Barack Obama Publishes His Space Policy

Fred J. McCall wrote:

:
:Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using
:robots), ...
:

Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go
and do that job.


Humans can't do that job because they can't survive in the moon for
weeks or months until the good cave is found!

Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, enough
to provoke cancers and blindness in astronauts if they live unprotected
for weeks in a high radiation environment.

And this facts do not go away. To *find* those protected environments
you need to send robots because they do not need any life support and
they are radiation hardened. And if they "die" nobody cares a lot!

Only once the good protected environments are found and prepared can
humans live for longer times. NASA is planning for a few days in the
moon, and that is of course easy to do. Staying for months or years is
completely another question, and that is what I am talking about.

:
:... you have to construct a whole environment for humans
:in that place:
:

And this is not hard to do if you actually jettison your ideology and
engage your brain.

:
air-tight so that humans can breathe.
:

Kevlar inflatable.


You can't inflate them anywhere! The slightest cosmic debris and all
humans are dead. Please just THINK a bit instead of throwing slogans
like that. You have to build an underground habitat that is not affected
by space debris and offers radiation shelter. Kevlar inflatable can be
used *inside* those protected holes/caves but not outside.

There is the problem of the temperature delta from day (150-200 degrees
in sun bathed places to -150 at night. (Centigrade). Your Kevlar would
explode if left in the sun for half lunar day (around 14 earth days)



:
with enough water and food so that humans can live for a
: while
:

Robots don't help with this. You're going to have to bring it with
you and recycle a lot.


It is obviously not only a matter of just bringing it in. You have to
have a place underground to*store* those supplies that is thermally
stable enough to hold water in liquid form for several months. Again,
you can't do this in the surface because of the previously mentioned
delta between day and night. To avoid freezing or vaporizing of water
you need places where day/night temperatures stay within 0-100 degrees
centigrade.

:
With enough "amenities" so that they do not go crazy:
: showers, waste disposal, communications, fuel, solar
: panels, and a big ETC!
:

And the robots don't help with all that, either. Again, you have to
bring it with you initially.


Yes, but then you have to install them, connect them, ensure they are
working, test them for a while BEFORE humans arrive whose life depends
on that equipment being functional.

:
:All that must be there BEFORE the humans arrive. Or you
:are seriously considering sending astronauts with shovels
:to the moon?
:

And once again your lack of intellectual integrity rears its ugly
head.


Obviously after you have found a good cave or you have blasted one with
explosives you will need to arrange the cave, inflate the Kevlar, bring
in the supplies, connect everything, test it, etc. And humans can't do
it without another habitat that keeps them alive in the moon, so you
need robots anyway.

:
:How they could survive when constructing
:the moon base if there is no moon base yet?
:
:It is obvious that sending construction workers to the
:moon in temporary habitats carried at great expense from
:earth is so silly nobody is seriously considering that.
:

That's right, nobody is, so why are you raising it as if someone is?


You.

:
:NASA, by the way, is not even considering a moon base
:at all.
:

Really? From a lack of intellectual integrity to outright lying in
one swell 'foop'.

http://www.world-science.net/otherne...lunar-base.htm


That document speaks about... 2024!! There is not even a budget for that
development, and the project rests on the possible collaboration of
other nations. All this is just pipe dreams at the moment. But even
accepting that NASA has a plan I recommend you reading the link you
posted:

quote
The pro*posed “lu*nar ar*chi*tec*ture” calls for robotic pre*cur*sor
mis*sions de*signed to sup*port the hu*man mis*sion, he added. Both the
Glob*al Ex*plo*ra*tion Strat*e*gy and the moon base will be dis*cussed
at a Space Ex*plo*ra*tion Con*fer*ence to be held this week at the
George R. Brown Con*ven*tion Cen*ter in Hous*ton.
end quote


:
:
: :
: :Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
: :very easy driving a robot there.
: :
:
: Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
: doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
: just exploring the room takes.
:
:
:You get used to it in 1-2 hours practice.
:

It's not a matter of 'getting used to it'. It's a matter of 'you have
to move really slow because **** happens in much less than a second
and you can miss a lot otherwise'.


Yeah, I would not recommend robot races. But a speed of 6-10 Km:hour is
enough to get everything done.

:
:You just want to send people there, ...
:

Quite right, I do. If that's not the plan, why learn about the place?

:
:... and there is a lot of profit
:to be made (not by you of course) in doing that, that is
:why sending humans is proposed by certain people.
:

And your profit motive is what, precisely?

Sauce for the goose and all that, after all...

:
:Personally, I do not give a dam about some guys jumping around
:in the moon. I am interested in exploration and science.
:

Well, no, you aren't. You're against people going (exploration).

:
:I know, that is very old fashioned and not so "gee-whiz".
:But, as said, I do not care about people getting disappointed.
:

You know, they used to say "no bucks, no Buck Rogers". Each new
generation of idiots like you needs to learn that the converse also
applies - "No Buck Rogers, no bucks."

I hope you're very, very wealthy and can fund what you want on your
own, because if people aren't going you're going to find getting tax
money to do it is pretty much a non-starter.


Europe is pursuing robotic exploration without any investments in
human exploration besides the ISS.

ESA has now robots in
o Mars with Mars express
o Venus with Venus express
o Saturn with Cassini/Huygens (with NASA)
o Mercury mission planned for 2013
o Moon missions with several automatic probes

This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
on robots.


Learn some history...



There is no history here. Nobody has ever went to those worlds. We are
entering the future, and we will have to change our frame of mind. We
will have to accept that space *is* different than everything we knew up
to now.

We will have to accept the fact that our body has grown to be adapted to
the surface of the earth for billions of year evolution and that we will
need a lot of effort to make it live elsewhere. Robots can be built
evolved for space right from the start. And in the first century of
space exploration they will be the only ones to go to deep space, before
we develop the technology to keep us alive in space.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

jacob navia wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: :
: :Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using
: :robots), ...
: :
:
: Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go
: and do that job.
:
:
:Humans can't do that job because they can't survive in the moon for
:weeks or months until the good cave is found!
:

What makes you think it takes "weeks or months"? You never heard of
'shade'?

:
:Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, enough
:to provoke cancers and blindness in astronauts if they live unprotected
:for weeks in a high radiation environment.
:

Cite?

Again, you never heard of 'shade'?

:
:And this facts do not go away. To *find* those protected environments
:you need to send robots because they do not need any life support and
:they are radiation hardened. And if they "die" nobody cares a lot!
:

To *find* those protected environments is pretty much dirt stupid.
Pick a convenient slope and blow it down on your habitat (for
example).

: :
: :... you have to construct a whole environment for humans
: :in that place:
: :
:
: And this is not hard to do if you actually jettison your ideology and
: engage your brain.
:
: :
: air-tight so that humans can breathe.
: :
:
: Kevlar inflatable.
:
:
:You can't inflate them anywhere!
:

Of course you can.

:
:The slightest cosmic debris and all
:humans are dead.
:

Nope. Please stop making up silly things.

:
:Please just THINK a bit instead of throwing slogans
:like that.
:

Please grow a clue and stop being an insulting ignorant ****.

:
:You have to build an underground habitat that is not affected
:by space debris and offers radiation shelter. Kevlar inflatable can be
:used *inside* those protected holes/caves but not outside.
:

Which is what I was referring to. But you're too busy not thinking to
understand that.

:
:There is the problem of the temperature delta from day (150-200 degrees
:in sun bathed places to -150 at night. (Centigrade). Your Kevlar would
:explode if left in the sun for half lunar day (around 14 earth days)
:

You assume there's no pressure regulation? You assume there's no
thermal protection? They've never heard of that advanced concept
called 'shade' where you are?

:
: :
: with enough water and food so that humans can live for a
: : while
: :
:
: Robots don't help with this. You're going to have to bring it with
: you and recycle a lot.
:
:
:It is obviously not only a matter of just bringing it in. You have to
:have a place underground to*store* those supplies that is thermally
:stable enough to hold water in liquid form for several months. Again,
:you can't do this in the surface because of the previously mentioned
:delta between day and night. To avoid freezing or vaporizing of water
:you need places where day/night temperatures stay within 0-100 degrees
:centigrade.
:

And this is not hard to do at all. Nor is it even required. Let it
freeze and thaw it as needed. Cover it with reflective foil. Use a
pressure vessel. Lots of answers. Your desire not to find any is
obvious.

: :
: With enough "amenities" so that they do not go crazy:
: : showers, waste disposal, communications, fuel, solar
: : panels, and a big ETC!
: :
:
: And the robots don't help with all that, either. Again, you have to
: bring it with you initially.
:
:
:Yes, but then you have to install them, connect them, ensure they are
:working, test them for a while BEFORE humans arrive whose life depends
n that equipment being functional.
:

No robots required for that.

Just how do humans settle ANYWHERE without your robots? Why, it must
be IMPOSSIBLE!!!

: :
: :All that must be there BEFORE the humans arrive. Or you
: :are seriously considering sending astronauts with shovels
: :to the moon?
: :
:
: And once again your lack of intellectual integrity rears its ugly
: head.
:
:
:Obviously after you have found a good cave or you have blasted one with
:explosives you will need to arrange the cave, inflate the Kevlar, bring
:in the supplies, connect everything, test it, etc. And humans can't do
:it without another habitat that keeps them alive in the moon, so you
:need robots anyway.
:

Hogwash.

:
: :
: :How they could survive when constructing
: :the moon base if there is no moon base yet?
: :
: :It is obvious that sending construction workers to the
: :moon in temporary habitats carried at great expense from
: :earth is so silly nobody is seriously considering that.
: :
:
: That's right, nobody is, so why are you raising it as if someone is?
:
:
:You.
:

I see. You're just an intellectually bankrupt liar with no
intellectual integrity.

: :
: :NASA, by the way, is not even considering a moon base
: :at all.
: :
:
: Really? From a lack of intellectual integrity to outright lying in
: one swell 'foop'.
:
: http://www.world-science.net/otherne...lunar-base.htm
:
:
:That document speaks about... 2024!!
:

Well, nobody is talking about doing this next Tuesday, you know.

Where are all your robots, their funding, their development schedules,
proof of concept....

:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
: : :very easy driving a robot there.
: : :
: :
: : Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
: : doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
: : just exploring the room takes.
: :
: :
: :You get used to it in 1-2 hours practice.
: :
:
: It's not a matter of 'getting used to it'. It's a matter of 'you have
: to move really slow because **** happens in much less than a second
: and you can miss a lot otherwise'.
:
:
:Yeah, I would not recommend robot races. But a speed of 6-10 Km:hour is
:enough to get everything done.
:

And that's faster than we could do it with people right there in the
driver's seat.

That is *WAY* too fast to do it with robots.

:
: :
: :You just want to send people there, ...
: :
:
: Quite right, I do. If that's not the plan, why learn about the place?
:
: :
: :... and there is a lot of profit
: :to be made (not by you of course) in doing that, that is
: :why sending humans is proposed by certain people.
: :
:
: And your profit motive is what, precisely?
:
: Sauce for the goose and all that, after all...
:
: :
: :Personally, I do not give a dam about some guys jumping around
: :in the moon. I am interested in exploration and science.
: :
:
: Well, no, you aren't. You're against people going (exploration).
:
: :
: :I know, that is very old fashioned and not so "gee-whiz".
: :But, as said, I do not care about people getting disappointed.
: :
:
: You know, they used to say "no bucks, no Buck Rogers". Each new
: generation of idiots like you needs to learn that the converse also
: applies - "No Buck Rogers, no bucks."
:
: I hope you're very, very wealthy and can fund what you want on your
: own, because if people aren't going you're going to find getting tax
: money to do it is pretty much a non-starter.
:
:
:Europe is pursuing robotic exploration without any investments in
:human exploration besides the ISS.
:
:ESA has now robots in
Mars with Mars express
Venus with Venus express
Saturn with Cassini/Huygens (with NASA)
Mercury mission planned for 2013
Moon missions with several automatic probes
:
:This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
n robots.
:

Sure you can, BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?

:
:
: Learn some history...
:
:
:There is no history here.
:

Of course there is. Go look it up. EVERY time the manned space
budget is cut the unmanned space budget takes bigger cuts.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

On Jan 14, 2:02 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote:

:This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
n robots.

Sure you can, BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?

Because you can't afford anything better?

I certainly agree that, for all the excitement the Sojourner rover,
and Sprit and Opportunity are generating, for all the enthusiasm over
pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope, or the Pioneer and Voyager
photographs of the outer planets and their moons. this pales in
comparison to the interest generated by the Apollo moon landing.

Sending people to Mars, however, costs more money than unmanned space
exploration. So much more that it is unclear that the American people
want to spend that much money.

The political will existed for Apollo because it seemed necessary to
prove that the Soviet Union was not the "wave of the future". No
similarly compelling reason exists to go to Mars, and thus a manned
Mars mission is highly unlikely to achieve broad bipartisan support. I
don't expect it's really supported all that strongly even within the
Republican Party.

I think that's a pity. I wish it were otherwise. And, if one is going
to talk about fantasy, of course the ideas advanced by some posters in
this newsgroup about artificial intelligence (a field that has shown
little progress in real life) are in that category.

But with regret, it looks to me like a manned mission to Mars is
something I will believe when I see it. This is despite China planning
to have an astronaut perform a space walk on their one planned manned
mission for 2008, and to do an unmanned sample return from the Moon in
2017.

However, with current improvements in computers and electronics, and
given that the Moon is so much closer than Mars, I suppose one could
(but because unmanned science is so unexciting, probably one cannot,
either) hope for an unmanned sample return by the U.S. on or before
2016 as a *cheap* way to demonstrate China is still outclassed, and to
complete the geological study of the Moon cut short by the early end
to the Apollo program.

The reaction by the Democratic Party to issues relating to Iraq and
Iran make me think that if, by some chance, Osama bin Laden were to
get caught by Pakistani forces, the U.S. is heading towards
isolationism. Of course, the liberal media may be premature in viewing
a Democratic victory in November as having the inevitability of the
sun rising tomorrow; both Obama and HIllary are unpopular, divisive
candidates... the same could be said of nearly all the Republican
front-runners, but not so much so.

And the balance of probabilities in Pakistan at the moment is such
that we might see a Democratic president *invade Pakistan* as a result
of a severe worsening of the situation there. After all, _that_
relates directly to catching Osama, which is what the Democrats
approve of, unlike Iraq and Iran, actions against which they oppose.

Think Vietnam. A *big* Vietnam. Except that it doesn't have a big
buddy with a full-scale strategic nuke capability.

And I'm worried. Because if you ask people the following question:

Which of the following two unpalatable options for the U.S. would you
prefer:

a) Being personally drafted yourself to get shot at in the mountains
of Pakistan, or

b) Dropping enough nukes on the place to be sure of getting Osama,
despite heavy collateral civilian casualties there,

since the unpleasantness in *b* is something one merely experiences by
reading about it in the newspaper...

I'm worried about the future. Even though, so far, the U.S. has made
great efforts to avoid dancing to Osama's tune.

John Savard

Since earth-to-orbit technology represents more
of an economic issue that is much more recently
completely unrelated to the thoughts or intentions
of NASA brainstorming sessions, the angle to be
played here would have to change how the funding
gets authorized, but it has nothing to do with the
way that our current establishment 'procures' it.

If the freest nations on the earth are to continue
to expand their borders by creating trade and mar-
kets on the high frontier of space, then the
'driver' for this interest can only be included
with the desire to shed the current national and
international chains that hold back markets -
markets that must include those who are left out
of the establishment banking systems, either by
some of the most major no-fault war practices of
the most redundant military industrial complexes
in history, or by the rising tide of transnational
pirate economies who continue to demonize the
basic needs markets like family housing, oil,
and quality job markets with overbuilt dwellings
in crowded communities, $100 barrel oil, and
weak, low quality, short term, extremely un-
intuitively and re-inventively barred upwardly
mobile hiring quotas.

I submit that a new class of much more saavy
pirates and privateers will have the ability to
forge through the current chaos that exists in
the world today and exploit the discovery of
precious metal, as well as the paths of survival
through that space that will take us there.

In this new gold rush, it may take slightly
longer for earth-bound governments to create
their own federal reserve boards since govern-
ment programs must issue gold certificates
after being indebted to a commission for the
precious metal.

Since the amount of commission for a parti-
cular trade is no longer fixed, it can vary
considerably among firms.

Since goodwill does not appear on a companies
financial statement(s) unless another business
is purchased at a price greater than
book value, one might wonder about the ability
of the registered representatives of a
commission to act on behalf of potential
start-ups, whether politically in good faith
or financially motivated in the long term,
in order to change the way that governments
affect space diplomacy. It's simply too late
to operate and export Wall Street jingoism
in the name of American patriotism.

The new patriots are the entrepreneurs of
earth-to-orbit technology,and they bring a
revolutionary energy industry to the front
lines with them: cheaper earth-to-orbit
access in order to push ahead the frontier
of extra-terrestrial outsourcing to companies
that specialize in designing for the remote
operation and auto-connectivity of facilities
(power, life support, boring, separating,
storage, refining, processing, monitoring,
mapping, delivery) as well as for safety and
backup systems.

Since the authority to establish a Federal
Reserve Banking System is not among the
enumerated powers of government, government(s)
act to establish such systems in order to
borrow money at their own credit. In this way,
each government can decide which appropriations
become 'proper', as it applies to commerce
between nations of common interest. The
'common interest' may include an external
sanctuary for "earthlings" in case of major
disruptions in the earth's biosphere, but it
can also mean exploiting the use and sale of
extraterrestrial resources (in a self-sustaining
extraterrestrial environment) for a no-holes-
barred rush into the solar system and beyond.

An unrestricted growth in bank reserves and
lending ability to the extraterrestrial pioneers
allows for increased economic growth at low
capital interest rates. Improved earth-to-orbit
technology is the key to unlocking these lower
interest rates and improved credit security for
prospective extraterrestrial markets.

American

"He who loves a quarrel loves sin;
he who builds a high gate invites destruction."
Proverbs 17:19

I agree that sending in those rad-hard robots is just the best ticket
in town, especially of such a naked/anticathode town of gamma and hard-
X-rays.

However, wouldn't having a well shielded platform as our manned
outpost or gateway within the moon L1 be doable?

After all, the moon's L1 is less than 60,000 km away from controlling
those nifty (made in China) robots.

- Brad Guth


On Jan 14, 12:21 am, jacob navia wrote:
Fred J. McCall wrote:

:
:Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using
:robots), ...
:

Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go
and do that job.

Humans can't do that job because they can't survive in the moon for
weeks or months until the good cave is found!

Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, enough
to provoke cancers and blindness in astronauts if they live unprotected
for weeks in a high radiation environment.

And this facts do not go away. To *find* those protected environments
you need to send robots because they do not need any life support and
they are radiation hardened. And if they "die" nobody cares a lot!

Only once the good protected environments are found and prepared can
humans live for longer times. NASA is planning for a few days in the
moon, and that is of course easy to do. Staying for months or years is
completely another question, and that is what I am talking about.

:
:... you have to construct a whole environment for humans
:in that place:
:

And this is not hard to do if you actually jettison your ideology and
engage your brain.

:
air-tight so that humans can breathe.
:

Kevlar inflatable.

You can't inflate them anywhere! The slightest cosmic debris and all
humans are dead. Please just THINK a bit instead of throwing slogans
like that. You have to build an underground habitat that is not affected
by space debris and offers radiation shelter. Kevlar inflatable can be
used *inside* those protected holes/caves but not outside.

There is the problem of the temperature delta from day (150-200 degrees
in sun bathed places to -150 at night. (Centigrade). Your Kevlar would
explode if left in the sun for half lunar day (around 14 earth days)

:
with enough water and food so that humans can live for a
: while
:

Robots don't help with this. You're going to have to bring it with
you and recycle a lot.

It is obviously not only a matter of just bringing it in. You have to
have a place underground to*store* those supplies that is thermally
stable enough to hold water in liquid form for several months. Again,
you can't do this in the surface because of the previously mentioned
delta between day and night. To avoid freezing or vaporizing of water
you need places where day/night temperatures stay within 0-100 degrees
centigrade.

:
With enough "amenities" so that they do not go crazy:
: showers, waste disposal, communications, fuel, solar
: panels, and a big ETC!
:

And the robots don't help with all that, either. Again, you have to
bring it with you initially.

Yes, but then you have to install them, connect them, ensure they are
working, test them for a while BEFORE humans arrive whose life depends
on that equipment being functional.

:
:All that must be there BEFORE the humans arrive. Or you
:are seriously considering sending astronauts with shovels
:to the moon?
:

And once again your lack of intellectual integrity rears its ugly
head.

Obviously after you have found a good cave or you have blasted one with
explosives you will need to arrange the cave, inflate the Kevlar, bring
in the supplies, connect everything, test it, etc. And humans can't do
it without another habitat that keeps them alive in the moon, so you
need robots anyway.

:
:How they could survive when constructing
:the moon base if there is no moon base yet?
:
:It is obvious that sending construction workers to the
:moon in temporary habitats carried at great expense from
:earth is so silly nobody is seriously considering that.
:

That's right, nobody is, so why are you raising it as if someone is?

You.

:
:NASA, by the way, is not even considering a moon base
:at all.
:

Really? From a lack of intellectual integrity to outright lying in
one swell 'foop'.

http://www.world-science.net/otherne...lunar-base.htm

That document speaks about... 2024!! There is not even a budget for that
development, and the project rests on the possible collaboration of
other nations. All this is just pipe dreams at the moment. But even
accepting that NASA has a plan I recommend you reading the link you
posted:

quote
The pro-posed "lu-nar ar-chi-tec-ture" calls for robotic pre-cur-sor
mis-sions de-signed to sup-port the hu-man mis-sion, he added. Both the
Glob-al Ex-plo-ra-tion Strat-e-gy and the moon base will be dis-cussed
at a Space Ex-plo-ra-tion Con-fer-ence to be held this week at the
George R. Brown Con-ven-tion Cen-ter in Hous-ton.
end quote



:
:
: :
: :Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
: :very easy driving a robot there.
: :
:
: Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
: doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
: just exploring the room takes.
:
:
:You get used to it in 1-2 hours practice.
:

It's not a matter of 'getting used to it'. It's a matter of 'you have
to move really slow because **** happens in much less than a second
and you can miss a lot otherwise'.

Yeah, I would not recommend robot races. But a speed of 6-10 Km:hour is
enough to get everything done.



:
:You just want to send people there, ...
:

Quite right, I do. If that's not the plan, why learn about the place?

:
:... and there is a lot of profit
:to be made (not by you of course) in doing that, that is
:why sending humans is proposed by certain people.
:

And your profit motive is what, precisely?

Sauce for the goose and all that, after all...

:
:Personally, I do not give a dam about some guys jumping around
:in the moon. I am interested in exploration and science.
:

Well, no, you aren't. You're against people going (exploration).

:
:I know, that is very old fashioned and not so "gee-whiz".
:But, as said, I do not care about people getting disappointed.
:

You know, they used to say "no bucks, no Buck Rogers". Each new
generation of idiots like you needs to learn that the converse also
applies - "No Buck Rogers, no bucks."

I hope you're very, very wealthy and can fund what you want on your
own, because if people aren't going you're going to find getting tax
money to do it is pretty much a non-starter.

Europe is pursuing robotic exploration without any investments in
human exploration besides the ISS.

ESA has now robots in
o Mars with Mars express
o Venus with Venus express
o Saturn with Cassini/Huygens (with NASA)
o Mercury mission planned for 2013
o Moon missions with several automatic probes

This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
on robots.

Learn some history...

There is no history here. Nobody has ever went to those worlds. We are
entering the future, and we will have to change our frame of mind. We
will have to accept that space *is* different than everything we knew up
to now.

We will have to accept the fact that our body has grown to be adapted to
the surface of the earth for billions of year evolution and that we will
need a lot of effort to make it live elsewhere. Robots can be built
evolved for space right from the start. And in the first century of
space exploration they will be the only ones to go to deep space, before
we develop the technology to keep us alive in space.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatiquehttp://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

Dear Fred, our physically dark and highly electrostatic dusty old moon
is not passive. Shade isn't worth squat unless you're talking about
10+ meters of basalt between yourself and most everything else.

- Brad Guth



On Jan 14, 1:02 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:

:
: :
: :Even if you find a good cave (you have to FIND it first using
: :robots), ...
: :
:
: Because obviously all of mankind is struck blind until robots can go
: and do that job.
:
:
:Humans can't do that job because they can't survive in the moon for
:weeks or months until the good cave is found!
:

What makes you think it takes "weeks or months"? You never heard of
'shade'?

:
:Solar radiation and space radiation in the moon is very strong, enough
:to provoke cancers and blindness in astronauts if they live unprotected
:for weeks in a high radiation environment.
:

Cite?

Again, you never heard of 'shade'?

:
:And this facts do not go away. To *find* those protected environments
:you need to send robots because they do not need any life support and
:they are radiation hardened. And if they "die" nobody cares a lot!
:

To *find* those protected environments is pretty much dirt stupid.
Pick a convenient slope and blow it down on your habitat (for
example).

: :
: :... you have to construct a whole environment for humans
: :in that place:
: :
:
: And this is not hard to do if you actually jettison your ideology and
: engage your brain.
:
: :
: air-tight so that humans can breathe.
: :
:
: Kevlar inflatable.
:
:
:You can't inflate them anywhere!
:

Of course you can.

:
:The slightest cosmic debris and all
:humans are dead.
:

Nope. Please stop making up silly things.

:
:Please just THINK a bit instead of throwing slogans
:like that.
:

Please grow a clue and stop being an insulting ignorant ****.

:
:You have to build an underground habitat that is not affected
:by space debris and offers radiation shelter. Kevlar inflatable can be
:used *inside* those protected holes/caves but not outside.
:

Which is what I was referring to. But you're too busy not thinking to
understand that.

:
:There is the problem of the temperature delta from day (150-200 degrees
:in sun bathed places to -150 at night. (Centigrade). Your Kevlar would
:explode if left in the sun for half lunar day (around 14 earth days)
:

You assume there's no pressure regulation? You assume there's no
thermal protection? They've never heard of that advanced concept
called 'shade' where you are?

:
: :
: with enough water and food so that humans can live for a
: : while
: :
:
: Robots don't help with this. You're going to have to bring it with
: you and recycle a lot.
:
:
:It is obviously not only a matter of just bringing it in. You have to
:have a place underground to*store* those supplies that is thermally
:stable enough to hold water in liquid form for several months. Again,
:you can't do this in the surface because of the previously mentioned
:delta between day and night. To avoid freezing or vaporizing of water
:you need places where day/night temperatures stay within 0-100 degrees
:centigrade.
:

And this is not hard to do at all. Nor is it even required. Let it
freeze and thaw it as needed. Cover it with reflective foil. Use a
pressure vessel. Lots of answers. Your desire not to find any is
obvious.

: :
: With enough "amenities" so that they do not go crazy:
: : showers, waste disposal, communications, fuel, solar
: : panels, and a big ETC!
: :
:
: And the robots don't help with all that, either. Again, you have to
: bring it with you initially.
:
:
:Yes, but then you have to install them, connect them, ensure they are
:working, test them for a while BEFORE humans arrive whose life depends
n that equipment being functional.
:

No robots required for that.

Just how do humans settle ANYWHERE without your robots? Why, it must
be IMPOSSIBLE!!!

: :
: :All that must be there BEFORE the humans arrive. Or you
: :are seriously considering sending astronauts with shovels
: :to the moon?
: :
:
: And once again your lack of intellectual integrity rears its ugly
: head.
:
:
:Obviously after you have found a good cave or you have blasted one with
:explosives you will need to arrange the cave, inflate the Kevlar, bring
:in the supplies, connect everything, test it, etc. And humans can't do
:it without another habitat that keeps them alive in the moon, so you
:need robots anyway.
:

Hogwash.

:
: :
: :How they could survive when constructing
: :the moon base if there is no moon base yet?
: :
: :It is obvious that sending construction workers to the
: :moon in temporary habitats carried at great expense from
: :earth is so silly nobody is seriously considering that.
: :
:
: That's right, nobody is, so why are you raising it as if someone is?
:
:
:You.
:

I see. You're just an intellectually bankrupt liar with no
intellectual integrity.

: :
: :NASA, by the way, is not even considering a moon base
: :at all.
: :
:
: Really? From a lack of intellectual integrity to outright lying in
: one swell 'foop'.
:
:http://www.world-science.net/otherne...lunar-base.htm
:
:
:That document speaks about... 2024!!
:

Well, nobody is talking about doing this next Tuesday, you know.

Where are all your robots, their funding, their development schedules,
proof of concept....

:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
: : :very easy driving a robot there.
: : :
: :
: : Not so much, no. Try walking across the room and examining objects
: : doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. See how long
: : just exploring the room takes.
: :
: :
: :You get used to it in 1-2 hours practice.
: :
:
: It's not a matter of 'getting used to it'. It's a matter of 'you have
: to move really slow because **** happens in much less than a second
: and you can miss a lot otherwise'.
:
:
:Yeah, I would not recommend robot races. But a speed of 6-10 Km:hour is
:enough to get everything done.
:

And that's faster than we could do it with people right there in the
driver's seat.

That is *WAY* too fast to do it with robots.

:
: :
: :You just want to send people there, ...
: :
:
: Quite right, I do. If that's not the plan, why learn about the place?
:
: :
: :... and there is a lot of profit
: :to be made (not by you of course) in doing that, that is
: :why sending humans is proposed by certain people.
: :
:
: And your profit motive is what, precisely?
:
: Sauce for the goose and all that, after all...
:
: :
: :Personally, I do not give a dam about some guys jumping around
: :in the moon. I am interested in exploration and science.
: :
:
: Well, no, you aren't. You're against people going (exploration).
:
: :
: :I know, that is very old fashioned and not so "gee-whiz".
: :But, as said, I do not care about people getting disappointed.
: :
:
: You know, they used to say "no bucks, no Buck Rogers". Each new
: generation of idiots like you needs to learn that the converse also
: applies - "No Buck Rogers, no bucks."
:
: I hope you're very, very wealthy and can fund what you want on your
: own, because if people aren't going you're going to find getting tax
: money to do it is pretty much a non-starter.
:
:
:Europe is pursuing robotic exploration without any investments in
:human exploration besides the ISS.
:
:ESA has now robots in
Mars with Mars express
Venus with Venus express
Saturn with Cassini/Huygens (with NASA)
Mercury mission planned for 2013
Moon missions with several automatic probes
:
:This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
n robots.
:

Sure you can, BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?

:
:
: Learn some history...
:
:
:There is no history here.
:

Of course there is. Go look it up. EVERY time the manned space
budget is cut the unmanned space budget takes bigger cuts.

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Quadibloc wrote:

:On Jan 14, 2:02 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: jacob navia wrote:
:
: :This demonstrates that you can build a space program based exclusively
: n robots.
:
: Sure you can, BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?
:
:
:Because you can't afford anything better?
:

That's hardly a recommendation for why WE should do it that way. It
also doesn't address the question.

:
:Sending people to Mars, however, costs more money than unmanned space
:exploration. So much more that it is unclear that the American people
:want to spend that much money.
:

So why do "unmanned space exploration" (which isn't 'exploration' at
all, really) if people are never going?

:
:However, with current improvements in computers and electronics, and
:given that the Moon is so much closer than Mars, I suppose one could
but because unmanned science is so unexciting, probably one cannot,
:either) hope for an unmanned sample return by the U.S. on or before
:2016 as a *cheap* way to demonstrate China is still outclassed, and to
:complete the geological study of the Moon cut short by the early end
:to the Apollo program.
:

We already have all the samples we need. China was outclassed back in
the 1960's when we went and got them. There's no need to collect more
(small) samples just to be collecting them, so why bother?

:
:both Obama and HIllary are unpopular, divisive
:candidates...
:

What's unpopular and divisive about Obama?


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw

On Jan 14, 9:07 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:

What's unpopular and divisive about Obama?

Folks here in Usenet naysayland don't like anyone that isn't of their
Old Testament mindset. It's that simple. If they had it their way,
we'd all be good little brown-nosed minions working for their Zion
puppet Hitler, and otherwise on behalf of his Third Reich global
domination cause that only got as far as they did because of what
those smart Jews provided in exchange for a shot at the faith-based
part of the global domination pie.
- Brad Guth

On Jan 13, 2:54*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote:

:
:But even if it is possible to send humans to the moon, progress in
:robotics and computers make such a trip unnecessary since we can
:travel around in the moon using robots much cheaper than going
:in person.
:

And if you want to send toasters to space rather than people, that's
the perfect position.

Toasters? Who said anything about toasters? Sensors, Fred. Cameras and
the like. And in the case of landers like the ones on Mars, they
actually sample the soil, the atmosphere, etc., as well as provide a
view of the surface.

The whole "toaster" notion is akin to claiming Abu Ghraib was "naked
twister". A poor excuse to minimize. But propaganda is
propaganda...poor Freddy, poor propagandist.


Now remove your agenda and try again.

You first.

:
:Humans can't survive in the moon for longer periods (3-4 weeks or
:more) if they have no radiation shielding. BEFORE humans go to
:the moon they need to build the moon station using robots, THEN,
:longer trips to the moon are possible.
:

Silly. *Even if your 3-4 week claim is right, there's a whole
Moon-load of rock and such there. *Ever heard of 'craters' and
'caves'?

Send some toasters up there to find out. LOL!


:
:Radio delay to the moon is just 1 second, short enough to make
:very easy driving a robot there.
:

Not so much, no. *Try walking across the room and examining objects
doing a 'step-look' sequence of a second for each one. *See how long
just exploring the room takes.

They manage fine on Mars with a 3 to 20 minute delay, the moon at 1
second can only be an improvement.


:
:My point is: robotic missions allows us to explore NOW, and
:develop the technology to enable the trips to space by humans
:LATER.
:

But what are we exploring for if people aren't going?

What part about NOW vs. LATER didn't you get Freddy?

*Exploring can
wait in that case and we can kill planetary science for the
foreseeable future.

No, then we get nothing. Why not do both as we do now? Do you really
want to remove unmanned missions and keeped just the manned ones?

I'll make a deal with you I waon't advocate unmanned missions only if
you don't advocate manned missions only?

Eric

On Jan 14, 2:28*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
"D. Orbitt" wrote:

:
: *My feeling is that if NASA had been left alone from the beginning,
:with any schedule and direction they chose to use and a modest but
:constant, uninterrupted flow of money, we'd have cities on the moon
:and in orbit by now, and Manned Mars missions in serious preparation.
:What has messed things up since the sixties is the continuous tearing
:up and re-making of plans every time some devil Congressman or
:Presidon't wants to make a political point. Like a ship that could
:sail a thousand miles if it hadn't spent the time running in circles
:and zig-zags. Benign neglect, a steady, uninterrupted trickle, would
:have given Grand Canyon-like results by now, instead of a lot of
:viewgraphs and powerpoint slides that, without steady funding, fly to
:nowhere.
:
:There, I've said it. Agree or not?
:

Congress doesn't budget billions of dollars to "go do whatever you
want" organizations.

CIA and much of the military...


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
*man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
*all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --George Bernard Shaw