/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1922019]

http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/neoworkshop.html

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/483296main_20100920-Explore_NOW_Summary_Report.pdf


Did you fags read this? It is from a NASA conference that basically outlined what the agencies next major manned mission is going to be.

It even hints at the possibility of building a system that generates artificial gravity like arthur c. clarke imagined it. NASA will de-orbit and kill the ISS but use some of the modules as part of a larger ship.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1922037]

Too little, too late.

[снайпер No.1922065]

We should have started doing this 30 fucking years ago.

At least we're going in the right direction now that the shuttle is finally dead.

[Anonymous No.1922071]

Also before the conference, some of the people from the Augustine commission determined what the general specs of the new rocket is going to be.

I can't find the pdf of the presentation, but it said something about it being a 200 metric tonne rocket.

That's a hundred thousand pounds heavier than the Saturn V if my math is right.

A big fucking rocket.

[Anonymous No.1922086]

>>1922065


I know you are a moonfag. If you read that report, you might be pleased to see that they might use your stupid fucking moon as a launch point for beyond earth orbit missions.

They have some charts showing how much delta V you would need to take off from the moon for an asteroid mission.

[Anonymous No.1922095]

Space thread?


Watch this. The Mars Science Laboratory launches soon!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Science_Laboratory

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/charles_elachi_on_the_mars_rovers.html

[Anonymous No.1922104]

>>1922086
It's the only thing that makes sense. Earth's gravity well is a bitch, and the moon is the only thing in its orbit. Anyone not wanting to use the moon extensively has shit for brains.

[Anonymous No.1922120]

SSSSSSSSSSPPPPAAAACEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.1922143]

>>1922104
What do you use the moon for?

[снайпер No.1922144]

>>1922086
I'm an "anything-that-makes-sense-fag"

It would be more accurate to say that I think going to the moon before going to Mars makes a dickload more sense than going to Mars first.

Or more to the point, I think the idea that our space program should focus on colonizing Mars is downright retarded and will put us into another 50 years of stagnation as the pitifully small Mars colony soaks up all the money in space exploration for incredibly marginal gains for things we could have simply done on the moon instead.

About the only hugely important discovery that could be made on Mars is whether or not it has microbial life, and we don't need to send humans there at the cost of trillions to figure that out.

In time, we'll go to Mars. But to do so *right now* is biting off more than we can chew.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1922149]

>>1922144
>It would be more accurate to say that I think going to the moon before going to Mars makes a dickload more sense than going to Mars first.

[Anonymous No.1922156]

>>1922149
There are less valuabl elements on the moon and it is more energetically feasible to launch straight from earth to mars than moon to mars.

Mars also has an atmosphere upon which to aereobrake, and higher gravity, and water. Mars will always make more sense....

[Anonymous No.1922163]

>>1922144


>But to do so *right now* is biting off more than we can chew.

>Mars DIRECT

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1922169]

>>1922156
Oh.
Well... I was thinking more...

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1922181]

ITT: People who know their shit and a mad megascale engineer wannabe.

And Robert Zubrin.

[Anonymous No.1922176]

>>1922163

protip: the new NASA direction as laid out by Obama is a carbon copy of the Mars Direct initiative. It is slightly more scaled back, but its the same thing.

Zubrin may have the last laugh after all.

[снайпер No.1922177]

>>1922143
The most sensible scientific use of the moon would probably be remote radio telescopes on the far side where there is very little, if any, interference from Earth.

>>1922156
It costs more delta-v to go from Earth to Mars than from Earth to the Moon. But that aside, you could build a launch system on the moon utilizing solar power to launch spacecraft at much higher velocities and masses to Mars than would be feasible to launch and accelerate under their own power out of Earth's gravity well.

Mars' atmosphere however, is more of a problem than it is a help. Mars has just about the most horrible combination of atmosphere and gravitational pull that makes it one of the hardest places to land any sizeable payloads in our solar system. You can read more about the difficulties involved here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Science_Laboratory#Landing_system

Both Mars and the Moon have water, so that's really not much of an argument.

Going to Mars is pulp science fiction stuff. It's immensely popular, but it's the wrong thing for us to do right away.

[снайпер No.1922184]

>>1922169
Well, considering the NASA summary talks about visiting Mars' moons, as well as moving asteroids...

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1922187]

>>1922184

[снайпер No.1922193]

Also, I hope I'm not the only one who found this hilarious.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1922198]

>>1922184

"The plan is simple, we attach a magsail to Phobos! Get the president on the line!"
"But this can't be done! We don't have superconductors!"
"You... You don't want to see ME MAD"
The next day, House of Reps., day:
"Oh God who unleashed Robert Zubrin?"

Man they should make a TV series about the lives of Aerospace Engineers and Robert Zubrin. Where they fight ignorant congressmen and then do science and at the end of the day when the two cents for the budget have been secured everything is back to normality and they all go out for drinks with Elon Musk.

And Robert Bigelow stays at home alone as usual.

[Anonymous No.1922200]

>>1922181


u mad?

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1922205]

>>1922193

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1922204]

>>1922198
I would watch this.

[Anonymous No.1922207]

>>1922193


It's not hilarious. It's bad ass.

The Japs did a good job with that probe.

The managed to somehow save it.

[Anonymous No.1922214]

can the ISS leave earth's orbit?

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1922219]

>>1922214

No, not really.

Unless they somehow Frankenstein the exhaust of the life-support and the power supply into a freaky makeshift ion drive.

Then the answer is still no.

[Anonymous No.1922227]

>>1922214


If you have enough power, yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Specific_Impulse_Magnetoplasma_Rocket#Testing_on_the_space_sta
tion

[снайпер No.1922255]

>>1922214
Sure. If you've got a big enough rocket engine to stick on it.

Can people still live on it? Maybe, maybe not. I'm not sure how much worse the radiation exposure would be outside of the Earth's magnetic field.

There's also the possibility of the acceleration induced by leaving orbit destroying parts of the station.

Also, issues with resupply.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1922268]

If one could perfect closed-loop life-support, put larger, more efficient nanotech-aided solar panels on the ISS, then add a VASIMR or two, and coat it with tungsten... Ah, a man can dream.

A man can dream.

[Anonymous No.1922273]

>>1922214
Can it? Yes.
Should it? No.

The ISS is insufficiently shielded to support human life beyond the van allen belts.

[Anonymous No.1922476]

>>1922268
Tungsten isn't the best radiation solution.