Hubble Marching orders

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: But is money enough? I would agree that we could do a sample return
: mission that was unmanned with today's technology, but could be do an
: manned mission, given the money, with today's technology? According to
: a Science Channel program on nanotechnology, use in medicine is not
: there yet for a three year manned journey to Mars. Keeping the
: astronauts healthy during the three year journey there and back would
: require breakthroughs in nanotechnology in medicine that doesn't exist
: yet.

: I suspect this is a case of "if the only tool you have is a hammer, every
: problem looks like a nail." Of *course* a nanotechnologist is going to
: claim that a Mars mission will require breakthroughs in nanotechnology -
: it's the only way *he* knows to solve the problem. That does not mean there
: are no other solutions, and some of those solutions require no
: breakthroughs in technology - just further development of technologies we
: already have.

How do you propose the astronauts overcome the problem with bone and
muscle degradation in zero gee for a Mars-lentgh mission?

Eric

: --
: JRF

: Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
: check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
: think one step ahead of IBM.

Eric Chomko wrote:
Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: But is money enough? I would agree that we could do a sample
return
: mission that was unmanned with today's technology, but could be
do an
: manned mission, given the money, with today's technology?
According to
: a Science Channel program on nanotechnology, use in medicine is
not
: there yet for a three year manned journey to Mars. Keeping the
: astronauts healthy during the three year journey there and back
would
: require breakthroughs in nanotechnology in medicine that doesn't
exist
: yet.

: I suspect this is a case of "if the only tool you have is a hammer,
every
: problem looks like a nail." Of *course* a nanotechnologist is going
to
: claim that a Mars mission will require breakthroughs in
nanotechnology -
: it's the only way *he* knows to solve the problem. That does not
mean there
: are no other solutions, and some of those solutions require no
: breakthroughs in technology - just further development of
technologies we
: already have.

How do you propose the astronauts overcome the problem with bone and
muscle degradation in zero gee for a Mars-lentgh mission?

As others have suggested so many times before...

Eliminate the zero gee with a two-part ship, joined by mile-long
tethers, and spinning to produce 1 gee. Test first in LEO. No
nanotech required.

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
wrote:

:So how many Hubbles, how many missions (perhaps even manned) to Mars
:could be paid for with the billions we've spent on our "mission" in the
:Middle East?

Zero.

How many political loons like you could be educated for the money
we're going to spend on going to Mars?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Hell, we don't need to be educated. Just send us on a one-way trip to Mars
and you'll be rid of us. So long, and thanks for all the "fish."

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:55:39 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
(Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Ever since the Republican takeover in Congress NASA HQ seems to have less
clout and JSC more. Just an observation.

Yes, and observation with no basis in reality.

wrote:

: Eric Chomko wrote:
: Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: : :
:
: : But is money enough? I would agree that we could do a sample
: return
: : mission that was unmanned with today's technology, but could be
: do an
: : manned mission, given the money, with today's technology?
: According to
: : a Science Channel program on nanotechnology, use in medicine is
: not
: : there yet for a three year manned journey to Mars. Keeping the
: : astronauts healthy during the three year journey there and back
: would
: : require breakthroughs in nanotechnology in medicine that doesn't
: exist
: : yet.
:
: : I suspect this is a case of "if the only tool you have is a hammer,
: every
: : problem looks like a nail." Of *course* a nanotechnologist is going
: to
: : claim that a Mars mission will require breakthroughs in
: nanotechnology -
: : it's the only way *he* knows to solve the problem. That does not
: mean there
: : are no other solutions, and some of those solutions require no
: : breakthroughs in technology - just further development of
: technologies we
: : already have.
:
: How do you propose the astronauts overcome the problem with bone and
: muscle degradation in zero gee for a Mars-lentgh mission?

: As others have suggested so many times before...

: Eliminate the zero gee with a two-part ship, joined by mile-long
: tethers, and spinning to produce 1 gee. Test first in LEO. No
: nanotech required.

Just a mile long? Yeah, "test" is the operative word here.

Eric

Rand Simberg ) wrote:
: On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:55:39 +0000 (UTC), in a place far, far away,
: (Eric Chomko) made the phosphor on my
: monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

: Ever since the Republican takeover in Congress NASA HQ seems to have less
: clout and JSC more. Just an observation.

: Yes, and observation with no basis in reality.

Other than a few contracts.

(Eric Chomko) wrote in
:

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: With the cut to HST (GSFC),
: how much do you want to bet it ALL goes to Tom DeLay (JSC) and
: brother Jeb (KSC)? Wanna bet?

: You'd lose. A large percentage of the new exploration program is
: being run out of MSFC in Alabama.

Surprise, surprise! I wonder if Glenn Space Center in Ohio will get
more $$$ since that state was key to W getting reelected.

Are you then conceding that your statement, "it ALL goes to Tom DeLay (JSC)
and brother Jeb (KSC)" was false? (emphasis on ALL was yours, BTW).
--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

(Eric Chomko) wrote in
:

wrote:

: Eric Chomko wrote:
:
: How do you propose the astronauts overcome the problem with bone and
: muscle degradation in zero gee for a Mars-lentgh mission?

: As others have suggested so many times before...

: Eliminate the zero gee with a two-part ship, joined by mile-long
: tethers, and spinning to produce 1 gee. Test first in LEO. No
: nanotech required.

Just a mile long? Yeah, "test" is the operative word here.

You don't need a mile-long tether unless you insist on Earth-equivalent
gravity at 1 RPM. At 3 RPM you only need a 76 m tether to produce Mars-
equivalent gravity. Of course, testing in LEO is required to see if Mars
gravity is tolerable long-term (ditto 3 RPM), but you want to do that
anyway for the Mars leg of the mission, and that should still require far
fewer breakthroughs than relying on nanotech.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: : (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: : :
:
: : With the cut to HST (GSFC),
: : how much do you want to bet it ALL goes to Tom DeLay (JSC) and
: : brother Jeb (KSC)? Wanna bet?
:
: : You'd lose. A large percentage of the new exploration program is
: : being run out of MSFC in Alabama.
:
: Surprise, surprise! I wonder if Glenn Space Center in Ohio will get
: more $$$ since that state was key to W getting reelected.

: Are you then conceding that your statement, "it ALL goes to Tom DeLay (JSC)
: and brother Jeb (KSC)" was false? (emphasis on ALL was yours, BTW).

No. Last time I checked Alabama was a red state. I used the acronyms MOC
and FAT as the manner in which to identify which center by state were
out of favor and in favor by the current administration. Out is MOC, as in
Maryland (GSFC), Ohio (GSC) and California (JPL). In favor was FAT, as in
Florida (KSC), Alabama (MSFC) and Texas (JSC). All you have done is make
me spell it out in more detail now, however. Red state/blue state.

Further, since I first used MOC and FAT about 6 months ago, Arnie has been
bending over backward for the GOP, especially at the RNC. And, Ohio was
the difference for Bush in the last election. That leaves Maryland on the
low end of the totem pole NASA-wise, which really was my basis for why
HST is getting the axe. But I'm glad you asked about MSFC and I'm glad to
be able to spell it out for you.

Eric

: --
: JRF

: Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
: check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
: think one step ahead of IBM.

Jorge R. Frank ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in
: :

: wrote:
:
: : Eric Chomko wrote:
: :
: : How do you propose the astronauts overcome the problem with bone and
: : muscle degradation in zero gee for a Mars-lentgh mission?
:
: : As others have suggested so many times before...
:
: : Eliminate the zero gee with a two-part ship, joined by mile-long
: : tethers, and spinning to produce 1 gee. Test first in LEO. No
: : nanotech required.
:
: Just a mile long? Yeah, "test" is the operative word here.

: You don't need a mile-long tether unless you insist on Earth-equivalent
: gravity at 1 RPM. At 3 RPM you only need a 76 m tether to produce Mars-
: equivalent gravity. Of course, testing in LEO is required to see if Mars
: gravity is tolerable long-term (ditto 3 RPM), but you want to do that
: anyway for the Mars leg of the mission, and that should still require far
: fewer breakthroughs than relying on nanotech.

What about going with both approaches? You know have nanotech in reserve
if the artificial gee scenario doesn't work.

Eric

: --
: JRF

: Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
: check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
: think one step ahead of IBM.