Space X

[Drago]

Curiosity and Perseverance can and do operate on Mars. A human can't. At least not without life support and shielding to get them there, fuel to decelerate them for a soft landing and fuel to get them and their life support off the surface again.

And that's exactly the point of Starship. Transport for the human and its equipment, life support, shielding, grub. Whether it will ultimately work or not is another matter, but there is no denying that theyre having a serous crack at it and have well surpassed the spaceflight abilities of even the best funded and most advanced nation state that had a near 60 year head start.

As sophisticated as the robots are they completely lack the intelligence, awarness, and insight of a human. As aforementioned, an elephant (in a suitable spacesuit, of course) could walk within a metre of Curiosity or Perservenrence and is liable to remain undected except in the most narrow of circumstances. Even the most obtuse human, assuming they are awake, wouldn't miss that.

It is an inarguable reality that even the most sophistacted probes can take days or months to achieve what a human can in seconds, if they are even able to achieve it at all, and that seems unlikely that change in any reasonably foreseeable future.

 

[gbb]

The computing power needed to do that must be extraordinary.
A young colleague said to me maybe 10 years ago...'I envy the fact you've seen so much in your life, the moon landings, the fall of the Berlin Wall etc etc..I will probably never get that same excitement'

And to a degree, he's right. I don't get excited about stuff anymore but that may be just me. I watched it with some awe but things like this are becoming almost everyday, technological leaps in so many spheres.
I wonder if he watched and marvelled at it ?

 

[Dogtrousers]

It is an inarguable reality that even the most sophistacted probes can take days or months to achieve what a human can in seconds, if they are even able to achieve it at all, and that seems unlikely that change in any reasonably foreseeable future.

Hmm. I'd say it's highly arguable.

The driving force behind putting people in such an environment is not mission effectiveness but a combination of hubris and a burning desire for Galaxy Quest to be real.

Never give up, never surrender.

I'm not knocking that space x landing btw. It was amazing.

 

[Drago]

Hmm. I'd say it's highly arguable.

Go on then, argue it for me.

Tell us how a robot with 7 sensors, very limited processing capacity, no decision making ability, and a time delayed link to its operator (with short periods with no link at all) is more capable at scientifc enquiry than a well educated human (assuming the human has the necessary Starship supplied wherewithall to not die on the surface of Mars.)

If you can make that work you'll be wealthier than Musk himself.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Go on then, argue it for me.

Tell us how a robot with 7 sensors, very limited processing capacity, no decision making ability, and a time delayed link to its operator (with short periods with no link at all) is more capable at scientifc enquiry than a well educated human (assuming the human has the necessary Starship supplied wherewithall to not die on the surface of Mars.)

If you can make that work you'll be wealthier than Musk himself.

For the cost of lugging a human (which has incredibly limited sensors it must be said) there and back you could afford to send a probe that wouldn't be hamstrung by having 7 sensors and very limited processing capacity.

And that's just Mars. There is literally nowhere else even remotely hospitable. Unlike Star Trek there isn't a handy "class-M planet" to beam down to each week

Oceangate comes to mind

 

[Psamathe]

Clever but how useful?

The number of launches is currently unsustainable and serving no real purpose beyond entertainment & influence for a few mega wealthy whilst doing untold damage. eg having been pressured into changing his StarLink satellite design to stop destroying scientific research, further cost cutting is yet again destroying scientific research and all for what purpose? A few seconds of youtube video keeping us happy?

Ian

 

[Ming the Merciless]

a burning desire for Galaxy Quest to be real.

Wait, what it’s not real? 😳

 

[Dogtrousers]

StarLink

Starlink, (well not Starlink specifically but more generally speaking the overall approach to chucking stuff into low earth orbit and leaving it there to disintegrate or bump into things and break up), has the potential to render the whole space flight question moot. Once a critical density of debris is reached debris breeds more debris and we could end up with a layer of crap that's too hazardous to penetrate.

 

[Psamathe]

Starlink, (well not Starlink specifically but more generally speaking the overall approach to chucking stuff into low earth orbit and leaving it there to bump into things and break up), has the potential to render the whole space flight question moot. Once a critical density of debris is reached debris breeds more debris and we could end up with a layer of crap that's too hazardous to penetrate.

Plus battery issues in the latest designed have all but destroyed deep space scientific observation. Massive increases in radiation emissions in the new designs.

But on the "positive" it does give Musk enormous influence to pursue his personal ideology.

(Maybe I should now be requesting registration in the "News, Current Affairs & Politics" section?)

Ian

 

[Dogtrousers]

(Maybe I should now be requesting registration in the "News, Current Affairs & Politics" section?)

If you're coming at it with an underlying point of view that Elon Musk (aka Space Karen) is a nob, then yeah. But if you can put that to one side it's possible that there are interesting, not overtly political, things to discuss.

 

[Psamathe]

If you're coming at it with an underlying point of view that Elon Musk (aka Space Karen) is a nob, then yeah. But if you can put that to one side it's possible that there are interesting, not overtly political, things to discuss.

Whilst I hold both views, here my main point is based on my placing a high value on scientific research and a high value on sustainability and whilst these for-profit mega wealthy are doing some clever stuff the current situation is not sustainable and is doing immense damage to scientific research all in the name of profit for very few who really don't need even more money ie we suffer the detrimental consequences of their growing bank balances.

For me a few seconds of "wow" on youtube fall far short of offsetting the negative impacts.

Ian

 

[Once a Wheeler]

My father was born six months before the Wright brothers made the first sustained powered flight in 1903. In 1969, I woke him up in the early morning to come and watch the first humans walking about on the surface of the Moon. After some avid watching in engrossed silence he leaned back in his chair and said, 'You know, I never doubted we would walk on the Moon one day. What never occurred to me, is that I would be able to watch it happening live.' The first practical television was demonstrated in 1926; and I suspect very few of the people who were eagerly watching the first Moon landing actually thought that the fact of seeing it was more of a wonder than the fact of doing it. Invention is never single-purpose — every invention changes the universe we live in.

When people first return from Mars they will not be returning to the world we live in now. Perhaps we will be walking amongst them in a virtual-reality reception room. Or perhaps they will be advocating the genetic modification of humans to enable lifetime habitation on other planets because the constraints on natural earthlings to maintain life elsewhere in the solar system are too severe. We shall see; but catching used rockets looks like a significant small step on the path, even if the path leads to human speciation as much as to humans leaving footprints in the rusty dust of neighbouring worlds.

 

[Psamathe]

We shall see; but catching used rockets looks like a significant small step on the path, even if the path leads to human speciation as much as to humans leaving footprints in the rusty dust of neighbouring worlds.

Thing the I'm unsure about is what catching a rocket allows us to do that we couldn't do before? Is it really a lot more sustainable in that we have to carry the additional fuel needed for landing up into orbit (additional launch mass)? What benefit in catching as opposed to handing in an open field? Is recovering a booster stage from the sea really that difficult?

Ian

 

[gbb]

Go on then, argue it for me.

Tell us how a robot with 7 sensors, very limited processing capacity, no decision making ability, and a time delayed link to its operator (with short periods with no link at all) is more capable at scientifc enquiry than a well educated human (assuming the human has the necessary Starship supplied wherewithall to not die on the surface of Mars.)

If you can make that work you'll be wealthier than Musk himself.

I suppose you could look at what's being done now, right now. ( and in the past)
Exploration of Mars with the rover and airborne , probes sent to Venus, the Moon, the Voyager missions have given us more scientific data than most of us will ever understand or dream of. None of all that multitude of data could currently be collected by a human, not one bit of it. We're all the richer for what has already been done by probes.

The human side will come of course....

 

[Gillstay]

Thing the I'm unsure about is what catching a rocket allows us to do that we couldn't do before? Is it really a lot more sustainable in that we have to carry the additional fuel needed for landing up into orbit (additional launch mass)? What benefit in catching as opposed to handing in an open field? Is recovering a booster stage from the sea really that difficult?

Ian

Well I would expect there to be clear reasons why its better. Just avoiding sea water has to be good. An they are not just doing it for kicks are they .