NASA: Love is Over Barak Obama

[Day]

its actually better.

[Charismatic]

His is better if you understand it, yours is better overall because more people will understand it.

[Day]

But to understand his you'd have to be retarded. I stand by my statement.

[Charismatic]

Why you callin' me retarded man? That's grounds for termination.

[Mizango]

Crewing.

[Day]

Crewing.

The gods must be crazy.

[gardeffxi]

This. This this this fucking THIS.

Save the cash for manned moon missions. Build a few Mars Rover-style probes. Drop on moon. Explore for months. The data gathered by comparison to sending humans would be huge and save billions in the process.

Then once we've got all the data we want and if the moon has useful resources we can send home, manned missions are the next option. We don't need another Apollo now or anytime soon.

Rovers were in work regardless of the manned missions. The area of interest (where the crash for water occurred) is about 10 Kelvin. A place where it would be intense to get a robot to function, let alone have a human survive there.

Aside from the general science and technology developments, the moon mission stood as a proof of concept of the constellation system for the ultimate goal of manned mission to mars.

[BerenTebogo]

Rovers were in work regardless of the manned missions. The area of interest (where the crash for water occurred) is about 10 Kelvin. A place where it would be intense to get a robot to function, let alone have a human survive there.

Aside from the general science and technology developments, the moon mission stood as a proof of concept of the constellation system for the ultimate goal of manned mission to mars.

The constellation project being a proof of concept for a manned mission to mars is a fallacy in my opinion. While it may be stated that some held that opinion, it is far from fact.

The end total sum of the Ares project and the constellation project would bring us not a single scientific leap closer to being able to make the journey to mars. The reason is, and if I missed contrary info along the way feel free to correct me, that the overall method of travel and all aspects of it: fuel, speed, length of trip, supplies, suspended animation, ways to counter loss of bone density, and more are not going to gain scientific breakthroughs by going to the moon.

The aspects of travel that do require space habitation to be further studied and analyzed can be done very efficiently on the ISS. Repeating a trip of known distance that we have already done with different outer equipment but still sup-par (in terms of to mars travel) essential equip will not offer much more information than can be gained from simulations, if any.

The concepts and technology need to be further developed here on earth. Given that at least one of the problems, fuel, would be greatly benefited by applications of nanocarbon(maybe wrong word) based tech. for lighter overall weight and therefore greater distance::fuel raito and the successful application on such a large scale is estimated to be ~15-20 years away...well, you can see where I'm going with this.

Nixing the constellation and ares projects will save over 50 billion dollars minimum. Someone earlier in the thread pointed out, that for better or worse, NASA is subject to public opinion. 50 billion when we're in a recession, as show by some other posters early in the thread, is not what much of the public wants to see.

Being overly optimistic: we could go to the moon with the constellation project and we could learn a handful of useful tidbits that maybe we can apply to our current research - but it still doesn't solve the problem that the technology does. not. exist. yet. to get us to mars.

Can argue that lolbama's reallocation of the funds is stupid all you want, I agree. Can argue that if the money isn't going to be used to refine our current processes here on earth before applying them to outer space than it's a waste. The point is that public opinion is a finite resource and the past decade or so has shown that American politics are not going to make the process of traveling beyond the moon any easier.

America doesn't always have to be #1. This is a situation where we can sit back and let china fly up, down, and sideways to the moon and we can still come out ahead. We follow through on the Ares project to completion 40 billion dollars later and still only get to the moon and the 2016 presidential campaign writes itself.

[Kyo]

There isnt enough bawwing in here.

[Gunitsoldier]

I agree with Day, fix this planet before it dies so you don't have to spend the entire earth's money on finding a glimpse of life on other ones(Mars related).

[Fhloston]

But to understand his you'd have to be retarded. I stand by my statement.

*sics the weaboos on you*

[Charismatic]

Stop making him look right before I smack you.

[Mizango]

Stop making him look right before I smack you.

Shhh, Days putting on a clinic.


Edit: NVM, hes from Houston. He was going to take it hook, line and sinker from the jump. His IQs not high enough to hot box with god.

[Day]

I still don't even get the original joke. I mean I got the idea but I don't watch JP cartoons.

[ephel]

Hm, given that a few billions years ago it is theorized that Mars may have had a surface and atmosphere very similar to earth could it be possible that ALL OF THOSE THINGS hold practical applications for how we look at our planet? But by all means, going to the moon accomplishes so many things we couldn't just test in the ISS. I hear there is a theme park on the otherside with moon whalers.

I guess i could google this and now i will, but if you have a link already i would like to read up on why they theorize mars could once have been similar to earth.

[Tankjr]

I hear there is a theme park on the otherside with moon whalers.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...s_Logo.svg.png?

[BerenTebogo]

I guess i could google this and now i will, but if you have a link already i would like to read up on why they theorize mars could once have been similar to earth.

In the most basic terms possible: every orbit a planet makes around the sun brings it an un-fixed distance value closer to the sun. Technically, and I'm not super with physics because I know there is a formula to describe this but I can't give it to you, every planet is in a constant state of acceleration and every planet is in a constant state of gradually moving closer to the sun.

It's theorized by some that 4 billion years ago Mars was far enough away in orbit from the sun that it was able to sustain an atmosphere which blocked most of the harmful radiation from reaching the surface, like ours does. This is a key element needed for a planet to develop life. As Mars orbited closer and closer the sun basically demolished the atmosphere irradiating the whole planet and turning it into a barren wasteland plagued by meteor and asteroid strikes.

Same thing will happen to earth in a few billion years.

Can correct me on any points I may have fudged up if someone knows more than me. I'm not an expert on Mars.

[QuePsiXI]

Haven't read the OP or any responses. Just requesting that someone fix the damn name on the title. Hell, I've seen stupid threads modded, at least change the name of our current president, and the nigga I am most in love with.

Thanks.

[Kryssan]

In the most basic terms possible: every orbit a planet makes around the sun brings it an un-fixed distance value closer to the sun. Technically, and I'm not super with physics because I know there is a formula to describe this but I can't give it to you, every planet is in a constant state of acceleration and every planet is in a constant state of gradually moving closer to the sun.

It's theorized by some that 4 billion years ago Mars was far enough away in orbit from the sun that it was able to sustain an atmosphere which blocked most of the harmful radiation from reaching the surface, like ours does. This is a key element needed for a planet to develop life. As Mars orbited closer and closer the sun basically demolished the atmosphere irradiating the whole planet and turning it into a barren wasteland plagued by meteor and asteroid strikes.

Same thing will happen to earth in a few billion years.

Can correct me on any points I may have fudged up if someone knows more than me. I'm not an expert on Mars.

I was fairly certain that Mars suffered from a similar problem to Venus, where its dynamo failed. Wouldn't Earth's atmosphere have been destroyed if Mars orbited in such a way to be closer to Sol than Earth? I've been under the impression for a while now that the reason Earth continues to survive is because our dynamo has yet to fail, and the dynamo generates the field that holds our atmosphere together, preventing it from being 'blown away' like that of Venus. We're fairly certain that Venus' dynamo failed leading to the solidification of its core, and that Mars also has had a similar occurrence in its past. One of the Martian probe missions also noticed that the atmosphere of Mars was undergoing similar effects akin to that of those on Venus, just not as great. The problem is that we can't examine Venus' surface for clues to the history of its dynamo, whilst we can do so on Mars. Nothing concrete has come from either planet yet though.


Where does your theory come from Sath? I honestly haven't heard that one yet, I thought the generally accepted one currently was the dynamo one. Mars used to actually have a much better orbit than Earth, but it has a lot higher orbit eccentricity than it used to. Still, I don't recall ever reading about Mars doing anything like what you describe. I don't recall the planets moving inward constantly; most of the energy and momentum of our system is in the planets Jupiter and Saturn, and they're fighting with Sol and Earth to determine the planets orbit patterns. However, most orbits are rather stable, with some exceptions. I do know that Earth's moon is moving away gradually from us (but that it probably won't escape until after a time where Sol expands into a red giant and destroys Earth anyway, assuming that event does not occur according to current theory/schedule), and at least one of Mar's moons is likely to either smash into it or break apart against it.


Here's some links to sites regarding the dynamo and atmosphere effects I've used here in the past. 1 2 3

[BerenTebogo]

I was fairly certain that Mars suffered from a similar problem to Venus, where its dynamo failed. Wouldn't Earth's atmosphere have been destroyed if Mars orbited in such a way to be closer to Sol than Earth? I've been under the impression for a while now that the reason Earth continues to survive is because our dynamo has yet to fail, and the dynamo generates the field that holds our atmosphere together, preventing it from being 'blown away' like that of Venus. We're fairly certain that Venus' dynamo failed leading to the solidification of its core, and that Mars also has had a similar occurrence in its past. One of the Martian probe missions also noticed that the atmosphere of Mars was undergoing similar effects akin to that of those on Venus, just not as great. The problem is that we can't examine Venus' surface for clues to the history of its dynamo, whilst we can do so on Mars. Nothing concrete has come from either planet yet though.


Where does your theory come from Sath? I honestly haven't heard that one yet, I thought the generally accepted one currently was the dynamo one. Mars used to actually have a much better orbit than Earth, but it has a lot higher orbit eccentricity than it used to. Still, I don't recall ever reading about Mars doing anything like what you describe. I don't recall the planets moving inward constantly; most of the energy and momentum of our system is in the planets Jupiter and Saturn, and they're fighting with Sol and Earth to determine the planets orbit patterns. However, most orbits are rather stable, with some exceptions. I do know that Earth's moon is moving away gradually from us (but that it probably won't escape until after a time where Sol expands into a red giant and destroys Earth anyway, assuming that event does not occur according to current theory/schedule), and at least one of Mar's moons is likely to either smash into it or break apart against it.


Here's some links to sites regarding the dynamo and atmosphere effects I've used here in the past. 1 2 3

It's not /MY/ theory by any means. I picked it up somewhere, honestly have no recollection of exactly where though. Was most likely on some Science channel or The Universe special if I had to guess as I don't go out of my way to look into Mars specifically.

Regarding the motion and direction of the planets, it's just the nature of gravity. The largest gravitational force acting on Earth and Mars is the sun. The opposing gravitational forces of the other planets, namely Jupiter and Venus, do work as an opposing force, but the strongest force acting on us is the sun.

As far as my understanding goes the orbital system works as I posted, but I'm open to being proved wrong. I hadn't heard the dynamo info before so that is very interesting.