/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3798665

>space is cooler. just sayin..

I am having a difficult time understanding this view. Consult the picture at left.

>But i guess living underwater is almost as good.
>almost as good

I keep hearing this and wonder if people who say it have ever seen pictures of Mars next to pictures of the shallow tropical waters where colonies will be situated. So I made this one. Look at it for a few minutes and then reconsider where you rank longterm occupation of the sea versus longterm occupation of Mars, the Moon, or any other radioactive, airless frozen desert world.

I, too, hunger to visit the Moon and Mars. But I could never live there. I want to be closer to life, not further from it. I want natural surroundings more fantastic than on land, not a total absence of anything green or living. The beauty of the sea far exceeds that of the Moon and Mars, and although we must inevitably build self sufficient cities there, I'll leave that to my grandchildren. I plan to grow old in the sea.

>But i guess living underwater is almost as good.
>almost as good

I keep hearing this and wonder if people who say it have ever seen pictures of Mars next to pictures of the shallow tropical waters where colonies will be situated. So I made this one. Look at it for a few minutes and then reconsider where you rank longterm occupation of the sea versus longerm occupation of Mars, the Moon, or any other radioactive, airless frozen desert world.

>>3670391

>Being in the sea is just like being on land but in a medium thicker than air. Thats not very exciting, and its nothing like space.

Well except for totally different forms of life and a stunningly exotic view. Meanwhile being on Mars is like being in the Utah desert only deadlier and more expensive. It's a frigid, barren, lifeless desert blasted with radiation. I don't find that exciting, just practical from a longterm survival standpoint.

If we're talking about which location is more desirable for longterm living, see the picture. It's hardly a contest.

>>3646800

>if you try to compete with space funding you will lose.

That's the topic of the thread. How to reverse that.

>if you try to make it a confrontation deep sea exploration will lose every time.

With some people, but not others.

>the public loves NASA.

That's why they decided not to cancel the James Webb Space Telescope right? Oh wait...

>it is fundamental science meets technology.

So is oceanic exploration.

>its the birth of the universe, its billions of thermonuclear reactors, its alien life, it life on earth. its everything.

What alien life? Show me some. And deep sea exploration has more to teach us about life on earth than anything discovered in space.

>you can be part of that everything but if you try to make it out like its one or the other it isn't the space budget that's going to be hurting.

Recently, NASA's budget was cut. The NOAA's was not. The reason is that it performs much more in the way of directly applicable science. Aquarius is one tenth the size of the ISS but does ten times the useful science. You can be a part of that, but first you'll need to severely adjust that attitude. Playing buck rogers to the tune of 18.5 billion a year is not more important than exploring a vast, mysterious frontier right here on Earth that's full of valuable resources and undiscovered life.

>>3588167

>SPACE IS BETTER THAN THE OCEAN

If you say so.

>>3584252

Well to give him the benefit of the doubt I was comparing the ocean to a hypothetical exoplanet very similar to Earth, with lots of native flora and fauna. But yes, a more plausible summation of the decision he faces can be seen in the picture.

>>3551295

>Lets live in Space.

You can't.

>Space is way cooler.

It definitely is cool, but you can't live there. It's way beyond an ordinary person's finances. The ocean is now open to us only because the technology necessary to reside within it has matured and dropped in price over the past fifty years, and all the requisite technologies can be bought off the shelf from wal mart or home depot. It will be a very long time before space is that accessible to the common man.

Besides, you're talking about living in a cold, radiation blasted vacuum. Or if on the moon/mars, a cold, radiation blasted desert. You have ample solar energy (although on the moon the nights last many weeks) but no local source of food, or air. In the ocean you're surrounded by free food and oxygenated water from which you can make air.

Seriously, compare the two scenes in the picture. Once the novelty of both wore off, which place would you be happier living for the rest of your life?

>>3335502

>>why the fuck do you want to live in the sea??

Compare these two. The answer should be fairly obvious.

>>3279927

>>Implying there's shit to research in orbit
>>Implying Mars and the moon aren't barren, radiation blasted deserts
>>Implying the sea isn't a lot like space in the good ways, except you find lots of new lifeforms instead of none, ever

Pic related, illustrative comparison.

>>3214968

>>It's good enough.

Right. Because how can the sea ever hope to complete with a barren, frigid, radiation blasted desert.

Which one would get old faster?