Why Mars?

[SSJPabs]

Okay, so I'm watching the Daily Show with John Stewart and they were spoofing the Mars expedition. At the end, John Stewart said something to the effect that we had sent the Viking craft and they collected rocks. Then we sent the Pathfinder and they looked at rocks. Now the current is looking at Rocks.

The segment ended without a response to this, but it got me to wondering. What is the ultimate goal here? Knowledge is a worthy pursuit indeed but what are we going to DO with that knowledge? What foundation does this help setup that we can continue to build on?

I actually support manned space travel because I belive we need to expand out of the solar system so our race doesn't die off in 5 million years but I'm curious as to the goal.

[Normandy6644]

Mars is interesting because it has the possibility for once harboring life. if indeed that is the case, then we have made a great stride forward in out quest to know and understand the cosmos. if there is life on Mars, perhaps there is life elsewhere, and thus begins our goal to make contact with other civilizations in the universe.

I personally believe it is our duty as human beings to learn all we can about not only our place in the universe, but the universe itself. We have been given cognitive abilities (whether you believe God-given or evolved) well beyond instinct and communication and therefore we have the responsibility to our species, unique in this ability on this planet, to utilize what we have. As far as cosmology as a whole goes, those who do not believe that the pursuit of knowledge is a noble and honorable (and most importantly worthwhile) endeavor, there will be no amount of persuasion that will convince them. On the other hand, those who love the field see its true worth to humanity, measured not by applicability, but rather by understanding.

[beck0311]

I am on record on this board as someone who is skeptical of the current plan to send man back to the moon and eventually Mars.

However, to me there is intrinsic value in exploration for the sake of exploration. I am a big fan of the Mars rovers. For relatively low cost, we are learing quite a bit about Mars. However, as sophisticated as these robots are, they are simply no match for the human capacity for abstract thinking. hearing scientists interpreting the data that the rover collects is interesting, but it is no match for hearing from a human standing on the surface describing what he or she is seeing.

In general, we will eventually wish to explore other worlds. The Moon was an obvious first choice because it is so close. It would seem that Mars is the next logical choice, since it is close, and the surface temperatureis not high enough to melt lead, like Venus.

[tuffel999]

Okay, so I'm watching the Daily Show with John Stewart and they were spoofing the Mars expedition. At the end, John Stewart said something to the effect that we had sent the Viking craft and they collected rocks. Then we sent the Pathfinder and they looked at rocks. Now the current is looking at Rocks.

The segment ended without a response to this, but it got me to wondering. What is the ultimate goal here? Knowledge is a worthy pursuit indeed but what are we going to DO with that knowledge? What foundation does this help setup that we can continue to build on?

I actually support manned space travel because I belive we need to expand out of the solar system so our race doesn't die off in 5 million years but I'm curious as to the goal.

How about he most basic human reason ever: Because it is there!

[ilkhani-tus]

:x

Well, according to these guys, they think they already HAVE the answers, and the rest of us are just dodging!


I'm SO glad that YEC's don't run any real tech or research institutions!

[EvilBob]

Normandy6644 wrote

Zusammengestohlen aus Verschiedenem diesem und jenem.

I asked Google to translate Normandy6644's sig and got "Zusammengestohlen from different one this and that one."

Now I'm REALLY curious! What does it mean? 8-[

[SirThoreth]

:x

Well, according to these guys, they think they already HAVE the answers, and the rest of us are just dodging!


I'm SO glad that YEC's don't run any real tech or research institutions!

Eeek. Checked out the link, exchanged an email with him, asking the following questions (And, yeah, I used the number 3 twice. Oops.):

1. How, precisely, would extraterrestrial life, on Mars or elsewhere, contradict the concept that God created the universe? Sorry, just not seeing it - the universe is rather large, and it seems like a waste to make such an enormous universe, and only place life on one single planet. As someone who argues for Intelligent Design, you have to admit that, had that been the case, God could've saved a lot of time, effort, etc. by altering the laws of physics and creating a much smaller universe, perhaps stopping at our solar system.

2. Should Spirit, Opportunity find evidence for life on Mars, or some future expedition (manned or unmanned) succeed in finding extraterrestrial life, would that not contradict some of the arguments you make on your site?

3. Should we eventually succeed in making contact with an extraterrestrial civilization, or, at the least, succeed in picking up a signal, or evidence of their existence, would this not contradict some of your arguments, especially should they prove to have significantly different spiritual and/or religious beliefs?

3. Looking for a moment at your "young universe" argument, where God would've had to create light nearby enough for us to see more distant stars, etc., or that things farther than 10,000 LY simply aren't there (part of a "gigantic picture show" as you put it), which behave in a specific pattern, wouldn't this require God to be misleading at best, and an outright liar at worst? I mean, you're saying that God created the universe to appear to be behaving in a specific pattern, governed by specific laws, yet, in actuality, it's all **. That's.....astonishing, and as a Christian, something I simply cannot accept. Isn't it far more likely that we humans, exceptional, yet still imperfect creatures, simply got things wrong or misinterpreted things along the line a bit?

Basically, I got back URLs to various articles on his website in their Q&A section. Of particular interest is the section on the propgation of light in a "young" universe, which just seems....weird.

Someone a little better versed in GR and Big Bang Theory want to take a look at this before I respond to him?

[Normandy6644]

Normandy6644 wrote

Zusammengestohlen aus Verschiedenem diesem und jenem.

I asked Google to translate Normandy6644's sig and got "Zusammengestohlen from different one this and that one."

Now I'm REALLY curious! What does it mean? 8-[

Literally it means "altogether stolen from various this and that."

[Squink]

Why Mars?
Because nobody thinks they can sell the American public on a manned mission to the moons of Jupiter yet.
-Maybe in a decade or two

[SSJPabs]

Personally I am proud to be a Liberal Evangelican Chrisitan. I'm not bothered by evolution, whatever happened happened and it really has little to do with my faith. So by all means keep on studying and publishing! Nothing wrong with pursuit of knowledge on Mars of any other projects, all view points welcome for anaylsis.

Anyhow, right now I'm mostly opposed to a manned Mars mission because I hear the plan would strip funding from all other NASA endevours to devote it to the new initiative. In other words, we'd be sacrificing everything else they are doing.

But you gotta sell it to the public to get the funds. If you say "because rocks are cool!" They say "What's it have to do with us?" Science is important, but science for science's sake is not really economically feasible so you have to throw in that wonderment for the average Jane or Joe.

[Normandy6644]

Science is important, but science for science's sake is not really economically feasible so you have to throw in that wonderment for the average Jane or Joe.

I agree with what you're saying, unfortunately. I think it's sad that that is the case. I only hope that it isn't like that forever, because what a boring world it would be. Well, until the sun becomes a red giant anyway.

[Dancar]

There are both advantages and disadvantages to sending people to Mars as opposed to unmanned robots.

Advantages:

1) Flexibility of mission: Rovers can do virtually nothing that was not anticipated while the mission was in the design stage. Humans more readily respond to whatever is seen in the landing zone. They can easily perform repairs and respond to unanticipated events (Apollo 13). They can safely naviagte boulder fields and avoid hazards. They can make decisions in real-time without waiting for round-trip communications from Earth. Rovers by necessety move very slowly because mission control will only guide it where they can see it is safe, and only after the round-trip communication lag will it move again.

2) Greatest Show: Ask anyone who remembers the Apollo 11 moon landing. The world stopped to watch the TV transmission from the moon. The only comparable event to happen since was the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Sending people from Mars (if successful) would produce unmeasurable presigue & clout for the country that does it. This is probably why GWB wants it.

Disadvatage:

1) Cost: Most of the money & enegry sent on a manned Mars expidition would be spent not on planetary exploration science, but on life support for the crew. Unmanned probes don't have to keep anything alive, so everything is designed around getting it there, the science to be done at the site, and transmitting it back.

2) Risk: Both times we lost a shuttle, the shuttle program ended up being grounded for at least a year. If a crew was lost during a Mars expidition, it would be billions down the toilet, and billions more and several years before another mission would be sent, if ever. When Apollo 13 suffered from an explosion on the way to the moon, they were able to swing around the moon and return the Earth in a few days. Once a Mars mission leaves earth, there is no turn-around option until they reach Mars after several months, and then it would be several months to come back. If conditions on the craft are not survivable for the rest of the trip, there would be no survivors. An Apollo 13-type accident would not be survivable unless it happned during the final approch to Earth.

My opinion: Roborts are much more advanced than they were in the 1960s and 1970s. If a sizable chunk of the monay it would take to send a manned mission were spent on a series of unmanned missions designed to handle a variety of terrains or perhaps fly with hot-air ballons, we'd learn a lot more about Mars for the money.

Dancar

[Launch window]

West Coast makes an anti-Human Space Flight article


HUMAN EXPLORATION OF SPACE is such an epic notion, conjuring images of both a science-fiction future and a real-life history of giant steps for mankind, that it's hard not to be swept up in the romance. President Bush certainly seemed to have been having "Star Trek" fantasies when he delivered his vision for returning astronauts to the moon, and eventually sending them to Mars, during the run-up to the 2004 presidential election.
Afterward, Bush dropped his proposal like a sizzling meteorite, having scarcely mentioned it since. Unfortunately, though, it still seems to be guiding the thinking of NASA Administrator Michael D. Griffin. About two-thirds of NASA's 2006 budget will be spent on manned spaceflight programs. That money will come at the expense of more scientifically worthy (not to mention cheaper and safer) unmanned space exploration and astronomy, and the under-funding of these programs promises to get worse.
The president's 2007 budget, slated to reach Congress on Feb. 6, is expected to reduce funding for several government programs — NASA included....
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...l=la-home-oped
Griffin should remember that NASA's greatest moments in recent years have all involved robotic, unmanned missions and space telescopes. The space probe Stardust, which parachuted back to Earth on Sunday, completed a 2.88-billion-mile journey during which it flew by a comet, capturing particles that scientists hope will shed light on the origins of the solar system. On Thursday, NASA launched New Horizons, another unmanned space probe that will embark on a nine-year, 3-billion-mile mission to rendezvous with Pluto, the solar system's lone unvisited planet. Those missions cost roughly $200 million and $700 million, respectively.....

[Doodler]

Maybe if humans had six wheels, one arm and lived off photosynthesis, I could be happy with Spirit and Opportunity as a form of exploration. But I find it hard to call two robots being remote operated anything resembling a human experience.

[Nicolas]

I actually support manned space travel because I belive we need to expand out of the solar system so our race doesn't die off in 5 million years but I'm curious as to the goal.

To releave some stress: it will be more like 5 billion years before our solar system gets some major issues with the sun .

[Doodler]

To releave some stress: it will be more like 5 billion years before our solar system gets some major issues with the sun .

500 million. Even before the Earth is absorbed, its going to get uncomfortably hot around here.

[suntrack2]

Why mars, its ok, then what is the ulternative, you know mars is different one, there is no need to spread the red carpet, the color is inbuilt there, and decent one, and in the mythological story the mars is a planet of "wealth".
then what is wrong in choosing Mars !

now let us laugh loudly!, if so then

anyway your doubt is so good, you have quote "why mars" why not other planet chosen by the earth people to stand on, that's fine.

best wishes from
sunil. (now laugh again, if so then )

[aurora]

In addition to the search for life or past life, Mars can teach us a lot about Geology and how our own planet works.

Unlike Venus, we can reach the surface of Mars.