25th June 2010, 7:10 PM
Actually all it tells us is that the shuttle is too complex. That's why the shuttle project has been scrapped. The main goal lately has been much simpler craft that can accomplish the same goals.
On another somewhat more controversial note, while I would never be for risking someone ELSE'S life, if an explorer is fully aware of the risks involved, every precaution is taken, and they still wish to travel, then by all means allow them to do so. Sometimes lives are worth risking for the sake of exploration, so long as it's your own.
Also, I want to be clear here. JUST going back to the moon or "touching down" on Mars is not good enough. The long term plan should be for a permanent outpost, first on the moon and then on other worlds. Again, this is long term. I agree that nanotechnology is a worthwhile thing, but Weltall the thing is, nanotechnology is no more "a thing" than "medicine" is. There's countless types of nanotechnology, and each new invention that's "nano" will blend directly into the next. We already have a lot of nanotechnology as it is, and more is on the way, but it's just barely scratching the surface. Nano is a category, not a single end-goal. There's also still plenty of room "at the top", plenty of inventions at larger scales yet to be invented. If we're going to get that borg style thing going, the big invention is somehow finding a way to "copy" a brain's total state and simulating it electronically. A FULL physics and chemistry simulation is insane, we can barely model a single cell as it is. Better to find a way to simulate the full litany of EFFECTS of those interactions in some simpler form, but it'd have to cover everything from the full set of electrical interactions possible between neurons, to the set of operations a neuron performs other than that, to the effects of all the various chemicals floating around in the brain (hormones and so on) that directly affect how neurons interact with each other. If there's a way to break that down into something much simpler than a full physics simulation, then so be it, but it is not going to be an easy task. In fact it'll probably be the most difficult endeavor ever accomplished, more so than a "mere" theory of everything (basic laws are complex as it is, but the complexity that can arise from those laws is far greater).
Suffice it to say there are PLENTY of worthwhile endeavors. I think the question "how will it benefit us?" is shortsighted as it is. Again, Maxwell's equations were simply the result of raw science for it's own sake. Had anyone back then suggested to cede all funding for "some old guy playing around with light", we wouldn't have radio, television, wi-fi, satellite, or anything else that practically defines the modern age. There's no telling where something like settling on Mars could take us, I still say it's a worthwhile goal.
On another somewhat more controversial note, while I would never be for risking someone ELSE'S life, if an explorer is fully aware of the risks involved, every precaution is taken, and they still wish to travel, then by all means allow them to do so. Sometimes lives are worth risking for the sake of exploration, so long as it's your own.
Also, I want to be clear here. JUST going back to the moon or "touching down" on Mars is not good enough. The long term plan should be for a permanent outpost, first on the moon and then on other worlds. Again, this is long term. I agree that nanotechnology is a worthwhile thing, but Weltall the thing is, nanotechnology is no more "a thing" than "medicine" is. There's countless types of nanotechnology, and each new invention that's "nano" will blend directly into the next. We already have a lot of nanotechnology as it is, and more is on the way, but it's just barely scratching the surface. Nano is a category, not a single end-goal. There's also still plenty of room "at the top", plenty of inventions at larger scales yet to be invented. If we're going to get that borg style thing going, the big invention is somehow finding a way to "copy" a brain's total state and simulating it electronically. A FULL physics and chemistry simulation is insane, we can barely model a single cell as it is. Better to find a way to simulate the full litany of EFFECTS of those interactions in some simpler form, but it'd have to cover everything from the full set of electrical interactions possible between neurons, to the set of operations a neuron performs other than that, to the effects of all the various chemicals floating around in the brain (hormones and so on) that directly affect how neurons interact with each other. If there's a way to break that down into something much simpler than a full physics simulation, then so be it, but it is not going to be an easy task. In fact it'll probably be the most difficult endeavor ever accomplished, more so than a "mere" theory of everything (basic laws are complex as it is, but the complexity that can arise from those laws is far greater).
Suffice it to say there are PLENTY of worthwhile endeavors. I think the question "how will it benefit us?" is shortsighted as it is. Again, Maxwell's equations were simply the result of raw science for it's own sake. Had anyone back then suggested to cede all funding for "some old guy playing around with light", we wouldn't have radio, television, wi-fi, satellite, or anything else that practically defines the modern age. There's no telling where something like settling on Mars could take us, I still say it's a worthwhile goal.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)