Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The next generation of manned spacecraft will be the ultimate flying machine, too. Man has always explored the unknown, from our cavemen ancestors moving 20 miles "over there" until today.
I remember when we were exploring under the seas at the same time we were going to the Moon. What happened?
Oh, hell, who wouldn't want to fly into space? But here is my point, the nearest planet outside of our solar system is 10.5 light years away, that's 5,878,630,000,000 x 10.5. The Helios space craft (the fastest to date) travels at a speed of 153,800 miles per hour. Now according to Einstein's theory, to even travel close to the speed of light would require an almost infinite amount of energy... get where I am going with this?
Yeah I see where you're going. Unfortunately I believe that if humans are taken out that funding for NASA will slowly dry up. And the reality is that NASA funding, while a big number, is still in the realm of rounding error in the overall budget.
Oh, hell, who wouldn't want to fly into space? But here is my point, the nearest planet outside of our solar system is 10.5 light years away, that's 5,878,630,000,000 x 10.5. The Helios space craft (the fastest to date) travels at a speed of 153,800 miles per hour. Now according to Einstein's theory, to even travel close to the speed of light would require an almost infinite amount of energy... get where I am going with this?
I'm afraid I don't.
What if Orville and Wilbur had deemed their first powered glider trials at Kitty Hawk pointless because , at the time, man going to the moon - or even flying hundreds of people on one aircraft coast-to-coast in a few hours was unimaginable?
Oh, hell, who wouldn't want to fly into space? But here is my point, the nearest planet outside of our solar system is 10.5 light years away, that's 5,878,630,000,000 x 10.5. The Helios space craft (the fastest to date) travels at a speed of 153,800 miles per hour. Now according to Einstein's theory, to even travel close to the speed of light would require an almost infinite amount of energy... get where I am going with this?
But we've only tapped less than 0.001% of the resources within the solar system. Just because we can't fly to the stars today doesn't mean we couldn't be mining He-3 on the moon tomorrow (or in 100 years when Fusion power is a reality).
Mars, Luna, maybe Venus, and several moons in the Jovian Systems (Saturn and Jupiter) have the potential to be terraformed with technology we'll likely develop over the next millennium. There's precious water ice everywhere and rare earth elements and all sorts of resources imbedded in near-earth orbiting asteroids which we can get to "tomorrow."
Manned Spaceflight is HARD, difficult, dangerous, and the returns are long-term... but so was sailing across the ocean 60 years after we had invented manned dugout canoe technology.
Oh, hell, who wouldn't want to fly into space? But here is my point, the nearest planet outside of our solar system is 10.5 light years away, that's 5,878,630,000,000 x 10.5. The Helios space craft (the fastest to date) travels at a speed of 153,800 miles per hour. Now according to Einstein's theory, to even travel close to the speed of light would require an almost infinite amount of energy... get where I am going with this?
Wow. I've got an old Toyota, and that's more miles than what is on my odometer.
The current thought, though, on Einstein's theory, is that light does not necessarily take the shortest route between two points. There might be short cuts, owing to a geometry of the universe that we don't yet know about. However, that is probably not a conceptual breakthrough that we can discover by dumping clumsy old brute-force rockets into the solar system.
Considering this debate has been hashed out, numerous times lately seems like, you should just research the older threads.
However, I will restate
NASA has contributed numerous advances, that are patented and more than make up the cost of their mission. Also, we will never get off of this rock, and secure the survival of our species until we go into space.
Few things cost as little, and gain us as much as manned space flight, and the space agency as a whole.
I guess we could have sent probes to the new world, but that would have done little for us. Sometimes it takes people. As far as the "speed of light" debate, with exploration comes progress, through progress comes breakthroughs, through breakthroughs comes the answers. Most of man kinds greatest advancements comes from jumping in, both feet, and not looking back. We seem to work best when pressed.
An example, when the Russians pressed us in space, we made it to the moon in less than 10 years.
What if Orville and Wilbur had deemed their first powered glider trials at Kitty Hawk pointless because , at the time, man going to the moon - or even flying hundreds of people on one aircraft coast-to-coast in a few hours was unimaginable?
To my knowledge there weren't any laws of physics which precluded the possibilities envisioned by the Wright brothers.
To my knowledge there weren't any laws of physics which precluded the possibilities envisioned by the Wright brothers.
Quite true, the technology for intergalactic travel is still in the womb. From where I'm sitting, the problems are solvable, but only if mankind, as a whole, cooperates in the effort. I don't see that happening anytime soon, but, IF this were to happen, we could expand into space successfully. Method of propulsion is the biggest problem, certainly. Intertia style propulsion, such as rockets, will not suffice. Fuel runs out to quickly and sufficient speed cannot be reached. There is the next problem, said sufficient speed cannot be reached without tearing things to shreds, requiring some sort of dampening.. I still think these issues could be resolved if humanity quit putting all our efforts into killing each other, but, that is not happening yet. I find the subject of space travel quite fascinating. FTL travel, wormholes, subspace corridors, phase technology, different theories of power sources etc. Alas, I don't see being a pioneer on the final frontier as being a part of my future. Perhaps my grandkids..........
I think people continue with manned space flight because they think it's very cool to go up in space, and then try to justify it.
It's a strange way to invent Tang and other such.
To my knowledge there weren't any laws of physics which precluded the possibilities envisioned by the Wright brothers.
You think we understand all that there is to know about physics?
I'm just not ready to accept that we're at a dead end when we've taken the first tiniest step forward. There's no right or wrong answer here, but I'm of the opinion that, at our very early stage, it is still worth the cost.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I still think these issues could be resolved if humanity quit putting all our efforts into killing each other, but, that is not happening yet. I find the subject of space travel quite fascinating. FTL travel, wormholes, subspace corridors, phase technology, different theories of power sources etc. Alas, I don't see being a pioneer on the final frontier as being a part of my future. Perhaps my grandkids..........
