If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary
Bill Graham wrote:
"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message It isn't clear to me how I have ever profited from manned space exploration in any way whatsoever to this day. That's your problem. You haven't done your research, and only you really know what's relevant to your life. Obviously you expect something glamourous, when the reality is more like 'occulation and sanitation' --- something done routinely which has profound effects ... and isn't even thought about any more. None of the TV/communication satellites needed manned space shots...... Fact is that only manned space travel forced manrated rockets. Manrating rockets will of course cause enormously increased knowledge about the specific rockets and much of that knowledge can be transferred to other rockets --- you don't have to start over at zero each time. Point: The Saturn V had twice engine failures. Because the same Saturn V had an advanced computer it could not only compensate the failures but could do so autonomously, recalculating and adjusting the trajectory as it went --- and thus all starts were successfull. This advanced computer had of course impacts on the advancement of computers in general. Point: The LEM had a couple computers as well, and their capabilities were much increased over the lunar landings. Of course the knowledge gained on building better, smaller computers was not ignored for satellites. I have always been more than willing to finance non-manned space shots, both for exploration, as well as for practical things like communication. It was only the manned stuff like Apollo that I objected to, and I am still objecting to these, because we can still learn 90% as much for 10% of the money with unmanned shots. Sexual education movies can cover 90% for much less than 10% what a baby costs --- and will not transmit diseases either. Yet I've got the feeling the real thing is necessary for the human race. There may be some argument for using manned repairmen to service some of the communications and optical equipment we have in orbit, but even there, one could argue that it is probably cheaper to just build another one and orbit it than to attempt to fix it on location..... Hubble was an experiment designed to also test if repairing and enhancing in orbit is feasible and worth the money. It turns out it really needed fixing and taught us much about the processes, even if it also turns out that replacing currently is often cheaper. Certainly this would be true were it not for the fact that the money has already been spent to develop space suits and livable space stations and the like, so we might as well use them. The money for space suits is peanuts, and space station knowledge will also serve us well when we'll settle on the ocean floors. Given that the oceans have vast resources (though much much less than asteroids offer) and that living space is going to be dear if there will not be a *successfull* global (really *everyone* involved global) change of the population curve. -Wolfgang |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary
"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message ... Bill Graham wrote: "Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message It isn't clear to me how I have ever profited from manned space exploration in any way whatsoever to this day. That's your problem. You haven't done your research, and only you really know what's relevant to your life. Obviously you expect something glamourous, when the reality is more like 'occulation and sanitation' --- something done routinely which has profound effects ... and isn't even thought about any more. None of the TV/communication satellites needed manned space shots...... Fact is that only manned space travel forced manrated rockets. Manrating rockets will of course cause enormously increased knowledge about the specific rockets and much of that knowledge can be transferred to other rockets --- you don't have to start over at zero each time. Point: The Saturn V had twice engine failures. Because the same Saturn V had an advanced computer it could not only compensate the failures but could do so autonomously, recalculating and adjusting the trajectory as it went --- and thus all starts were successfull. This advanced computer had of course impacts on the advancement of computers in general. So? - You make my point. They didn't neeed men on board..... Point: The LEM had a couple computers as well, and their capabilities were much increased over the lunar landings. Of course the knowledge gained on building better, smaller computers was not ignored for satellites. So why have men on board, if computers can do the job fine without them? I have always been more than willing to finance non-manned space shots, both for exploration, as well as for practical things like communication. It was only the manned stuff like Apollo that I objected to, and I am still objecting to these, because we can still learn 90% as much for 10% of the money with unmanned shots. Sexual education movies can cover 90% for much less than 10% what a baby costs --- and will not transmit diseases either. Yet I've got the feeling the real thing is necessary for the human race. Your "feelings" are costing us billions of dollars.....Perhaps you should lie down for a while until your feelings go away..... There may be some argument for using manned repairmen to service some of the communications and optical equipment we have in orbit, but even there, one could argue that it is probably cheaper to just build another one and orbit it than to attempt to fix it on location..... Hubble was an experiment designed to also test if repairing and enhancing in orbit is feasible and worth the money. It turns out it really needed fixing and taught us much about the processes, even if it also turns out that replacing currently is often cheaper. Certainly this would be true were it not for the fact that the money has already been spent to develop space suits and livable space stations and the like, so we might as well use them. The money for space suits is peanuts, and space station knowledge will also serve us well when we'll settle on the ocean floors. Given that the oceans have vast resources (though much much less than asteroids offer) and that living space is going to be dear if there will not be a *successfull* global (really *everyone* involved global) change of the population curve. -Wolfgang Even with undersea exploration, unmanned robots are certainly the way to go......Having to protect men from the horrendous pressures that exist 4 or 5 miles deep is ridiculous, when a mechanical photographer can do 90% of the work for only 10% of the money.....Have you ever taken any courses in business management? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary
Bill Graham wrote:
"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message Manrating rockets [...] Point: The Saturn V had twice engine failures. Because the same Saturn V had an advanced computer it could not only compensate the [...] So? - You make my point. They didn't neeed men on board..... And the Saturn V had no men on board. It had a computer ... and a payload. And it had that sort of computer because it was a manrated rocket. Point: The LEM had a couple computers as well, and their capabilities were much increased over the lunar landings. Of course the knowledge gained on building better, smaller computers was not ignored for satellites. So why have men on board, if computers can do the job fine without them? Cause computers cannot do the job fine without them. You might have to LOOK UP the details of the Apollo 11 landing; human interaction was critical twice for a safe landing. You either don't even know what you rant against (always a bad sign) or, worse, you misrepresent the truth. I have always been more than willing to finance non-manned space shots, both for exploration, as well as for practical things like communication. It was only the manned stuff like Apollo that I objected to, and I am still objecting to these, because we can still learn 90% as much for 10% of the money with unmanned shots. Sexual education movies can cover 90% for much less than 10% what a baby costs --- and will not transmit diseases either. Yet I've got the feeling the real thing is necessary for the human race. Your "feelings" are costing us billions of dollars..... I have power over billions of dollars? I don't even have any *ugly* assistants, never mind pretty ones! What has become of the trappings of power! Whatever happened to the dollar, devalued so that you need many billions for a hot dog or a burger --- oh, yes, I remember, the formerly great United States lost --- no, never even started --- the race for asteroid resources. Perhaps you should lie down for a while until your feelings go away..... Now I, as Lord And Master over Billions Of Dollars, Tell You, without the real thing humanity will be dying out and the last humans will die within 100 years from now. Babies are *necessary*, even if they cost money. Lying down will not alter that. Now, speaking of lying down, how about that pretty assistant I was supposed to have? The money for space suits is peanuts, and space station knowledge will also serve us well when we'll settle on the ocean floors. Given that the oceans have vast resources (though much much less than asteroids offer) and that living space is going to be dear if there will not be a *successfull* global (really *everyone* involved global) change of the population curve. Even with undersea exploration, Please read what I wrote. I didn't say "exploration", I didn't say "exploitation", I said "settle". You know, what people did in the American West between when there were only Indians and now. Or would reading actually hurt your agenda? go......Having to protect men from the horrendous pressures that exist 4 or 5 miles deep is ridiculous, It's ridiculously cheap, Bathyscopes are. Of course, you are always trying to settle the Mariana Trench instead of the continental shelf because you don't aim for realistic scenarios. when a mechanical photographer can do 90% of the work for only 10% of the money..... It can make babies, invent, manufacture, learn, react autonomously, teach classes, collect, classify, name, test, observe, repair, make judgement calls, allocate, priorize, measure, describe, write papers, assist, study, hold conferences --- and all that for only 10%? You must share the construction details some day. Have you ever taken any courses in business management? Are you talking about the same courses that caused all these many banks to collapse recently? Must be very expensive, these courses, learning how to destroy so much money so fast. -Wolfgang |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary
"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
... Cause computers cannot do the job fine without them. You might have to LOOK UP the details of the Apollo 11 landing; human interaction was critical twice for a safe landing. Please read what I wrote. I didn't say "exploration", I didn't say "exploitation", I said "settle". You know, what people did in the American West between when there were only Indians and now. Are you talking about the same courses that caused all these many banks to collapse recently? Must be very expensive, these courses, learning how to destroy so much money so fast. Some good comment there. Technology is marvellous and can do many useful things but I've seen plenty of geologists comment that it's not a substitute for being there. Building machines with the necessary IQ and dexterity isn't there yet. What's the point of getting out of bed in the morning? We still have to find something to do and enjoy, or we'd just be a waste of DNA. We may be anyway but at least it takes our minds off it. I've done those management courses. Some are very good and some managers are excellent but you can find the same lessons walking down the street and great people everywhere. One just has to look. -- Charles E Hardwidge |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary | Alan Browne | Digital SLR Cameras | 486 | August 6th 09 07:03 PM |
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary | Bill Graham | 35mm Photo Equipment | 10 | August 5th 09 06:15 AM |
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary | Chris Malcolm[_2_] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | July 31st 09 02:06 AM |
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary | Chris H | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | July 30th 09 07:47 AM |
Apollo 11 Lunar landing - 40th aniversary | Bowser | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 4 | July 22nd 09 05:21 AM |