Funding cut for NASA Constellation and Ares (Opp: school, cost)

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

So robots are only going to go so far in exploration...

How exactly do you know what a robot will be able to do, 20, 30 even 40 years from now?

[blondandfun]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

How exactly do you know what a robot will be able to do, 20, 30 even 40 years from now?

Ummmm, I know what they can't do.. They can't pick up a tool set and do nearly what a human could do. And they sure as hell will NEVER do what they did in Apollo 13. FOr you to think that everything can be done on the ground and without counting errors and miscalculations is just plain wrong.

[iAdam]

Sad to see that we're cutting our Space program instead of cutting other factors.

[djmaxwell]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

And they sure as hell will NEVER do what they did in Apollo 13.

Isn't that kind of the point? If it were robots instead of humans on Apollo 13, it probably would have been cheaper because you wouldn't have needed the recovery effort.

[HB2HSV]

Originally Posted by djmaxwell

Isn't that kind of the point? If it were robots instead of humans on Apollo 13, it probably would have been cheaper because you wouldn't have needed the recovery effort.

What recovery effort on the Apollo 13? There wasn't even an "rescue" effort.

We need more rish-taking astronauts like the Apollo-era astronauts.

[HB2HSV]

Originally Posted by Charles

The most exciting events in space/NASA to me since the Apollo era were the Mars robots - not the Space Station or the Shuttle. Seems like we (taxpayers) got the most bang for the buck from the robots. As soon as you man rate something, the costs are significantly higher.

OK so the Mars robots received a lot of publicity. Yes we were all excited about robots landed on Mars.

But keep in mind what the excitment was about Mars, not about robots. It was the first time we were able to see the surface of Mars, just like we saw the surface of Moon back in 1969.

But the difference is, the Apollo astronauts came back from the Moon and brought soil samples with them.

What're the robots on Mars doing now? I've heard they're stucked in the sand somewhere not far from the landing site and can't do much.

Robots have their place in space exploration, but they can never replace human space exploration.

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by blondandfun

Ummmm, I know what they can't do.. They can't pick up a tool set and do nearly what a human could do. And they sure as hell will NEVER do what they did in Apollo 13. FOr you to think that everything can be done on the ground and without counting errors and miscalculations is just plain wrong.

I think its just plain wrong to assume we have any idea of what robots will be capable of in coming decades. What we do know is that the state of robotics and AI will advance.

I don't see the Apollo 13 connection. That's the entire point - no one is at risk when the inevitable yet unforseeable screw up occurs.

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by HB2HSV

OK so the Mars robots received a lot of publicity. Yes we were all excited about robots landed on Mars.

But keep in mind what the excitment was about Mars, not about robots. It was the first time we were able to see the surface of Mars, just like we saw the surface of Moon back in 1969.

But the difference is, the Apollo astronauts came back from the Moon and brought soil samples with them.

What're the robots on Mars doing now? I've heard they're stucked in the sand somewhere not far from the landing site and can't do much.

Robots have their place in space exploration, but they can never replace human space exploration.

What of scientific value did the astronauts on the moon accomplish that a robot could not today?

Its easier to design an unmanned vehicle with return capability than it is a manned one. The mars rovers weren't designed to return anything. They were designed to last a couple months. They've lasted 6 years (if I recall correctly). We've had six years of wandering the martian surface; compare how much science they've done for the cost versus the cost of sending people to accomplish the same. It's a slam dunk.

[HB2HSV]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

What of scientific value did the astronauts on the moon accomplish that a robot could not today?

If you have to ask this question, then there're too much education to be done than what this thread can accompolish.

In "today's" robot technology, can you design a robot to drive like an average human being going from RSA to Hampton Cove in today's automobile & traffic? How long and how much would it cost to design a robot to duplicate human's ability to see, hear, sense, think and react?

One doesn't exist. Period. End of story.

The simple fact is that, ultimately; there's no purpose of space exploration without human's involvement. Robots are nothing but complex set of instruments, just like space probes. They have values in "helping" human to explore space & understand the environment. But ultimately, it it the humans that's doing the exploring.

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

How exactly do you know what a robot will be able to do, 20, 30 even 40 years from now?

Ummm, we're going to plan on designing systems _right now_ based on technology that doesn't exist? I'm quite familiar with AI and what it can / cannot do, and we don't have Terminator robots at _this time_ or even 10 years down the road.