Yupa Posted January 21, 2004 Report Posted January 21, 2004 I wasn't being sarcastic the Gemini rocket is to get you into space the compressed air/gas is to get you to Mars
Dav Posted January 22, 2004 Report Posted January 22, 2004 hmmmm thay wond sentd anyone there for years tho, well that considering america has that much sense.
Yupa Posted January 22, 2004 Report Posted January 22, 2004 sense? We likely don't need to go to another -*BAD WORD*-ing planet EVER we COULD JUST -*BAD WORD*-ING NOT DESTROY THIS ONE
Dav Posted January 22, 2004 Report Posted January 22, 2004 its exploration akai, egventuallyt we will be going to other star systems and investigating. This is the future
madhaha Posted January 24, 2004 Report Posted January 24, 2004 Space exploration is unviable until we start exploiting the resources out there. Its no good sending out little explorers every few years, gathering a few crumbs of data if they survive the journey. Real exploration stems from need and people who are willing to fund the exploration. This can only come from either a state or a commercial interest. Space travel is not as simple as Akai claims (VERY complicated in the case of interplanetary manned space travel). Whats more we've lost the tools and design work that went into the saturn rockets. In short we've made no real progress in space travel despite technological advance and it will continue to be a non-priority until space outside earth's orbit becomes commercially compe!@#$%^&*ive with resources on earth.
Yupa Posted January 24, 2004 Report Posted January 24, 2004 everything is as simple as I claim :jules:
mr. scruff Posted January 24, 2004 Report Posted January 24, 2004 we could travel; to mars if they figured out a way of fitting enough food and such for the journey into the rocket. but whats the point?
madhaha Posted January 24, 2004 Report Posted January 24, 2004 You think putting a couple of people in something the size of a small dormroom for a 3 month journey (at the shortest) without them killing each other is going to be simple? And then convincing them that they aren't going to die, that the radiation shielding will work, that there is enough food and water to go round, that it doesn't matter that most probes going to mars have been destroyed or mysteriously dissapeared and it will all be worthwhile for the experiments they could conduct in the few days they're staying there and that the RETURN JOURNEY is going to be just as fun? And do that on a tiny budget? Good luck. There is no point in going to mars until we've discovered something useful to do there other than gather scientific data.
Yupa Posted January 24, 2004 Report Posted January 24, 2004 There is no point in going to mars until we've discovered something useful to do there other than gather scientific data.I agree, but perhaps Bush is just looking ahead he's working to help -*BAD WORD*- this planet nicely, maybe he just knows it better than the rest of us
Vile Requiem Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 Let's not forget the logistical/physiological problems of a weightless enviroment on the astronauts themselves. Human skeletal structure and shape is based on the !@#$%^&*umption that you're going to have a constant gravatational force pulling down on you at all times, thus your bones have a certain strength/diameter/shape to them. In a weightless enviroment, even 100 days is enough to potentially cause serious complications due to shifts in your body's equlibrium (upon a return to earth), much less 4 years. This fact will lead to one truth if the moon or mars are ever colonized: There will develop another race of "humanity". Anyone who stays for a year or so will begin to change, and eventually evolution will make the Martians' bones thin and long as an advantage over smaller people (and as a direct result of less gravity), thus one way or another the "greys (aliens)" will be a reality. Picture a planet where Yao Ming's height/wingspan is the norm. A mission to mars will never occur until scientists can sucessfully replicate the earth's gravity in a spaceship and on the planet surface itself. Even then, the potential risk of something going wrong is far too high, not even taking into account the psychological factors of 'cabin fever'. Basically another Bush pie in the sky dream, like the eradication of steroids. Anyone notice how his SOTU was 99% "Vote for me cause I care?" Thank god a democrat is finally polling better then the shrub (Kerry, 49% to Bush's 46%)
Fluffy White Bunny Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 A mission to mars will never occur until scientists can sucessfully replicate the earth's gravity in a spaceship and on the planet surface itself.We already have the technology to create artificial gravity, even if it would be needed inside a space ship. All you have to do is keep a room or part of a space ship rotating at a certain speed and centrifugal force will do the rest. ...I think.....?
Vile Requiem Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 That works if you have the astronauts sit in chairs strapped to said rotating chamber, and the speed is regulated. However, to accomplish that for a significant length of time a massive power source is going to be required, and I personally don't know if solar will be able to handle it (not a rocket scientist after all). Unfeasable for planetary colonization however. Just think of your mom's daily activities. How much of that can be done while strapped to a rotating chamber?
SVS Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 It would be much easier to simulate gravity in a spaceship in space then on a surface. If the ship rotated at the correct angle at the correct speed centrifugal force should simulate a sufficent amount of gravity to say... stay on the ground. The bad thing about that theory is that the force of the gravity would not be uniform throughout the ship. It is also possible theoriticly to accomplish this without it being noticeable to the occupants. I guess you could do the same on the surface if the building was built into a massive gyroscope. ^^
madhaha Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 Obviously you haven't been down to the fairground recently. And I guess no-one saw the centrifuge bit in James Bond either... Power arrangements would be tricky. One simple way would be to use ion drives (already developed) to set the entire ship spinning and shut them off when you've reached the desired speed. It has also been shown that excercise helps to offset some of the low/zero G problems for the short term.
Paine Posted January 25, 2004 Report Posted January 25, 2004 If the U.S.A. is in massive debt, whos gonna do somthing about it? If anyone even tried, bush would say "ooh ooh, they have weapons of m!@#$%^&* destruction, lets go nuke them" .....and I think the world knows it anyway. I think this is why they attacked iraq, because of the debt, they neeeded the oil. And when the iraqis set fire to the oilfields, I think they knew why bush was coming too, it was strategy on their part to try and get Bush to leave. It didnt work though.... and Iran is next, I hear they have rich oil deposits too.
Recommended Posts