http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/neil-degrasse-tysons-answer-to-innovation-stagnation-a-space-race-to-mars-20150525-gh9gys.html
Neil de Grasse Tyson suggests rekindling old Cold War-esque visions? Respectfully in one context for the popular science speaker Neil, a little logic is in order here. We may actually be coming out of a mini Cold War not going over hauling and rekindling a major one here. Secondly it would appear that big government spending is beginning to wind down for anti terrorism efforts, which could be the equivalent of a cold war fight for previous decades. Then I have seen recent suggestions that cuts in military spending have put the U.S. supposedly slated to loose air superiority. I am not certain I exactly believe this, but as to cuts in military spending, yes, it seems likely, and much of this could be in the area of DARPA appropriations and other like kind programs. We aren't clearly at war with the Russians and even if anti Westernism is a given at times potentially in the East, it would appear far more nuanced in language and neither so clearly bellicose. These goofy 'space races' if you will in my opinion shouldn't be the drivers of technological innovation, and anyways, Nasa has hinted a desire for pioneering exploration on a smaller level, in the way that I have heard others including myself directly suggest. Why not go nano? Why not save humanity all that extra money...anyways the Indian government apparently has found a way at slashing budgets and they haven't sacrificed human lives (as far as we know) sending robots to do the exploratory work which honestly ounce for ounce in terms of cost is far cheaper and more apt to answer generally a lot more questions than one human setting foot on Martian soil would answer setting a goofy American flag there. Secondly, I think far more questions are likely better to be answered not through socially and politically engineered competitive ventures, where some have ventured so far as to say that there were hoaxes perpetrated by Governments with clear incentive of bolstering their image, relative to cooperative ventures that maybe a have a little less incentive in lying and more incentive in being honest to people about the role of the mission and exactly what its meant to serve in so far as goals. The bigger problem I see with respect to social divisions engineered less cooperatively, is that less brain power synergy is allocated in the collective sense to tackling problems. Divided use of resources can hinder progress.
Honestly it is for the better really. The space shuttle was a big showy piece of mass designed to shuttle people back to the Earth for the romance of ideas coupled to military industrial purposes that left much of its return to Earth cargo space unused and unwieldy at times and especially costly. Unused cargo space with space flight then as it is now at a premium should have long since axed such a program and amazingly it took some time to get this program decommissioned. All because the Shuttle supposed served to ideological romantic fantasies between purposing compromise that likely should have grounded it from the start. Did government or money provoke innovation? Or at least I might suggest that the writings of Contact suggest rightly what at times ails public sectors investments. Better to be done with governments that hand wring project interests in a myriad of ways in warping and twisting something into a behemoth and a costly one at that. Of course, Too many cooks at times spoil the stew.
I am sort of chuckling I wasn't paying attention to the Google doodle Sally Ride tribute to the first woman in space, or apparently so much the vessel used in getting her there. I had to stink on the vessel with some fair criticism.
Neil de Grasse Tyson suggests rekindling old Cold War-esque visions? Respectfully in one context for the popular science speaker Neil, a little logic is in order here. We may actually be coming out of a mini Cold War not going over hauling and rekindling a major one here. Secondly it would appear that big government spending is beginning to wind down for anti terrorism efforts, which could be the equivalent of a cold war fight for previous decades. Then I have seen recent suggestions that cuts in military spending have put the U.S. supposedly slated to loose air superiority. I am not certain I exactly believe this, but as to cuts in military spending, yes, it seems likely, and much of this could be in the area of DARPA appropriations and other like kind programs. We aren't clearly at war with the Russians and even if anti Westernism is a given at times potentially in the East, it would appear far more nuanced in language and neither so clearly bellicose. These goofy 'space races' if you will in my opinion shouldn't be the drivers of technological innovation, and anyways, Nasa has hinted a desire for pioneering exploration on a smaller level, in the way that I have heard others including myself directly suggest. Why not go nano? Why not save humanity all that extra money...anyways the Indian government apparently has found a way at slashing budgets and they haven't sacrificed human lives (as far as we know) sending robots to do the exploratory work which honestly ounce for ounce in terms of cost is far cheaper and more apt to answer generally a lot more questions than one human setting foot on Martian soil would answer setting a goofy American flag there. Secondly, I think far more questions are likely better to be answered not through socially and politically engineered competitive ventures, where some have ventured so far as to say that there were hoaxes perpetrated by Governments with clear incentive of bolstering their image, relative to cooperative ventures that maybe a have a little less incentive in lying and more incentive in being honest to people about the role of the mission and exactly what its meant to serve in so far as goals. The bigger problem I see with respect to social divisions engineered less cooperatively, is that less brain power synergy is allocated in the collective sense to tackling problems. Divided use of resources can hinder progress.
Honestly it is for the better really. The space shuttle was a big showy piece of mass designed to shuttle people back to the Earth for the romance of ideas coupled to military industrial purposes that left much of its return to Earth cargo space unused and unwieldy at times and especially costly. Unused cargo space with space flight then as it is now at a premium should have long since axed such a program and amazingly it took some time to get this program decommissioned. All because the Shuttle supposed served to ideological romantic fantasies between purposing compromise that likely should have grounded it from the start. Did government or money provoke innovation? Or at least I might suggest that the writings of Contact suggest rightly what at times ails public sectors investments. Better to be done with governments that hand wring project interests in a myriad of ways in warping and twisting something into a behemoth and a costly one at that. Of course, Too many cooks at times spoil the stew.
I am sort of chuckling I wasn't paying attention to the Google doodle Sally Ride tribute to the first woman in space, or apparently so much the vessel used in getting her there. I had to stink on the vessel with some fair criticism.
No comments:
Post a Comment