Money spent on science is money well spent.
Money spent on science is money well spent.
I think the difference here is this specific part of science not "science and funding" as a whole. It will indeed work within its own field I would imagine for more exploration of the (empty) planet.
Well of course you can put it that way, I certainly wouldn't. There is a myriad of long tem research it could be used for that doesnt have to be simply dumping into a hole becuase it didnt go to this project. Although, it did and its an interesting one, but as I say, I just wobble on the funds part and the planet we are on now.You could of course simply dump the money for short term gain, then the people that benefited would return next year and ask for more, as they always do......
Well of course you can take the narrow view that this project exists in isolation and cutting it wouldn't matter. It's part of a larger program and cutting it would damage everything else, it would also ignore the deep budget cuts that have already taken place and points to a deep ignorance of the subject or possibly the usual wilful trolling and US bashing.
The Mars program has already had it's budget slashed and 2 missions cancelled, so it's had it's round of budget cuts along with the rest of NASA, you have to leave them something or you lose the expertise. Putting all these people out of work wouldn't really be be the right thing to do in the long term and would affect the US economy as a whole.
The two places this will occur are the Moon and Mars. Mars exploration requires practice as it's more difficult to land there than either the Earth or Moon. That's what some people fail to understand, the landing phase of this mission was probably far more significant than the exploration phase. It's something that requires experience, if space exploration is to advance and meet the goals set for it, or, don't set the goals in the 1st place.NASA Authorization Act of 2010.
According to the Act, "The long-term goal of the human spaceflight and exploration efforts of NASA shall be to expand permanent human presence beyond low-Earth orbit and to do so, where practical, in a manner involving international partners."
It's interesting to note that whenever NASA appears in the headlines it is always closely followed by this sort media heckling about cost. I've seen it occur for decades even though NASA's share of the federal budget decreases every year. NASA's budget in 2012 is the the lowest % share of the Federal Budget (0.48%) in 52 years. Strange that the media rarely ask the same questions about other nations space activities as there are many with very expensive space programs contrasted by severe poverty problems far worse than anything in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_agencies
It may be wise for NASA to put aside some money for the future. Looking at the recent decline in rationality and intelligent debate on most blogs, there could be just cause to plan for a future search for intelligent life on Earth.
Last edited by PELHAM; Aug 13 2012 at 01:27.
I fail to see why bickering over the budget takes precedence over the accomplishment of the mission. But if real savings should occur, then they should occur by scrapping Trident & all the other weapons that will never be used, and if they are will ruin the planet more completely. Deterrent? Waste of money IMO.
That said I should like to congratulate the efforts made to make this mission a success.
It doesn't really, I made that clear while also suggesting its a side issue ref funding, but an interesting one ref to Hans point.I fail to see why bickering over the budget takes precedence over the accomplishment of the mission.
Complete bollocks and not needed to be raked into it.and points to a deep ignorance of the subject or possibly the usual wilful trolling and US bashing.
Not really needed, always expected, hey ho.Looking at the recent decline in rationality and intelligent debate on most blogs, there could be just cause to plan for a future search for intelligent life on Earth.
I don't live in America, I don't care that much about your economy, but there is one thing that I do think any American looking for those good ol' days (or even just a better future) should care about .....
And all us other earthlings will be grateful for that ....
Not sure if they have stopped dreaming? They just needed a U-turn away from hazardous, highly expensive reusable space planes to the earlier disigns that are more effective. There is still the SLS and SpaceX have already started lifting cargo to the ISS and will begin human transport to LEO in the next few years:
SpaceX will also launch a lunar mission in 2013 for Astrobotic Technology who hope to win the Google Lunar X Prize.
Last edited by PELHAM; Aug 14 2012 at 14:07.
Curiosity leaves first tracks on Mars:
This was a test of the turn-in-place maneuver and assessment of the properties of the local soil structure.
The tread pattern is broken on a rear wheel so the distance travelled can be callibrated and checked from the photographs (termed visual odometry markers, at red arrow). The holes in the section of wheel are in a pattern that spells JPL in morse code to honour the Jet Propulsion Laboratory which had a significant role in the project.
Yeah it's great that it landed on Mars... how many years after the first one landed on the Moon? Almost the whole generation!
Space exploration is going so slow it makes one wish Cold War never ended.
Fix AI in ArmA3
AI knows enemy position at all times, no matter what (incl. video) || AI reflexes are extremely bad in CQB (incl. video) || AI can't see enemies being lit by light at night
Fix realism issues with ArmA3
Sprinting is too fast and instantaneous || It takes 0.1 sec to pull a pin and throw a grenade || The sun is not dangerous (this is NOT for A2 HDR, it's for A1/A2 sun visual) || floating camera when rolling and aiming
They won't achieve that by 2015.
Ah there is a footnote at the end... Can't access the article but anyway, they didn't enter the competition.