Because it is Rocket Science

[Matt Deckard]

One of the Reasons I like hanging around JPL is because its Jet Propulsion Laboratories. Thats where Rocket science became Rocket science. How I get to hang with them? I dont know, all I know is I do. Cassini Space Probe Only the coolest probe ever built on the face of this earth.

Named after Jean-Dominique Cassini who found four of Saturns moons. The probe was sent to study the rings of Saturn. The Huygens probe which was attached to the side was sent to check out the moon Titan which has an atmosphere a moon with an atmosphere. Not just an atmosphere though activity.. it has lakes and thermal movement its cool, I get to hang out and study.

We can see spokes on the rings of Saturn yes spokes what does that mean who knows. They appear to show up when eradiated by the sun. Perhaps they are particles that repel from the rest of the ring and stand away casting a shadowy spoke every few thousand miles.

Its all just cool. Better than Star Trek. I saw it under construction I got to talk to reporters and students at JPL open houses about it, and now its part of our history. Even created controversy when it was launched because of the nuclear propulsion system. Its the biggest thing civilians have sent into space.

Now here is the question. Seeing as this project cost billions. Should we focus that money on sending more people to the moon, or sending out more probes like this to learn about whats out there?

Seems to be a conundrum between manned exploration and robot exploration. One slows down our ability to learn. The other is more exciting.

What should we do?

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Commence worm can opening sequence....

Now here is the question. Seeing as this project cost billions(of taxpayers dollars!). Should we focus that money on sending more people to the moon, or sending out more probes like this to learn about whats out there?

Seems to be a conundrum between manned exploration and robot exploration. One slows down our ability to learn. The other is more exciting.

What should we do?

Now you asked the question MD, so I am only responding to "What should we do?" because you asked. In no way am I casting aspersions on all the fine folks who work for JPL, NASA or the like. Nor am I making anything that can be misinterpreted as a personal attack on any individual, group, or agency of the Federal Government. Now, that being said:

The answer is clearly, STOP! It is NOT theirs to spend A government sponsored space program has cost the American taxpayer trillions of dollars. Now I like teflon, and sharp pictures of Venus as well as the next man, but how is it that a government in a Constitutional Republic usurps the responsiblity for this kind of activity from the private sector?

The government sponsored space program has made inroads into the arena of space exploration, but it begs the question; where would we be by now if the private sector, using private investment capital, were left to explore the potential for space exploration and exploitation? The government sponsored shuttle program has never even come close to it's goal of paying for itself nor has it proven itself with any commercial potential.

I am that voice out here in the wilderness crying STOP!... enough is enough! The government of the United States of America should not be involved in a tax and spend program that squanders trillions of dollars with so little to show for it, and with no possibility of ever paying for itself. Even the government sponsored mail delivery system does a better job of paying it's way than the space bureaucracy.

In this new century, having opened the doors of space, it's now time for the government to step aside and allow the forces of private interprise (capitalism!) to explore the markets of space. It is obvious that entrepreneurs like Turner, Gates, Branson, et al (no personal attack expressed or implied!) are capable of building a space market if one exists. Richard Branson especially is positioning his capital to take advantage of the possibility of commercial space exploration already, with his operations in New Mexico.

So there is my answer. STOP! I think that the American people are finally beginning to wake up to the fact that this stuff costs a lot of money, that only a few elite hand picked citizens can avail themselves of it, and that there are national priorities (and personal, individual priorities!) the should take precedence. The bottomless pit of government sponsored space exploration must finally be capped off and sealed over.

Thank you for this opportunity to submit my answer to this important and valid question. (No animals were injured in the formulation of this opinion.)

-dixon cannon

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Now you asked the question MD, so I am only responding to "What should we do?" because you asked. In no way am I casting aspersions on all the fine folks who work for JPL, NASA or the like. Nor am I making anything that can be misinterpreted as a personal attack on any individual, group, or agency of the Federal Government. Now, that being said:

The answer is clearly, STOP! It is NOT theirs to spend A government sponsored space program has cost the American taxpayer trillions of dollars. Now I like teflon, and sharp pictures of Venus as well as the next man, but how is it that a government in a Constitutional Republic usurps the responsiblity for this kind of activity from the private sector?

The government sponsored space program has made inroads into the arena of space exploration, but it begs the question; where would we be by now if the private sector, using private investment capital, were left to explore the potential for space exploration and exploitation? The government sponsored shuttle program has never even come close to it's goal of paying for itself nor has it proven itself with any commercial potential.

I am that voice out here in the wilderness crying STOP!... enough is enough! The government of the United States of America should not be involved in a tax and spend program that squanders trillions of dollars with so little to show for it, and with no possibility of ever paying for itself. Even the government sponsored mail delivery system does a better job of paying it's way than the space bureaucracy.

In this new century, having opened the doors of space, it's now time for the government to step aside and allow the forces of private interprise (capitalism!) to explore the markets of space. It is obvious that entrepreneurs like Turner, Gates, Branson, et al (no personal attack expressed or implied!) are capable of building a space market if one exists. Richard Branson especially is positioning his capital to take advantage of the possibility of commercial space exploration already, with his operations in New Mexico.

So there is my answer. STOP! I think that the American people are finally beginning to wake up to the fact that this stuff costs a lot of money, that only a few elite hand picked citizens can avail themselves of it, and that there are national priorities (and personal, individual priorities!) the should take precedence. The bottomless pit of government sponsored space exploration must finally be capped off and sealed over.

Thank you for this opportunity to submit my answer to this important and valid question. (No animals were injured in the formulation of this opinion.)

-dixon cannon

The answer to that is simple. Your respective representation in both houses of our fine government were elected by you. Have you written them?

Until you have made your wishes known, then they are usurping -nothing-. You elected them, unelect those that want space exploration.

If the majority of constituents did that, and representatives knew they would not be relelected due to their space program support, then they would stop supporting it.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

...first worm commences EVA!...

The answer to that is simple. Your respective representation in both houses of our fine government were elected by you. Have you written them?

Until you have made your wishes known, then they are usurping -nothing-. You elected them, unelect those that want space exploration.

If the majority of constituents did that, and representatives knew they would not be relelected due to their space program support, then they would stop supporting it.

This post in no way is intended to defame or malign worms or any other annelid regardless of race, creed color or political affiliation. (LOL) lol

Thanks for inquiring Miss Neecerie. I am involved with a major national movement to do just that. It is our goal to "Downsize DC" (as it were.) and to unelect representatives at every level. We have been successful in narrowing down the culprits to two wings of the same party. Those that designate their affiliation with either a (D) or a (R). Once routed, that should solve the problem.

-dixon cannon

 

[Miss Neecerie]

This post in no way is intended to defame or malign worms or any other annelid regardless of race, creed color or political affiliation. (LOL) lol

Thanks for inquiring Miss Neecerie. I am involved with a major national movement to do just that. It is our goal to "Downsize DC" (as it were.) and to unelect representatives at every level. We have been successful in narrowing down the culprits to two wings of the same party. Those that designate their affiliation with either a (D) or a (R). Once routed, that should solve the problem.

-dixon cannon

Ah so its not really a can of worms, but rather your personal political agenda.

Glad you told us upfront that you are using this and any discussions here to promote your cause, so we can take you with the huge grain of salt that lobbyists get.

 

[jamespowers]

Dixon, I can agree with you to a certain point. I want to stop throwing good money after bad but I just don't want to end it. Private companies are indeed better than the government at any level to tackle a problem. That being said, why don't we just contract the stuff out to private industry?
So Matt, the answer is do it with human beings through private industry. Give them a challenge or a contest to see who can put together a manned mission to Mars or even another one to the moon. The prize would be something like $20,000,000 and possibly more when the project has completed its mission. I have seen another contest that paid a man $1,000,000 to build a craft capable of getting out of the stratosphere or some such thing. It could be like that. Those people were amazingly resourceful with what little they had to work with and they accomplished the goal. Not bad for a small group of people with a shoestring budget.
The current rocket scientists could vie for the grants/prize and I think they could accomplish quite a lot without someone constantly looking over their shoulder.
So exploration by humans would be great. Lets do it but lets do it for reasonable sums. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

 

[Dixon Cannon]

No.

Ah so its not really a can of worms, but rather your personal political agenda.

Glad you told us upfront that you are using this and any discussions here to promote your cause, so we can take you with the huge grain of salt that lobbyists get.

I'm a fedora lover with several hats and a penchant for the vintage look. The FD offers several categories whereby a member can express their opinion on a variety of topics. Those topics occasionally include issues of a social or political nature. My grain of salt has equal weight with any other opinion that is expressed in these threads. It is my experience though that those that do have an "agenda", or turf to protect take umbrage to any opinion that might threaten their role. We've seen that more than a time or two.

No Miss Neecerie, I'm here just like you and everyone else - to enjoy the banter that takes place in the Lounge and to express my thoughts when the the thread interests me. I try to do that with some provocative ideas and a sense of humor.

Thanks for asking.

-dixon cannon

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Hey...??

Who's your favorite astronaut? Mine was Deke Slayton.

-dixon cannon

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Great idea with positive implications...

Dixon, I can agree with you to a certain point. I want to stop throwing good money after bad but I just don't want to end it. Private companies are indeed better than the government at any level to tackle a problem. That being said, why don't we just contract the stuff out to private industry?
So Matt, the answer is do it with human beings through private industry. Give them a challenge or a contest to see who can put together a manned mission to Mars or even another one to the moon. The prize would be something like $20,000,000 and possibly more when the project has completed its mission. I have seen another contest that paid a man $1,000,000 to build a craft capable of getting out of the stratosphere or some such thing. It could be like that. Those people were amazingly resourceful with what little they had to work with and they accomplished the goal. Not bad for a small group of people with a shoestring budget.
The current rocket scientists could vie for the grants/prize and I think they could accomplish quite a lot without someone constantly looking over their shoulder.
So exploration by humans would be great. Lets do it but lets do it for reasonable sums. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

I left Burt Rutan out of my lineup! He is a modern day Goddard/Wright/Lindbergh. Imagine what is possible if he were turned loose to create a space market!
-dixon cannon

 

[Pilgrim]

Dixon, I can agree with you to a certain point. I want to stop throwing good money after bad but I just don't want to end it. Private companies are indeed better than the government at any level to tackle a problem. That being said, why don't we just contract the stuff out to private industry?

I disagree with this blanket statement. IMO, private business is ONLY better than government at doing things that generate a profit for that business. There is no way that the entire costs of the space program can become profitable for any single company, or any group of companies. If left to private business, the space program is dead.

I do agree that there are some things that private busines should be more involved in. I completely disagree that the space program is one of them. For the long-term benefit of the US and the human race, the money spent in the space program makes sense to me. (And without looking up numbers, my bet is that its cost is a lot less annually than we spend in six months in Iraq...an expenditure that we should not be making, IMO.)

So Matt, the answer is do it with human beings through private industry. Give them a challenge or a contest to see who can put together a manned mission to Mars or even another one to the moon. The prize would be something like $20,000,000 and possibly more when the project has completed its mission. I have seen another contest that paid a man $1,000,000 to build a craft capable of getting out of the stratosphere or some such thing. It could be like that.

And if it cost them $10 billion to win $20 million, who whould play? Not gonna happen. Shareholders would crucify a CEO that spent more on the project than the prize would return. And if you made the prize big enough to offset the cost of the program, what is the difference between the US paying for a space program and the US providing a prize that equals the cost of the space program?

Makes no sense to me. But I grew up reading Asmov and Heinlein, and I have felt for years that the cost to explore space is worthwhile. That's my opinion. There is at least one vote (mine) that says: "Here ya go boys, it IS yours to spend!"

 

[Dixon Cannon]

I take that back....

Hey...??
(quoteWho's your favorite astronaut? Mine was Deke Slayton. quote)

-dixon cannon[/IIAMHEASYOUAREHEASYOUAREMEANDWEAREALLTOGETHER

It is Dale Gardner of STS-51-A. I think he was the all time greatest weightless liquid bubble bouncer. He was magnificent! :eusa_clap


-dixon cannon

 

[jamespowers]

I disagree with this blanket statement. IMO, private business is ONLY better than government at doing things that generate a profit for that business. There is no way that the entire costs of the space program can become profitable for any single company, or any group of companies. If left to private business, the space program is dead.

I do agree that there are some things that private busines should be more involved in. I completely disagree that the space program is one of them. For the long-term benefit of the US and the human race, the money spent in the space program makes sense to me. (And without looking up numbers, my bet is that its cost is a lot less annually than we spend in six months in Iraq...an expenditure that we should not be making, IMO.).

Ok what about the previously mentioned Burt Rutan then? There is always someone willing to undertake a task just to be the first one to do it. Everything is worth something to someone. Just the advertising revenue from such a venture helps pay for it and there is a profit in the seemingly unprofitable. How can you determine something unprofitable until you let someone give it a try. I wonder how much they can make just maintaining and putting satellites in space for this and other countries.
It used to be a space race, now it is just space exploration. I could see it years ago due to the Cold War competition but not now. We can do just fine by giving someone else a chance to mine the space program.

And if it cost them $10 billion to win $20 million, who whould play? Not gonna happen. Shareholders would crucify a CEO that spent more on the project than the prize would return. And if you made the prize big enough to offset the cost of the program, what is the difference between the US paying for a space program and the US providing a prize that equals the cost of the space program?

Makes no sense to me. But I grew up reading Asmov and Heinlein, and I have felt for years that the cost to explore space is worthwhile. That's my opinion.

Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was our space program. I said the prize or grant could go higher but it would have to be met with proof that they actually spent that much---unlike government spending. That is the difference right off the top. The other difference is a certain intellectual freedom and the freedome to create what you want without sticking to some arbitrary and capricious set of things set up by government. You wouldn't need $5,000 hammers and $250 toilets seats either. You would be free to get what you want from who you want to build your project.
I am sure you probably support the National Endowment for the Arts. Why not have this as a National Endowment for Space Exploration?
I like the whole Star Trek thing too but I am not willing to keep throwing money at the government Tribbles for Tang. Even Star Trek started with the premise that a private individual started the whole space exploration and space vehicle innovations---Cochraine.

Regards to all,

J

 

[jamespowers]

There is at least one vote (mine) that says: "Here ya go boys, it IS yours to spend!"

I figured it would be.

Regards,

J

 

[Dixon Cannon]

There's a lot of 'Quotin'' goin' on here...

..so I'll just acknowledge the previous posts about government v/s private sector involvement. I'm sure that similar things were said about steel making, automobile manufacturing, shipbuilding, and airplane technology back in their infancy; it's too expensive for one company - we've got the get the government to steal more money from taxpayers to fund the "public service project"!..except back in those days, it was beyond comprehension for most American's to consider going to the public trough. That why it's called "CAPITALISM". (and not that other -ism.)

Because we've allowed this sort of thing since the days of the 'New Deal', it is now justifiable to go to the taxpayers to bankroll everything from Gateway Arches, to moon shots, to football stadiums.

There are those Americans who do know that that is NOT Capitalism - it is something else, by another name.

I think when compared it is obvious that the private sector can perform miracles and provide the public with hitherto unheard of products and services. But not when competing against the "force" of government. By comparison government has shown us time and again how to squander and waste resources and money with one boondoggle after another.

It might have been a good argument back in 1959 or so, but their are Capitalists who are in a financial position today to take on such opportunities. Again I reference Richard Branson, et al.

-dixon cannon

 

[Pilgrim]

I'm sure that similar things were said about steel making, automobile manufacturing, shipbuilding, and airplane technology back in their infancy; it's too expensive for one company - we've got the get the government to steal more money from taxpayers to fund the "public service project"!..except back in those days, it was beyond comprehension for most American's to consider going to the public trough. That why it's called "CAPITALISM". (and not that other -ism.)

-dixon cannon

I can't resist the chance to quote this section and make this point: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT STEALING YOUR MONEY. You and I both are paying taxes for some expenditures we agree with, and some we don't. The taxes you pay are assessed as per US law, and the expenditures are those your representatives - and mine - have voted on and endorsed. It's all legal.

You disagree with how some of this money (not all) is being spent, and as you have already noted, you are taking individual and group action to challenge and change that expenditure. That's great, and I appreciate that action...it's your right and responsibility to act.

But let's keep our discussion accurate in this respect: NO ONE is stealing your tax money, and just because you disagree with how some of it is spent doesn't make it theft.

If they're not stealing my tax money to pour into Iraq (and they're not - I just disagree with how it's being used), they're sure not stealing yours to support the space program.

 

[Briscoeteque]

I'd rather shoot rockets into space to colonize the planets than have them blow up straw huts on the other side of the planet. The government can do lots of things that don't 'pay for themselves' while still being legitimate. How's the military paying for itself? It isn't, and it costs way more than NASA. So does maintaining the roads. It's also absolutely nessesary. Why doesn't the government let private companies maintain roads and make it all profitable? Some things just aren't profitable, and also happen to be nessesary. The government needs to cut back, sure, cutting NASA funding without restructing the horrible beauracracy it has become would be pointless. Cutting funding, much like adding funding, doesn't solve any problems. The private sector isn't this magic force of effeciency.

What's holding the private sector back? Private rocket programs are moving along, with technology NASA gleaned from decades of trials and failures. In this case, it's paying for itself by giving the private sector a much needed kick in the behind. Space exploration is probably one of the most important things there is, and waiting for it to become profitable without making it possible is just a pipe dream. NASA has helped the private sector way more than it has oppressed it. NASA is a mess, no doubt about it, but cutting funding is the worst solution. It has potential. Now if politicians would consult SCIENTISTS about which sort of SCIENCE projects to fund instead of setting lofty and pointless goals like 'Man on Mars' things would start to move in the right direction.

And ever hear of the X Prize? Some fellow's idea to 'jump start' private space programs. Think it was 10 Million to get a man into the sub-atmosphere while costing (another guess) under half a million per launch. So some guy made a two stage airplane that did just that and is pretty much a dead end. Why wait for them to catch up? Whip NASA into shape, sure, but don't kill it because it's being run on money the government stole from you. Which it didn't, because it doesn't.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

There is a definition for THEFT...

I can't resist the chance to quote this section and make this point: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT STEALING YOUR MONEY. You and I both are paying taxes for some expenditures we agree with, and some we don't. The taxes you pay are assessed as per US law, and the expenditures are those your representatives - and mine - have voted on and endorsed. It's all legal.

You disagree with how some of this money (not all) is being spent, and as you have already noted, you are taking individual and group action to challenge and change that expenditure. That's great, and I appreciate that action...it's your right and responsibility to act.

But let's keep our discussion accurate in this respect: NO ONE is stealing your tax money, and just because you disagree with how some of it is spent doesn't make it theft.

If they're not stealing my tax money to pour into Iraq (and they're not - I just disagree with how it's being used), they're sure not stealing yours to support the space program.

I won't go too far afield in this thread but you can see how these discussions progress. There is the faulty premise that asserts that it is OK to "abscond" with ones neighbor's property because the scheme is so grand, the means justifies the end. Any time one (or one's gang!) takes property from a neighbor against his will, that is called stealing (theft!). It matters not that the majority have agreed that it's OK to steal the minority's property. That's how we end up with Gateway Arches, sports stadium and space programs.

There are all kinds of taxes specified by the Constitution of the United States of America and there is a reason why those taxes, imposts and excises are specified there!... so that the federal government could never get so big and bloated with "absconded" wealth that it could start thinking about things like, say, going to the Moon!

I always remind people who assert that government skimming of wealth off the productive private sector to engage in boondoggles is 'just the way it is', to check their premise before spending your neighbors money.

I'm a taxpayer! And I know when I'm being robbed!

-dixon cannon

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Hey!.. how 'bout those rings around Uranus!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/12/22/uranus.hubble/

Now that's good science!

-dixon cannon

 

[Briscoeteque]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/12/22/uranus.hubble/

Now that's good science!

-dixon cannon

I don't get it. It is good science, by any stardard, so you can't reasonably be sarcastic. And although it is a couple of SETI guys, what did they use? The Hubble Space Telescope? I don't think SETI sent that up there. They (the private sector) was able to get real science accomplished by using government-funded projects. If anything, it's proof that this should be (reformed, yes) but continued.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

[huh]

I don't get it. It is good science, by any stardard, so you can't reasonably be sarcastic. And although it is a couple of SETI guys, what did they use? The Hubble Space Telescope? I don't think SETI sent that up there. They (the private sector) was able to get real science accomplished by using government-funded projects. If anything, it's proof that this should be (reformed, yes) but continued.

Whoa! I'm not sarcastic at all. I'm dazzled. I had no idea that any planet other than Saturn had rings. That is good science - I don't think the article mentions funding at all does it? :whistling

-dixon cannon