Here's why NASA is ramming a spacecraft into an asteroid

[wingnut771]

Yep, it's fun. That's great, if the time and budget for fooling around exists, and fooling around it is, considering that it still does not solve any existing problem.

Scientists have to eat too.

 

[RonSwanson]

Scientists have to eat too.

Ah, good lad, follow the money.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Yep, it's fun. That's great, if the time and budget for fooling around exists, and fooling around it is, considering that it still does not solve any existing problem.

TBH, there are elements of your stance that I generally agree with, we should be focusing on "research' that solves existing problems.. but if we did that to the exclusion of "pure" research, and research into areas that are pushing boundaries we would very quickly stagnate in the sciences fields.

 

[Moosedrool]

Do you think that they are? How many human deaths have they caused in the past 10,000 years?

Over 10000 years? We don't know but consider how much the population grew over the last 1000. We know rocks exists which can destroy cities or even the entire planet.

With your logic in mind. Ask yourself how many human deaths were recorded in the Indian ocean before 2004 due to tsunamis. If you had the means to stop that would you try?

The probability that we'll be hit by destructive meteors over thousands of years are 100%. Even the Chelyabinsk meteor injured more than 1000 people and caused $33 million USD in property damage.

 

[Thor]

I feel it's a bit silly that 1 nation can do something that potentially has a global impact if done wrong.

 

[RonSwanson]

Over 10000 years? We don't know but consider how much the population grew over the last 1000. We know rocks exists which can destroy cities or even the entire planet.

With your logic in mind. Ask yourself how many human deaths were recorded in the Indian ocean before 2004 due to tsunamis. If you had the means to stop that would you try?

The probability that we'll be hit by destructive meteors over thousands of years are 100%. Even the Chelyabinsk meteor injured more than 1000 people and caused $33 million USD in property damage.

Wow. What a stretch.
I'll give you the answer: It's zero. Nul.

 

[Moosedrool]

Wow. What a stretch.
I'll give you the answer: It's zero. Nul.

Except a destructive event happened about 10 years ago. but you do your probability.

 

[ForceFate]

Man I get the excitement but I sometimes find those cheering / hugging / omg Kelly! shots so cringe.

I'd cheer and high five if I were part of this team.

 

[RonSwanson]

Except a destructive event happened about 10 years ago. but you do your probability.

You are the one doing probability, which is a qualitative stance. I am proposing a quantitative analysis, based on past metrics.

 

[Moosedrool]

You are the one doing probability, which is a qualitative stance. I am proposing a quantitative analysis, based on past metrics.

Your past metrics are insufficient which is exactly why 230k people died on boxing day 2004.

Prior to discovering evidence of sequential megathrust earthquakes little to none of the major events where recorded because the population count was lower and less events were documented. Past metrics showed there's little to no threat.

 

[Geoff.D]

Yep, it is, but it needs to solve a real problem, or further a noble cause. This one isn't, and considering all of the other problems that we have, it's a complete waste of research funding.

That is a matter of opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I don't agree with your view. Lots of new technology solutions will come out of this experiment. We (the public at large) might not know what those are.

 

[Geoff.D]

but if we did that to the exclusion of "pure" research, and research into areas that are pushing boundaries we would very quickly stagnate in the sciences fields.

This is exactly what has happened in SA - we have lost the small edge we had in so many areas as a result of this idea that the only research that should be done is to solve existing problems.

 

[neoprema]

I'm with @Geoff.D on this one. We need research that is not only focused on our problems. Otherwise we will never make progress.

 

[RonSwanson]

Your past metrics are insufficient which is exactly why 230k people died on boxing day 2004.

Prior to discovering evidence of sequential megathrust earthquakes little to none of the major events where recorded because the population count was lower and less events were documented. Past metrics showed there's little to no threat.

Dodging the question and obfuscating the topic, we are not talking about earthquakes.
But even if we allow it, the amount of humans deaths due to earthquakes vs those due to meteorites give ample data. The Boxing Day Tsunami was hardly a black swan event.

 

[ToxicBunny]

This is exactly what has happened in SA - we have lost the small edge we had in so many areas as a result of this idea that the only research that should be done is to solve existing problems.

So I think that is possibly a bit incorrect. There is a fair chunk of pure research that goes on in this country, but it never gets celebrated.

 

[Geoff.D]

destroy cities or even the entire planet.

Destroy cities etc, but not the planet. Might cause the extinction of many species, but in the end, the planet will still be there.

 

[defcomk]

So I think that is possibly a bit incorrect. There is a fair chunk of pure research that goes on in this country, but it never gets celebrated.

Probably but it gets drowned by the usual noise who f'n who why the lights go anc did what.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220922103225.htm

You really got a search it

 

[ToxicBunny]

Probably but it gets drowned by the usual noise who f'n who why the lights go anc did what.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220922103225.htm

You really got a search it

100%...

We have a very science averse nation in many ways.. so these things fly under the radar and are hard to find.

 

[RonSwanson]

That is a matter of opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I don't agree with your view. Lots of new technology solutions will come out of this experiment. We (the public at large) might not know what those are.

Then we agree to disagree.

When we get proof of how throwing a grain of salt at a one inch ball bearing is going to create new tech, I may alter my stance.
If people want to play, then say so, don't sell to the public as a movie-theater plot and that therefore it is somehow useful. That is dishonest, and honesty is a cornerstone of good scientific research.

 

[Geoff.D]

So I think that is possibly a bit incorrect. There is a fair chunk of pure research that goes on in this country, but it never gets celebrated.

I worked at the CSIR for quite a few years and witnessed first-hand how the Department of Science and Technology, as well as the NSF, pushed against pure research proposals. In a few instances, complete labs were shut down. Universities, on the other hand, are not solely dependent on funding from the govt and thus have more say in what research is carried out. I think the tide has turned again and slowly but surely, pure research is once again receiving more attention. Hence, why this project by NASA is so important. Nothing like a few successes to push things along