what kind of space mission would cause the same buzz as apollo?

[coppercone2]

I swear you might get a serious Russian basketball team this way.

(lunar)Lakers vs...

How about away-from-earth jerseys?

[coppercone2]

A moon base is cool and something new and will generate a lot of interesting science for a long period of time.

Yep, a lunar hotel is a lot more practical and attention-grabbing than a couple of guys going to Mars.

It would be like Disneyland for billionaires.

I think you need some kind of events to occur there. Not just static stuff.

Obviously racing, anyone design a lunar dirt bike yet?

[T3sl4co1l]

Ignorance of the climate in which the original mission happened, and ignorance of its actual goals.

The first: people at the time were mixed on the mission.  It's a waste of money.  Clearly it is; very little can be gained by sending bags of mostly water plus their support systems into orbit.  Is it cool to do?  Hell yeah it is.  But just because it's cool doesn't mean it's worthwhile.

The second: an F-U to the Soviets.  How do you win a war?  With lots of money.  Both sides spent ludicrous amounts of money on showing up the other.  An all-out war involves traditional fighting: troops on the ground, air support, etc.  In a cold war, you just don't send out troops.  Nothing else is different.  Just as much gets spent on intel, on developing weapons and defenses (even if they're unlikely to be needed), on securing geopolitical borders, allies and enemies, offenses and defenses -- just as much as ever.

Is that a waste of money?  Well, of course, but so is everything.  There doesn't seem to be an obvious way to restructure the power dynamic in a way that doesn't involve wasting huge piles of money.  It is the piles of money which supply the power dynamic in the first place; the best we can hope for, seems to be a dynamic where the money is spread evenly about.  If we tried to constrict the money flow, we'd get a sausage effect and end up concentrating it elsewhere.

We might ask: was the space program, among others, a worthwhile show of power relative to other approaches?  Would it have been better spent, say, strengthening and expanding our allies?  Or more directly destabilizing our foes?  Who knows.  Even if we knew, hindsight is 20/20...

We might ask a completely different question.  What large project could we do today, which is likely to be looked back upon with rose-tinted glasses, by the next generation?  Is that a loaded question?  Well, of course, but so was the original question, and one must understand why, in order to construct a solution to it.

Tim

[Bicurico]

I think people are less focussed on space missions because they have realized a few things:

1) Space is big. Quoting Douglas Adams: "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
2) Space is mostly empty. Nothing to see, nothing to do.
3) The next solar system is out of reach in our life time, even if we invented some for of travelling at the speed of light, which is not possible at the current state of knowledge.
4) It took us humans millions of years of evolution to adapt to this specific planet Earth. We are specifically made for it. Quick search provided this link: https://study.com/academy/lesson/comparing-elements-on-earth-to-those-in-the-human-body.html, but there is a nice chapter in "A Short History of Nearly Everything": by Bill Bryson
5) The moon was a challenge. Done. Nothing more to see.
6) Mars is NOT habitable for humans, not just because it lacks the atmosphere. It lacks an iron core like on Earth, that produces a magnetic field which shields us against cosmic radiation.

This list could go on.

There are many more problems on Earth that could need some fixing:
1) Overpopulation
2) Pollution
3) Wars with all kind of conflicts (religious, economical, petrol, ...)
4) Starvation
5) Lack of cures for deadly or incapacitating diseases

Again this list could go on and on.

So why should we be overwhealmed with space exploration? I am pretty sure that the human kind will never leave this planet.

Regards,
Vitor

[apis]

Yep, a lunar hotel is a lot more practical and attention-grabbing than a couple of guys going to Mars.

It would be like Disneyland for billionaires.

Well, to me, research is the only really worthwhile endeavour, but I might be alone in thinking that. Of course, it would be cool if it grew into a lunar city where one could relocate permanently and not a small group of elite scientists.

If there's a hotel then anyone can go there (at least in theory, since anyone can win the lottery, right?) It is something people can daydream and get excited about.

[Fungus]

a lunar hotel is a lot more practical and attention-grabbing than a couple of guys going to Mars.

It would be like Disneyland for billionaires.

I think you need some kind of events to occur there. Not just static stuff.

Obviously racing, anyone design a lunar dirt bike yet?

Lunar golf, obviously.

[schmitt trigger]

Ignorance of the climate in which the original mission happened, and ignorance of its actual goals.

As a child growing during the Cold War, this is absolutely correct.

It was like a death match between two badass gladiators, while we (the rest of the World) watched with both excitement and terror.

Everything was politicized back then. Heck, even the Olympic games. The Space Race was just another weapon in both the US/ USSR's arsenals.

[BravoV]

Buzz only ? I think its already started, but only at very early stage.

1st you have to realize the reason of Space Race Ver.1 in 50-60s, the Sputnik 1 sparked it. With the advantages of having a communication relay hanging in the sky, thats definitely a strategic advantage. But we all know, it was also like a bitch slap at US face that challenged it's domination. Its also sort of made JF Kennedy said these ... "Hell, sending satellites is for loser, the Ruskies have done it 1st, we should make a unique bold move that we are the 1st one" ... hence Apollo program.

What you need now is, say one day, you heard the news that China Space Agency is working closely with one of the Chinese conglomerates (say Mining one  ...hint..hint ) , or China and Russia joined hand in hand for moon exploration commercialization and some private businesses also joining in as part of the deal.

Then the real Space Race Ver.2 is booting up. 

PS : If you're pretty sure that above example is about to happen, I guess its time to stock piling SpaceX stock ? 

[Tomorokoshi]

We might ask a completely different question.  What large project could we do today, which is likely to be looked back upon with rose-tinted glasses, by the next generation?  Is that a loaded question?  Well, of course, but so was the original question, and one must understand why, in order to construct a solution to it.

Tim

Part of what made Apollo exciting is that 400,000 people were involved, what at the peak? In total quite a few more over the 13 years or so. It paid a lot of mortgages. If there were a single program that employed 400,000 people, or perhaps 600,000 now, it would be exciting even if the ostensible goal was relatively mundane.

The quest for mere knowledge and achievement runs headlong into, well, a brick wall (beaded curtain?) in the current reality of placebo facts and pride in ignorance. A clear, utilitarian product would have to be the goal, such as nationwide solar, wind, etc. power. But that isn't coal or oil, so that's a non-starter for now.

[coppercone2]

I think those energy sources are good to have, so there is sustainable living, but I wonder what will happen when we start to develop those karashadev level manufacturing processes that require monsterous amounts of power.

It might even be the case that we run dangerously large reactors on other planets just to be able to process strange materials. Where it won't be a question of running out but being able to supply enough peak power for experiments and inefficent processes etc. Like terrawatt reactors.

Of course there is also atmospheric processing to think about I guess..

[apis]

The amount of solar power available isn't the bottleneck.

[coppercone2]

The amount of solar power available isn't the bottleneck.

I dunno if you need terrawatts+ of power for sustained periods of time you might run into some serious infrastructure problems compared to building a dangerous matrix of nuclear reactors. Our requirements are pretty small right now. Even if you had global grids think about all the switch gear, wiring, power converters, etc. If some ridiculous experiment or robot factory goes wrong in some caves under venus or whatever no one really gives a shit.

Look at the insane amounts of engineering time that go into high efficiency devices. Compare some 60% efficient PSU to a 98% one. We might be able to get some cool stuff if we can safely throw lots and lots of power at problems.

[duak]

I was a teen in Canada during the Apollo missions and while I was certainly interested in it I don't recall all that much buzz about it, even the first landing.  There was a slight blip for Apollo 13 but even I didn't have that much interest in the later missions.  Skylab coming down was talked about more than it going up and staying there.  I was on a trans-pacific flight when the captain announced that the first Shuttle Columbia had launched safely.  I spoke exceedingly briefly with the 2nd crew at a presentation once, does anyone remember their names?  The Challenger disaster was quite memorable and the Hubble was sort of a comedic interlude.  9/11 was the biggest & most publicy discussed event that I can remember.  Three Mile Island, Chernobyl & Fukushima, IMHO were talked about here more than Apollo.

Bottom line, if if bleeds, it leads and we tend to be more interested in bad news than good.  If some drama could be scheduled a la The Martian, there could be big interest, but it wouldn't last long.  Didn't Stalin say, "one death is a tragedy but a thousand is a statistic"?

To change the subject slightly, are you familar with Project Orion?  That's where a spacecraft used a series of fission bombs exploded sequentially to drive it into space?  George Dyson, the son of one of the scientists on the project, gave a most excellent TED talk on it - well worth the view.   Can you say unintended consequences like radioactive fallout?  Or propulsion system failure and dropping this thing on a big city at a few km per second?  That'd make the news, eh?

Cheers,

[coppercone2]

yea i think with project orion I would make sure there is

1) earth defense system capable of getting rid of debris. Like a serious one that has multiple options like pushing stuff away reliably, space tug boats, etc. not just missiles. With a serious 'dont fly within these coordinates or get pulverized'
2) do not run any of that kinda stuff close to earth, maybe from the moon at least.

[hamster_nz]

Trips to Mars take too long for the modern news cycle, and would fail to galvanise the majority. Day 24? Like day 23, like day 22 was...

It would be worse than test cricket!

[coppercone2]

nah you film it like Jersey Shore

the italian young adult culture of new jersey has already done the proofing test on the type of media that can be used to cover a mars trip.

[apis]

Every week the viewers get to vote who gets thrown out of the airlock?

[rstofer]

There are many more problems on Earth that could need some fixing:
1) Overpopulation
2) Pollution
3) Wars with all kind of conflicts (religious, economical, petrol, ...)
4) Starvation
5) Lack of cures for deadly or incapacitating diseases

All of those items are self-correcting, no research necessary.  Items 2..5 are the solution to Item 1 and Item 1 is the cause of items 2..5.  In a circular route, those solutions also solve themselves.  No population, no pollution.  No population, no starvation.  No population, no wars.  It all works out!

There used to be dinosaurs and they were around for a lot longer than humans (about 180 million years versus about 200,000 years - 1000 times as long!).  Now they're gone!  We may be the apex predator at the moment but things change.  There is no reason to believe that humans are here for the long haul (multiple hundreds of millions of years).  Richard Feynman brought up the point that if we are to survive, we must employ locational diversity.  We need to move elsewhere.

[In Vacuo Veritas]

The first man/woman on Mars will be some billionaire, IMHO. I think there's a whole bunch of rich people who'd pay everything they've got to be the first person on Mars. That's something only one person in history can ever do.

Maybe one with a fatal illness, so he can justify it being a one-way trip.

(getting back from Mars is orders of magnitude more difficult than going there in the first place)

LOL yeah, because people become billionaires chasing after quixotic puerile daydreams. Hint: billionaires rarely take even a 5 second break from their businesses. They aren't strapping themselves into a metal death trap so they can live out YOUR fantasy! 

And astronauts are typically selected for their frailty. 

Do you not see the ridiculous scenario you have here?

[Fungus]

LOL yeah, because people become billionaires chasing after quixotic puerile daydreams. Hint: billionaires rarely take even a 5 second break from their businesses. They aren't strapping themselves into a metal death trap so they can live out YOUR fantasy! 

You never hard of Richard Branson then?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Branson#World_record_attempts

And astronauts are typically selected for their frailty. 

And not all billionaires are old/frail.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/101415/worlds-top-10-youngest-billionaires.asp

Do you not see the ridiculous scenario you have here?

Nope.

[Mr. Scram]

None, people are aware that space is an immense sucking vacuum, a dead end for people. People in space is a stunt.

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/10/why-not-space/

a=ISS
d=Moon

You figure it out.



People don't get excited for bottom of the ocean dives either...

Never mind the quasi-religious fervor about "the species" and "must explore" and all this weird adolescent garbage some people believe.

We got your panties in a right bunch with that one, didn't we? I'm on team sensible and smart scientists on this one. The truth does ultimately lie in the vacuum, funnily enough.

That being said, we don't need a buzz. Buzzes the to be strong and short-lived. We need a steady acceptance and getting to a new normal.

[Mr. Scram]

LOL yeah, because people become billionaires chasing after quixotic puerile daydreams. Hint: billionaires rarely take even a 5 second break from their businesses. They aren't strapping themselves into a metal death trap so they can live out YOUR fantasy! 

And astronauts are typically selected for their frailty. 

Do you not see the ridiculous scenario you have here?

The era of the gentleman racer and pilots hasn't been gone for that long, an era where extremely affluent young men sought to challenge themselves in rather dangerous ways. Quite a few met their untimely demise in the pursuit of some record or race title.

[In Vacuo Veritas]

LOL yeah, because people become billionaires chasing after quixotic puerile daydreams. Hint: billionaires rarely take even a 5 second break from their businesses. They aren't strapping themselves into a metal death trap so they can live out YOUR fantasy! 

And astronauts are typically selected for their frailty. 

Do you not see the ridiculous scenario you have here?

The era of the gentleman racer and pilots hasn't been gone for that long, an era where extremely affluent young men sought to challenge themselves in rather dangerous ways. Quite a few met their untimely demise in the pursuit of some record or race title.

Difficulty: airplanes exist. Your fantasy spacecraft ... don't.
Difficulty: engineering exists. Your fantasy technologies... don't.
Difficulty: incremental changes from existing technologies and energy sources allowed the early 20th century explosion... you require leaps in materials and energy sources in the orders of magnitude. What is more likely? I'm right, or your fantasies that still, after DECADES, amounted to NOTHING, might happen?

bet: in the next ten years, no one will have gone farther than LEO. Or the next twenty. Just like the twenty before.

The end.

So sad.

[coppercone2]

like what advances in materials do we need?

where do you see costs being cut? what magic bullet do you need? are these solutions going to come up magically?

what do you hope for? new alloy orders of magnitude stronger then the best inconels? better ceramics? someone to fall on a toilet, hit their head and develop a new propellant?

[apis]

I never understand what point you're trying to make @In Vacuo Veritas. Everyone here knows how big the solar system is maybe it is you who are missing something? Solving problems and inventing new stuff is what engineers do.