporting matter, no beam me up Scotty, and no replicators for instant food of your choice on demand. The closest to that is a Big Mac at a drive thru or Pizza delivery in under twenty minutes or your money back. Oh I forgot ready prepared frozen foods and microwaves, did I?
6) So pose all your challenges & difficulties. That is what life, science and learning is about. But do not bring other issues like disease, senility, famine in Africa into the equation of Space exploration or Space Travel. They are problems and difficulties which need to be resolved in their ‘own’ right. Look at Bill Gates he became a billionaire with Microsoft, now he can dedicate himself fully to philanthropy and his wife’s charity in Africa.
But he does not say do not waste your money on laptops, microsoft, x-box or video games, and give your money to Africa. He gives you something for your money and then takes the profits (or taxes) and does something about Africa.
So now list all the impediments to Space exploration and Space Travel, and lets work on resolving them. If my physics is not all askew there must be something out there worth ‘mining’ – relatively speaking building three small ships to cross the atlantic five hundred years ago was for the crown of Spain about the same cost (and achievement) as building three shuttles – and bringing oil by tanker from saudi or Irqa thru the Canal of Suez and the straits of Gibraltar are no twopence halvenney feats, they are pretty mind boggling deeds in comparison to the three little ships with which Columus set sail to America, or even the space shuttles and NASA Missions.
And I agree let us use ‘Robots’ not ‘Slaves’
or forced labour ‘prisoners’ and ‘criminals’ to colonise space, work plantations. or mines, or to populate Australia or any other continent or moon or planet.
But rather like the Nike ad “Just Do It”
Have a nice weekend! – Q
Q said: “The government prints money, and you receive wages, buy goods/services and pay taxes with that money. Not viceversa. Or did you + you ‘create the money.”
Yes, I goddamn well did “create the money.” I’m a self employed business owner, and every penny I ever had came right out of my back and my hands. I spend more labor and effort keeping up with government regulations and paying taxes than I do providing products and services to my paying customers, and if I could get back just 10% of the money I’ve paid in taxes in the last 32 years, I’d be a retired millionaire right now.
If Bill Gates chose to explore space, he could do that because he’d be using his money. The government is using “my” money, and I should have something to say about how they use it. A manned spaceflight to Mars is a boondogle and a total shame if it takes money away from other research that might actually benefit mankind and solve some of the problems we have right here on the ground. Traveling to other planets while this planet is in the messes that its in is just nonsense.
“Bulletin of the Space Scientists” ?
Perhaps we need more public education on the merits and costs of manned space exploration versus “Beyond Einstein” and other basic scientific research. The charter might be, to emulate Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
“The mission of the Bulletin is to educate citizens about basic science research issues, especially the continuing dangers posed by manned space exploration, and the appropriate use of taxpayer money in this area.”
Mike Schuler,
Doesn’t the law of conservation of energy point to the fact that money is not created by governments or people but by exchanges?
Doesn’t that further imply the illusion of “getting ahead” in life? And doesn’t wishing for being a retired millionaire show the desire for the same illusion that socialism struggled for…some workless utopia gained that cannot be there?
Or, if your measuring affluence in terms of leisure time rather than the accumulation of goods and services, then the hunters/gatherers are more affluent than we are. They work less than 20 hours per week and suffer no brain diseases nor do they ask for handouts. The more money one makes leaves less leisure time to enjoy it. I wouldn’t trade places with Gates and his imprisoned life. Gates, on the other hand, might recognize that he is giving up on leisure that he just doesn’t value all as much as taking risks. He could be just a thrill seeker that wound up with money by an accident of random coincidence.
Mike Schuler. you are a hard working self-employed business owner. You don’t “create” money. You create trade/business/services for money. Money is paid to you by customers/clients, and you pay money to suppliers if you have any. From the residue, or profit margin (or tax you are charging customers for your service) you pay a portion in state (local) taxes and federal income tax.
You have every right to express your preference on what the government spends your taxes on. The invasion of Iraq was paid with your taxes.
Bob wealth is created by exchange or ‘velocity’ of money. Money is created or ‘minted’ by the Treasury
The nature of US money has changed since Milton
Friedman made his claim.
Yes, in fact all modern money has changed, not just US money. The changes have not fully registered among a significant fraction of the population, and that has led to a great deal of misunderstanding about the national debt. The Federal debt is not at all equivalent to private debt.
Individuals and firms will fail if they borrow more than they can service, but the Federal government will never involuntarily default on its debt or become bankrupt.
It borrows in the very same money “it” “creates”.
Many misconceptions, inconsistencies & errors exist in people’s minds, on economics & physics. – Q
Bob said: Or, if your measuring affluence in terms of leisure time rather than the accumulation of goods and services, then the hunters/gatherers are more affluent than we are. They work less than 20 hours per week and suffer no brain diseases nor do they ask for handouts.
Bob said: Doesn’t that further imply the illusion of “getting ahead” in life? And doesn’t wishing for being a retired millionaire show the desire for the same illusion that socialism struggled for…some workless utopia gained that cannot be there?
Funny how people who hope to retire millionaires early or in their fifties say, want ‘other’ people to consume more of their goods and the goods from the companies they hold shares in.
Then, they’ll mock a drunk who wasted all his hard earned money on “Guinness” or whatever american brew, so that the breweries could make vast profits and pay you dividends in your pension scheme.
Is the drunk any less worthy of a decent pension than you are, when he retires. After all he just played his part in the grand scheme of things. Not sure I’d want to trade places, but that is life! It is evident we cannot all be Bill Gate’s or lions in africa. Not all at the same time anyway. – Q.
It’s a pity Barney Frank’s amendment was defeated. Here’s what he said
in his speech:
Flying pork is about right, but I think Charles Stross puts it even more precisely
in his novel Accelerando:
For more of my disgruntled views on this nonsense, check out
Meme Therapy.
Here is one of my favorite quotes, which I use regularly when I inevitably/regularly run into incompetent fools (I used work for NASA/JPL):
“You can’t soar like an Eagle, if you’re stuck with a bunch of turkeys”
— hockey commentator (ex-NHL player), also from Educational Quotes
What I experienced at JPL/NASA defies description:
– the boss goes out of town on business, & my so-called “colleagues” go to audio-store in Pasadena, & buy stereo equipment..& come back openly bragging about it (“I bought a Yama-haha”). And, that guy is now head of Caltech Computer Services!
– my officemates (Image Processing Lab/JPL) have this addiction to this computer-game “Dark Castle”. They are playing it CONSTANTLY during work, & discuss it. Visiting contractors also engage in conversation about it. I approached the office one afternoon, it was locked, opened the door, the lights were turned out, & that PhD was..yep, playing Dark Castle! This is the clown who writes up these idiotic task-lists (shabbily quickly done thing), & is my immediate supervisor! I promptly report it to my boss, who tells me “xx, I want to know if this happens again”. Okay, so the next day, these 2 clowns are waiting for me..staring at me, & tell me “go get your chair in the next room”. Intimidation & bullying. I mean, this sounds like punks in high-school..& this is JPL/NASA???
These clowns are going to Maui (staying in Condos, those goof-offs), in support of an SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) project involving a 40″ telescope (now used for NEO/Near Earth Object detection), which we know now to be a sham. I was “blackballed” for being an “insurgent”, move out of my office. After the above clown was promoted in a JPL flyer “Dr. xxx, did an outstanding job on this project yyy”, I realized I had no future in that sh*t-can outfit (posing as a Rocket Science Lab, & wasting tax payers dollars). I submitted my resignation, & walked out..I can still remember that hot July afternoon.
That “issue” I refer to in a previous post is the above: how JPL is an embarassment & committing fraud to scientists who are putting their trust in Caltech to manage unmanned space-probes. Those 2 consecutive Mars failures by JPL were no accident. A contemporary of R. Feynman’s (he would dine with RPF @Faculty Club, & started the Analog Computing Lab @JPL) told me of how the Mariner probes to Mars (60’s!) were on the brink of failure. Only because of his diligent work, was a disaster avoided. He told me this, after he *publicly* agreed with my comments on JPL, on an amateur meteor-observing list.
I feel the Scientific Community needs to be aware of this fraudulent/irresponsible/unprofessional behavior. I mean, would they TRUST these guys to manage a space-probe & the incoming data? Dang, I sure has hell wouldn’t!
Is this for real? What happened to ovesight?
Burt Rutan (legendary aviation pioneer, ex-Air Force employee) is a well-known critic of NASA. Good articles here 1, 2,3
[ von Braun was Rutan’s hero, WB was the Technical Leader (PhD Aeronautics), Business Leader (got Federal funding, gave JFK a tour), Spiritual Leader (“driving force”). Burt R, basically emulated WB, for his Space Ship One project, which was bankrolled by Paul Allen (ex-Microsoft founder) ]
You might recall the Wehrner von Braun dream, was to goto Mars..the Moon was just the 1st step. After the Moon objective was met (purely a political motive), WB made his pitch to Congress (“the opposite of Progress”) about going to Mars..”it fell on deaf ears” (as per the documentary on History Channel). So, why is going to Mars (manned mission) a big deal now? Answer: more political BS-nonsense (just like the Moon thing).
“War is an extension of Politics..by any other means”
— von Clausewitz
This was a quote from the 1800’s (probably valid back to the Greeks/Romans), & explains the folly in Iraq & the current hallucination with Mars. It’s all an extension of Politics..”Wise men [ scientists ] Speak, Fools [ politicians ] decide”/Anacharcis.
That’s it..we’re stuck in a mind-boggling/mind-blowing Catch-22 situation. We’re stuck with trying to do Science, in an atmosphere created by idiots. THIS is the thing I never learned how to do, which apparently is the Game that’s being played.
“Suppose you were an Idiot, suppose you were a member of Congress..but I repeat myself”
— Mark Twain
#35 Mike Schuler: “Gates, on the other hand, might recognize that he is giving up on leisure that he just doesn’t value all as much as taking risks. He could be just a thrill seeker that wound up with money by an accident of random coincidence.”
Many of the rich thrill-seekers are, in fact, presently pursuing space and space travel in all of the best ways.
Hi Amara, from your rich thrill-seekers
I’d heard of sleeping “business” partners, but Angel Investors? – love it!
In the world of business startups, funding often cannot be found from conventional sources such as banks and venture capital firms. Instead, a so-called angel investor is found who supports the initial costs out of his or her own pocket.
Similarly, “space angels” are now putting serious money into innovative space endeavours. Using very low cost approaches, the projects can carry out exciting projects that NASA does not have the money for or, as in the case of space tourism, has stood in the way of.
Nice quote today. Is it true? 🙂
If one were to think of the “Templeton foundation,” in all that has been expressed here, then money allocated along the “desires of organizations,” may have offended some people?
So you’ll get these kinds of thoughts, “judging” what ever information may come out of it? “Smart people” sometimes, labelled because of association?
That seems to happen a lot, regardless of the organization, regardless of the model choosen?
So is it a case of “looking for” the motivations and designs these space angels have in the quest of their money? Or or they a truly humanitarian based, free of these ill inntentioned suspicions of helping “free” of ego and possension?
Is their not such honor in todays world? I think so:)
Prosperity is a blessing – every customer/client who comes to you and leaves satisfied, is a blessing
Prosperity can be a curse – it can engender a certain jealousy and mistrust among competitors for ‘riches’, no matter how noble + novel the ideas which engendered the prosperity or wealth.
Some people in retail or business actually medidate that the next visitor will be a client, more business, a sale!
There is a 60% chance that we’ll have another weather related scrub, and I’m not the least bit surprised, as the window is much too late for a launch this time of the season in thunderstormy central florida. Although, one good break in the clouds and ‘this bird is flyin’. Otherwise, the crew on the space station will just have to spear another SoyuzFish…
Cyborgs and bots won’t teach us “much” about long-term survival in our inevitably changing environment, and the “group” of left-sighted people who want to do away with this aspect of space exploration also think that they can reverse time by returning the Earth to a pristine state. This is the reason why their bills don’t pass, and why the NEVER get things all their way, because the mindset for what constitutes science to “new-aged” “free-thinkers” is equally clue-less to that of the right-sighted tree-burners. Neither side has a real clue when it comes to undertanding our place in nature and that is all that there really is to this.
Q, I don’t even believe that loops are necessary to a *real* theory of quantum gravity, much less the big ball of spun yarn that lives in neverNeverland with tinkerbelle, hook, and god.
We should not waste taxpayer money on the shuttle program but use it for real science instead.
I don’t agree, we should fund both. I don’t see why the funds have to be in competition with one another specifically. Rather the funds should be in competition with the plurality of all government spending.
Which would I rather fund. Some entitlement fund, or a trip to mars? You guessed it, the latter.