ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

The Times reports on the hurried makeover that NASA is going through to
respond to Bush's new priorities.  The upshot of it is that $11 billion
of the $86 billion NASA budget will be reallocated toward manned
exploration of the moon and then Mars.

According to the article, the programs most at risk include the Hubble
Space telescope (with two repair missions that would extend its life
first to 2010 and then to 2015 now in doubt), the Shuttle and by
extension the ISS.

Apparently there is no new money going with the new priorities, so the
"pork" will just be re-allocated.  I am all for spending on the space
program, but I would rather that the priorities not be casually
re-jiggered for short term, uninformed political expediency.  Nowhere
have I heard any report that there was any scientific counsel that went
into this decision, I have heard no scientists have come forward to
praise the new priorities.

Eric

On Jan 16, 2004, at 4:58 AM, Jonah Cohen wrote:

> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology
> Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
> institutions.
> ***********************************************************************
> ******
>
> A few more thoughts on this - comforting, as outer space is probably
> warmer than where I am now.
>
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 09:46:53 -0600 "Shelly Goglick"
> <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>> One thing that Bush didn't say in his speech that he should have was
>> that for every $1 NASA receives, $7 gets returned to the American
>> public.
>
> I'm never sure exactly what stats like this mean, in terms of "getting
> returned to the public". (Where's my $7?!?) But your point is well
> taken
> space exploration leads to all kinds of new technology advances, new
> useful products and such. I know NASA only uses up a tiny fraction of
> our
> tax dollars, and it's cash I'm willing to spend (don't get me started
> on
> the stuff it's way better than!) I just wonder where the scientific
> impetus behind this new "vision thing" is.
>
> And for that matter, there are many benefits to space travel that have
> no
> easy $benefit$, but should in no way be ignored: the accumulation of
> knowledge. The wonder and inspiration that this exploration inspires.
> As
> Tom Hanks once said, getting to the moon took the work of a lot of
> people, dedicating to this goal, working together to overcome a lot of
> serious problems --- imagine if we could get so many people that
> committed to cooperation on solving some of our more earth bound
> problems.
>
> The part I'm questioning is: aren't those same benefits available with
> non-manned exploration, too? Not that it has to be a total either/or,
> not
> that we should give up on sending people into space entirely... but the
> robotic option seems a lot more efficient.
>
> One of the things that I find amazing about astronauts is that humans
> are
> in no way evolved to survive in space, yet there they go. In a way,
> they're flipping the bird to human limitations. Now THAT'S inspiring!
> But
> I still recognize that there's only so far you can push your limits
> before Nature simply doesn't budge. And I'm not sure the moon/Mars
> colony
> idea isn't trying to go beyond that un-budge point.
>
>> As for the Moons resources and launching from the moon, the
>> potential is unlimited.  We know there are many ore resources
>> available on the lunar surface that can be used to make fuel or
>> materials.
>
> No offense, but this still seems a little science fiction-like to me.
> How
> much of that ore is economically recoverable? Even if there's lots of
> iron and titanium on the lunar surface, where's the infrastructure to
> mine it? And refine it into useable material? And craft said material
> into equipment? And....
>
>> Because the gravity on the lunar surface is 1/6 of the
>> earths, it will be a lot cheaper to launch rockets to the further
>> reaches of space.
>
> OK, please do correct me if my physics/engineering knowledge of this is
> way off base, but... I know the moon has less gravity (heck, no air
> means
> less drag on a launched rocket, too). But I was under the impression
> that
> getting a rocket to reach escape velocity and get into space isn't the
> difficulty with getting to Mars. We can get stuff to leave earth just
> fine, and after a few hundred miles, the earth having greater gravity
> than the moon makes no difference.
>
> The problem is that the trip takes what, 3 or 4 years? Each way! I
> can't
> see how having a slightly easier launch on half of the trip makes all
> that much difference.
>
> As for the NPR kids who think we should move to Mars once earth is too
> poluted to live on: well, that may reflect a lot of cynicism or crass
> consumerism by the kids. Or it may reflect their fears about the state
> of
> things. I wonder if in the 60's, kids thought we should go to the moon
> because they were afraid we'd need a new place to live once the earth
> was
> destroyed by nuclear war.
>
> It's true, I bet folks poo-poohed JFK when he said we should to the
> moon
> (as surely people scoffed at the Wright Brothers and a lot of others).
> And maybe in 20 years when New Earth colony is thriving on the Sea of
> Tranquility, someone will dig my doubting listserve post out of some
> digital archive and place me in the pantheon with that 19th century
> patent office guy who said there was nothing left to be invented. (Oh,
> I
> can only hope!) But on the other hand, that argument could be used to
> justify darn near anything. "What, you think I can't invent a free
> energy
> machine? People like you said we'd never get to the moon!")
>
> Thank you for thoughtful input, as always, listeservers.
>
> Jonah Cohen
> Outreach & Public Programs Manager
> Science Center of Connecticut
>
> BUSH: We go into space for the same reason that humans have always
> explored uncharted lands and crossed great oceans.
> STEWART: That reason? Rapacious greed.
>                 -The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>
> ***********************************************************************
> More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
> Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at
> http://www.astc.org.
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
>

***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]