![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|||
|
Space travel is a good idea, of course. My main concern is that I don't want the government mucking it up for the private sector. It's just a matter of time before private companies offer trips to outer space on a regular basis - presuming the governments allow them to do so. Unfortunately, that's a big IF. If the Federal Aviation Authority had been around during the infancy of air travel, we would never have developed commercial airliners. Planes were awfully risky at first, comparable to spacecraft today.
I see no reason to send people to Mars, or even the moon, at this time: the gains aren't worth the cost. I'd much rather see us spending space exploration dollars on unmanned missions for now, they offer much better bang for the buck. |
|
|||
|
The question isn't really if we should or shouldn't. The question is who (which countries) will be the leaders. Many Americans are unaware that there is a new "space race" involving a number of countries who are developing advanced technologies to access space. Thes range from fairly modest (Italy is working ona low-cost satellite launch system) to highly sophisticated (Australia has already tested a hypersonic scramjet; China is launching manned spacecraft and has an active lunar program).
One might ask, what's the purpose (other than national prestige)--and what does it mean for the United States? The answers to the first question provide the basis for the answer to the second. here are the main reasons all these countries (others include Germany, Britain, France, Japan, India): 1)developing advanced technologies generally. Space travel invariably produces advanced technologies useful in other areas. 2)military--for both intelligence gathering and defense 3) pure science--why this is worthwhile is the same as #1--and much of our modern technology is already based on space science. 4) The biggie: space manufacturing. The potential that isalready known will revolutionize at least three major fields: electronics/computers (and communications); biotechnology (especially pharmaceuticals and 3) matierals technology (example: a matieral 3 times as strong as steel and lighter than styrofoam.--and is a better insulator than practically any other material That's not a fantasy--its called aerogel--but it CANNOT bemanufactured on earth at a reasonable cost. You get the idea. What are the implications for the United States? Simple: we either get into the race--or we become a secon-rate economic power over the next few decades. If we don't compete, we lose. its that simple. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|