NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Manned Venus Flyby
From: Robert Eno
Date: 2012 Sep 3, 13:56 -0400
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7441 (20120903) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
From: Robert Eno
Date: 2012 Sep 3, 13:56 -0400
Well, since we
are already off topic, I feel compelled to contribute to this
discussion and a previous thread about the passing of Neil Armstrong.
I remember the Apollo missions with a great deal of fondness and nostalgia.
I was a young lad, 12 years of age when Armstrong set foot on the moon. I
remember that era as one of boundless confidence, hope and excitement. Like
many other lads in my age group, I wanted more than anything else, to be an
astronaut. I was certain that by the time I reached Armstrong's age, men
would be walking on Mars and beyond; that some new miracle form of atomic
propulsion would have been devised that would allow us to visit distant
galaxies travelling at close to the speed of light.
Now what I am about to say will likely cause offence and a few hurt feelings
but the last 40 years of "space exploration" has been, in my opinion, a
huge disappointment; at least with respect to my youthful expectations circa
1969. It seems that the momentum that propelled humans to the moon within 8
years of President Kennedy's promise to put an American on the moon, petered
out and died a quiet death in the mid-1970s. We have not since put a human
beyond earth's orbit. This is more astounding when you consider the
relatively primitive technology that we had back in the 1960s and 70s as
compared with what we have now. Yet we have seemingly gone nowhere;
notwithstanding the amazing feat of putting that robot on Mars this past
summer.
Alex, your point with respect to where we humans should expend our resources
is valid and certainly has been advocated by many others where a discussion
of manned space travel is concerned. But it does not have to be a zero-sum
game. I believe that it is our destiny to travel to the stars and indeed, a
concerted effort toward this end may someday (like about 900 million years
or so when our sun starts to expand) be humanity's only option for survival;
accepting the premise that our species is worthy of survival.
In any event, there is not enough money nor resources on the planet to
eradicate the many problems we have on earth. Throw as much money at our
problems as you want but at the end of the day, we'll still have problems to
reckon with.
Robert
discussion and a previous thread about the passing of Neil Armstrong.
I remember the Apollo missions with a great deal of fondness and nostalgia.
I was a young lad, 12 years of age when Armstrong set foot on the moon. I
remember that era as one of boundless confidence, hope and excitement. Like
many other lads in my age group, I wanted more than anything else, to be an
astronaut. I was certain that by the time I reached Armstrong's age, men
would be walking on Mars and beyond; that some new miracle form of atomic
propulsion would have been devised that would allow us to visit distant
galaxies travelling at close to the speed of light.
Now what I am about to say will likely cause offence and a few hurt feelings
but the last 40 years of "space exploration" has been, in my opinion, a
huge disappointment; at least with respect to my youthful expectations circa
1969. It seems that the momentum that propelled humans to the moon within 8
years of President Kennedy's promise to put an American on the moon, petered
out and died a quiet death in the mid-1970s. We have not since put a human
beyond earth's orbit. This is more astounding when you consider the
relatively primitive technology that we had back in the 1960s and 70s as
compared with what we have now. Yet we have seemingly gone nowhere;
notwithstanding the amazing feat of putting that robot on Mars this past
summer.
Alex, your point with respect to where we humans should expend our resources
is valid and certainly has been advocated by many others where a discussion
of manned space travel is concerned. But it does not have to be a zero-sum
game. I believe that it is our destiny to travel to the stars and indeed, a
concerted effort toward this end may someday (like about 900 million years
or so when our sun starts to expand) be humanity's only option for survival;
accepting the premise that our species is worthy of survival.
In any event, there is not enough money nor resources on the planet to
eradicate the many problems we have on earth. Throw as much money at our
problems as you want but at the end of the day, we'll still have problems to
reckon with.
Robert
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <eremenko@math.purdue.edu>
> To: <NavList@fer3.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2012 2:40 PM
> Subject: [NavList] Re: Manned Venus Flyby
>
>
>>
>> Greg,
>> I understand that I touched a topic which is very far away from the list
>> scope:
>>
>>> This would have been as cool as walking on the Moon. It could have been
>>> done at reasonable cost but the 70's were recessionary times.
>>
>> Recessionary for all 40 years since then? Well, perhaps...
>>
>>> It seems to me that a manned Venus flyby should be done before an attempt
>>> at Mars.
>>
>> My main question is about "should be" (?)
>> We have enough unsolved problems here on Earth. Can we really afford
>> spending large resources on this?
>>
>> Alex.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
>> signature database 7439 (20120902) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7441 (20120903) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> From: <eremenko@math.purdue.edu>
> To: <NavList@fer3.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2012 2:40 PM
> Subject: [NavList] Re: Manned Venus Flyby
>
>
>>
>> Greg,
>> I understand that I touched a topic which is very far away from the list
>> scope:
>>
>>> This would have been as cool as walking on the Moon. It could have been
>>> done at reasonable cost but the 70's were recessionary times.
>>
>> Recessionary for all 40 years since then? Well, perhaps...
>>
>>> It seems to me that a manned Venus flyby should be done before an attempt
>>> at Mars.
>>
>> My main question is about "should be" (?)
>> We have enough unsolved problems here on Earth. Can we really afford
>> spending large resources on this?
>>
>> Alex.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
>> signature database 7439 (20120902) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7441 (20120903) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7441 (20120903) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
