Return to Moon "Not Viable" says report!

[LazyLion]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32738086/ns/technology_and_science-space/

A White House panel of independent space experts says NASA’s return-to-the-moon plan just won’t fly.

The problem is money. The expert panel estimates it would cost about $3 billion a year beyond NASA’s current budget.

 

[Geriatrix]

Yep. Saw this coming. It was technically feasible to go to mars in the 70s already. Problem was that there was always some or other war to fund.

 

[mercurial]

Lies! They fear the aliens

 

[SlinkyMike]

I'd agree wholeheartedly with that.
Mars should be top of the list.

 

[killadoob]

Forget sending all these probes, let's get light or close to light speed rather then look into the space program again.

Seriously if we could travel at light or close to it, mars would be dropped and far more interesting planets would open up.

 

[J25]

Forget sending all these probes, let's get light or close to light speed rather then look into the space program again.

Seriously if we could travel at light or close to it, mars would be dropped and far more interesting planets would open up.

Actually, I have a better idea. Let's forget speed of light travel and rather wait until we have teleportation devices. Seriously, if we could teleport we wouldn't be confined to our own galaxy, never mind our tiny little solar system.

 

[waynegohl]

we are buying time till we have a raygun perfected, then we will conquer space.

 

[killadoob]

Actually, I have a better idea. Let's forget speed of light travel and rather wait until we have teleportation devices. Seriously, if we could teleport we wouldn't be confined to our own galaxy, never mind our tiny little solar system.

Maybe so but i am sure reaching close to light speed seems a bit easier than teleporation , not easier i suppose by feasible

 

[Geriatrix]

Maybe so but i am sure reaching close to light speed seems a bit easier than teleporation , not easier i suppose by feasible

But we know how to do that. It just takes time and money. Oh and define close.

 

[mercurial]

Forget sending all these probes, let's get light or close to light speed rather then look into the space program again.

Seriously if we could travel at light or close to it, mars would be dropped and far more interesting planets would open up.

Actually, we'd still pretty much only be able to travel to the planets in our solar system, as the next closest star is Proxima Centauri, which is 4.2 light years away. That means that if we were able to travel at the speed of light, it would take us 4.2 years to get there, whereas Mars would take 27 minutes. The human body is not able to withstand such longstanding effects (effects of gravity etc) once they have left Earth.

 

[Geriatrix]

Actually, we'd still pretty much only be able to travel to the planets in our solar system, as the next closest star is Proxima Centauri, which is 4.2 light years away. That means that if we were able to travel at the speed of light, it would take us 4.2 years to get there, whereas Mars would take 27 minutes. The human body is not able to withstand such longstanding effects (effects of gravity etc) once they have left Earth.

There're ways to simulate gravity(think of that spinning module in the movie 2001). Whats a bit trickier figure out is to how to protect the (enter country here)nauts from solar and cosmic radiation. Also, as I've said before there's the stopping part.

Moving that fast will also make it a bit difficult to dodge any obstacles in your way. Hitting something as small as a grape at close to the speed of light would probably result in a expensive display of deep space fireworks.