hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 150 of 152 FirstFirst ... 50100140147148149150151152 LastLast
Results 2,981 to 3,000 of 3038

Thread: NASA Live

  1. #2981
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    the article does have a point tho. once you send the machines to prepare all the things is the only viable time to actually send humans up there. big waste of resources to have meatbags using up all the precious resources when you can do it via remote (see: drone technology in modern day armies for a recent example)
    Its also dumb, because it ignores the massive single point of failure we have as a species, which is that we only exist on a single planet that has a provable history of extinction level encounters with extraterrestrial objects.
    meh

  2. #2982

    Join Date
    March 10, 2019
    Posts
    18
    It's simply not realistic, as pointed out in the article, to assume we can just off this planet and live somewhere else. We are depleting Earth of its resources, true. Is there anywhere in this entire universe that we can actually arrive to that will have more resources than even a resource-depleted Earth? No. From this POV, government support of SpaceX, ISS, etc. is a waste of money except for NASA's robotics division and the best way to deal with climate change and resource depletion is to divert funding to green technologies.

    As quoted in the article, "Steven Weinberg has described the ISS as an “orbital turkey”:
    The only real technology that the space station has produced concerns the technology of keeping humans alive in space—which is a senseless and circular process if you realize there is no point in having humans in space." Weinberg is a Nobel laureate in physics.

  3. #2983
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    6,614
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    the article does have a point tho. once you send the machines to prepare all the things is the only viable time to actually send humans up there. big waste of resources to have meatbags using up all the precious resources when you can do it via remote (see: drone technology in modern day armies for a recent example)
    Its also dumb, because it ignores the massive single point of failure we have as a species, which is that we only exist on a single planet that has a provable history of extinction level encounters with extraterrestrial objects.
    i mean if you think it's easier to terraform a different planet than terraforming earth (which we are effectively doing with pollution as well as moving to green energy to reverse the process) then i dunno what to tell ya. maybe there's something i'm missing, i dunno.

    make no mistake, i'd LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE for us to become a spacefaring race a'la Expanse but isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on, which actually has everything we need to live, before terraforming another one that lacks like 99% of needed things for human survival outside of a spacesuit?

    i also kinda doubt other planets are exempt from the whole "worldending disaster scenario" that earth is infamous for
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  4. #2984
    Super Ponerator Global Moderator Evelgrivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    the article does have a point tho. once you send the machines to prepare all the things is the only viable time to actually send humans up there. big waste of resources to have meatbags using up all the precious resources when you can do it via remote (see: drone technology in modern day armies for a recent example)
    There's nothing more consistently overestimated than the capabilities of the machines men make.

    On an aside? Planets are a horrible way to gather resources. It's not feasible to do more than scrape the crust, which is a hugely destructive act for biospheres. Space has no biosphere to protect, and the elemental composition of the solar system is right there for the taking, so long as you can get to it. Asteroids, with their shallow gravity wells and abundance of heavy elements and precious metals, have the potential to make terrestrial mining an obsolete industry. From a strictly environmentalist standpoint, getting to space sooner could eliminate the need to pave our world.
    Last edited by Evelgrivion; March 10 2019 at 10:44:20 PM.

  5. #2985
    dzajic's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 15, 2011
    Posts
    3,458
    Weinberg has a grudge against ISS? Gee I wonder why.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supe...Super_Collider

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  6. #2986
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    the article does have a point tho. once you send the machines to prepare all the things is the only viable time to actually send humans up there. big waste of resources to have meatbags using up all the precious resources when you can do it via remote (see: drone technology in modern day armies for a recent example)
    Its also dumb, because it ignores the massive single point of failure we have as a species, which is that we only exist on a single planet that has a provable history of extinction level encounters with extraterrestrial objects.
    i mean if you think it's easier to terraform a different planet than terraforming earth (which we are effectively doing with pollution as well as moving to green energy to reverse the process) then i dunno what to tell ya. maybe there's something i'm missing, i dunno.

    make no mistake, i'd LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE for us to become a spacefaring race a'la Expanse but isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on, which actually has everything we need to live, before terraforming another one that lacks like 99% of needed things for human survival outside of a spacesuit?

    i also kinda doubt other planets are exempt from the whole "worldending disaster scenario" that earth is infamous for
    I not making any judgement on which is cheaper, easier to do or even which order tasks should be taken in. Just that until we can reliably reproduce on not earth, we risk being wiped out as a species.
    meh

  7. #2987

    Join Date
    March 10, 2019
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by dzajic View Post
    Weinberg has a grudge against ISS? Gee I wonder why.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supe...Super_Collider

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    . Point taken. As an aside, two days ago Nima Akani-Hamed was saying https://cerncourier.com/in-it-for-the-long-haul/ that we need a 100 TeV collider to be a Higgs factory and potentially produce dark matter. By way of comparison, the wiki linked above says SSC was planned to be 40 TeV and LHC is 13 TeV.

  8. #2988
    Movember 2011 RazoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Motherland
    Posts
    30,887
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on
    you could start by resolving israel/palestine

    i'll wait

  9. #2989
    Super Ponerator Global Moderator Evelgrivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,219
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on
    you could start by resolving israel/palestine

    i'll wait

  10. #2990

    Join Date
    December 20, 2013
    Posts
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by August View Post
    New article https://inference-review.com/article/lost-in-space argues manned space travel is a waste of money. I didn't realize so little beneficial research has come out of the space program.
    While that article and others may have a point about specific inventions like Teflon and velcro, I think the part of the picture they're missing is all of the refinement and advancement that space programs in general have driven. Solar cells weren't invented by NASA, but I'm quite sure that various manufacturing methods and efficiency improvements were driven by space projects. Plus all those GPS and communications satellites certainly rode on the coattails of various space program advancements.

    Also, I remember reading an opinion that the true achievement and legacy of the ISS is the huge amount of international cooperation it required to build and operate. I have a hard time arguing with that, myself.

  11. #2991
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    8,420
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on
    you could start by resolving israel/palestine

    i'll wait
    The answer is that it's easier to start over in space without all those troublesome cultures and religions with historical grudges coming along for the ride. At least that's what the elite think. It's easier to leave the poors behind on a dying world than try and fix it.
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; March 11 2019 at 09:10:09 AM.

  12. #2992
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,847
    The solar system could support trillions with asteroid habitats alone in a fraction of the time. Quibbling over terraforming Mars is lol. Besides, my version of of our impeding FALGSC utopia is 99.9% digital.

  13. #2993
    Specially Pegged Donor Overspark's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    NL fuck yeah
    Posts
    3,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    make no mistake, i'd LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE for us to become a spacefaring race a'la Expanse but isn't it a billion times easier to try and fix the planet we're already on, which actually has everything we need to live, before terraforming another one that lacks like 99% of needed things for human survival outside of a spacesuit?
    That's a funny example, since in the Expanse universe only the Martians are weird enough to actually attempt terraforming as a multi-century project, while everyone else is happily off doing their thing on asteroids and moons which are both not nearly as deep in a gravity well. And Earth is fucked and everyone lives under domes.

    That said, trying to survive on another body might actually provide insight in how to live under a dome or on a world with a fucked atmosphere, so you never know when that'll come in handy.

  14. #2994

  15. #2995

  16. #2996
    Mashie Saldana's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Peterborough, UK
    Posts
    998
    Interesting read, they are getting closer to sorting out the engines needed for space planes: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47585433
    How to tell the difference between Machine Learning and AI:
    If it is written in Python it is most likely Machine Learning.
    If it is written in PowerPoint it is most likely AI.

  17. #2997

  18. #2998
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    9,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Evelgrivion View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    the article does have a point tho. once you send the machines to prepare all the things is the only viable time to actually send humans up there. big waste of resources to have meatbags using up all the precious resources when you can do it via remote (see: drone technology in modern day armies for a recent example)
    There's nothing more consistently overestimated than the capabilities of the machines men make.

    On an aside? Planets are a horrible way to gather resources. It's not feasible to do more than scrape the crust, which is a hugely destructive act for biospheres. Space has no biosphere to protect, and the elemental composition of the solar system is right there for the taking, so long as you can get to it. Asteroids, with their shallow gravity wells and abundance of heavy elements and precious metals, have the potential to make terrestrial mining an obsolete industry. From a strictly environmentalist standpoint, getting to space sooner could eliminate the need to pave our world.
    Have we found commercially viable deposits of gold, copper, uranium and lithium on other stellar bodies?
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...

  19. #2999

    Join Date
    December 20, 2013
    Posts
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by Evelgrivion View Post
    Gorgeous machinery. Is that a Raptor?

  20. #3000
    Super Ponerator Global Moderator Evelgrivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Eranziel View Post
    Gorgeous machinery. Is that a Raptor?
    Yup. They've been doing fit-checks on the Hopper since yesterday.


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •