[RunItUpTheGut]

Just watched the whole thing live here and pics are about to come in...

http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/08/05/Watch...344216806/

I must say im pretty excited, and ive never seen so many nerds excited in the same room at one time, but it is pretty amazing. We can only explore as far as we want to go, and IMO you cant "waste" money on space exploration.

Pretty cool deal...

[RunItUpTheGut]

"Curiosity" has been bound for Mars since it hitched a ride aboard the United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket last November from Cape Canaveral.

After 352 million miles and $2.5 billion dollars, NASA's rover will finally land on the surface of the Red Planet. Or at least, NASA hopes it will land--with is payload of fancy gadgets for studying Mars once it arrives, a lot is riding on the success of a tricky maneuver.

Over a period of about seven minutes, the spacecraft containing Curiosity--actually a car-sized rover contained inside a larger craft--will decelerate from 13,200 miles per hour to zero in the space of 390 miles.

Assuming everything goes as planed, Curiosity will spend two years exploring Mars looking for signs that our nearest planetary neighbor has or ever had the ability to support and sustain life.

NASA TV will stream the landing between 11:30pm and 2:00 a.m. Eastern Sunday night to Monday morning. The actual landing is due to take place at 1:31 a.m.


Read more: http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/08/05/Watch...z22k2gqhEN

[Hoot Gibson]

Pretty exciting time, watching a room full of American scientists celebrate the NASA's last major accomplishment for the foreseeable future. It is a shame that the Obama administration is effectively shutting down our space exploration program. I wonder if the NASA brass will take this opportunity to push their global warming agenda.

Hopefully, the next administration will kick start the program and refocus it on space exploration and away from politics. But for now,

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[RunItUpTheGut]

It was exciting.
So many people have problems with spending money on space exploration and quite frankly, even as a conservative republican i have no problem with it.
Its amazing what all could be out there and those are some of the brightest men and women in the country sitting in one room making it all happen.

[Hoot Gibson]

It was exciting.
So many people have problems with spending money on space exploration and quite frankly, even as a conservative republican i have no problem with it.
Its amazing what all could be out there and those are some of the brightest men and women in the country sitting in one room making it all happen.

:Thumbs: We should be spending much more money on space exploration. The 10 year program that JFK launched to send men to the moon was the best investment in education that this country ever made at the federal level and it inspired thousands of bright American students to pursue excellence in science and engineering. Watching the Curiosity project team celebrate what is hopefully the beginning of the very successful end of a project that has been years in the making should make every American proud.

The very long term survival of the human species depends on our ability to colonize other planets and other star systems. We have the technology to land men and women on Mars and that project should be much further along and much better funded than it is. It is a shame that we do not already have a permanently manned outpost on the moon.

[OffTheHook]

^Couldn't have said it better myself.

[OffTheHook]

That's one sweet looking machine!

[judgementday]

The machine is cool and it is somewhat interesting as to what could be beyond our planet but I am one of those who doesn't think as much money should be spent on the space program.

I have a really hard time with millions of dollars being spent on a piece of equipment that is crashed into the moon or something they can never retrieve.

IMO, the money could be spent somewhere else.

[Hoot Gibson]

The machine is cool and it is somewhat interesting as to what could be beyond our planet but I am one of those who doesn't think as much money should be spent on the space program.

I have a really hard time with millions of dollars being spent on a piece of equipment that is crashed into the moon or something they can never retrieve.

IMO, the money could be spent somewhere else.

As this country withdraws from the space race, other countries are redoubling their efforts. If for no other reason than national security, we need to maintain our lead in space related technology. Think about how much damage China could do to this country by nudging a city block-sized asteroid so that its trajectory would land it on along one of our coasts. What would be the reasonable response to such a "natural disaster" that might kill millions and cripple our power grid?

It is really short sighted to see spending on space technology as a waste of money, IMO. If the technology does not already exist to turn a comet or asteroid into a man made disaster, it will in the not so distant future. Compared to what it would cost China or Russia to build a conventional military capability to threaten us, waging a surprise attack from space would be cheap.

[zaga_fan]

Have you read anything about the possibility of that? Or are you just speculating?

It seems too farfetched for me lol

[Hoot Gibson]

Have you read anything about the possibility of that? Or are you just speculating?

It seems too farfetched for me lol

It's a pretty common sci-fi theme but if you apply any force to a object moving in space, it will change its trajectory. Smaller, faster computers and better telescopes, including space based ones, allow astronomers to compute orbital paths faster and more accurately than ever before and that capability is quickly improving.

Applying a force or repeatedly applying force to an object whose orbit already brings it close to Earth on a periodic basis would theoretically allow scientists to guide the object toward a specific target on Earth. Even something as simple as painting half of an asteroid black or white would affect its orbit to some degree. Detonating a high explosive or tactical nuclear weapon would definitely alter an object's orbit by a measurable amount.

The key for some country to pull off such a feat would be to identify a large object that would pass within a few hundred or thousand miles of Earth with no intervention and apply a small, carefully calculated force well in advance of its next approach to Earth. Another application of force could be used to "fine tune" the object's trajectory on its final approach.

There would be no point in cataloging large objects whose orbits make them potential threats to our planet if scientists believed that we would be powerless to do anything to protect ourselves if threats are identified with enough advance notice. If science can provide the planet with some protection against objects with near earth orbits, then those same objects are potential weapons in the hands of other scientists.

Here is a description of NASA's Near Earth Object program. Please read it and imagine adapting the defensive strategies discussed into a secret weapons program.
I don't think that the idea is far-fetched at all. We may not face this threat in our lifetime but our children or grandchildren could easily see the threat become a reality.

[Strikeout King]

Let me ask you NERDS ( nicker: )something, would any of you live on Mars, if possible?

[Wildcatk23]

As this country withdraws from the space race, other countries are redoubling their efforts. If for no other reason than national security, we need to maintain our lead in space related technology. Think about how much damage China could do to this country by nudging a city block-sized asteroid so that its trajectory would land it on along one of our coasts. What would be the reasonable response to such a "natural disaster" that might kill millions and cripple our power grid?

It is really short sighted to see spending on space technology as a waste of money, IMO. If the technology does not already exist to turn a comet or asteroid into a man made disaster, it will in the not so distant future. Compared to what it would cost China or Russia to build a conventional military capability to threaten us, waging a surprise attack from space would be cheap.

I thought the budget was staying at 17.7 billion? The Cut was coming directly from the MARS exploration program?

[Hoot Gibson]

Let me ask you NERDS ( nicker: )something, would any of you live on Mars, if possible?

Only if I had too. Someday in the distant future, humans will either call other planets or moons home or we will cease to exist as a species. The colonization of the stars will either happen gradually over time or it will not happen at all and we will become extinct. The distances and times to reach destinations suitable for permanent colonies are too great for one or two generations to make the leap.

I would love to be among the first visitors to Mars. I think that scientists will very likely discover life on Mars and may even find fossils of more advanced life forms that lived there eons ago.

What is often overlooked in the debate about whether this country spends too much on space exploration is the value of byproducts of the research and development of the technologies employed in NASA's missions. How many of the common small electronic devices that most of us take for granted today would even exist if not for NASA? Does anybody think that computers and electronics would be as small, powerful, and inexpensive today had it not been for the need to miniaturize them so that they could be transported into space?

How many people who were born before the race to the moon was declared would have believed that a computer chip containing thousands of transistors and complete GPS capability would fit in an area smaller than a thumbnail? Or that the contents of the entire Encyclopedia Britannica could be crammed into a wireless telephone with plenty of room to spare and that we would live to see it happen?

I understand that it is much harder for those of you who arrived on this planet within the past 20 or 25 years have a hard time grasping the dizzying pace of technological advances that coincided with our race to the moon but give it a shot. As for being a nerd, I am proud that I have managed to keep pace with technology over such a long period to be called a nerd at my age. :lmao:

[Hoot Gibson]

I thought the budget was staying at 17.7 billion? The Cut was coming directly from the MARS exploration program?

It's not just the budget, it is the shift in priorities that threatens space exploration. NASA is becoming a big player in the so-called fight against global warming and one of its top stated priorities is now to make Muslim youngsters proud of their religion's contributions to math and science (which have been few and far between). To Obama, every federal dollar is earmarked for social engineering.

Arabs have made many significant contributions to math and science during history, but most of those contributions predate the founding of Islam.

Winning the race to the moon was a bipartisan effort. Obama's politicization of NASA is disgusting.

[INDENT]

NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/...z22ozchFaQ

[/INDENT]

[Strikeout King]

I hope I'm dead before then, their's no way I'd live on Mars

[Hoot Gibson]

I hope I'm dead before then, their's no way I'd live on Mars

Imagine tripling your vertical jump and playing basketball above the rim with very little effort. Or playing a football game where you could easily connect with a receiver on a 100-yard pass or kick a 90-yard field goal. Armchair quarterbacks could play the game like no earthbound professional athlete could dream of doing. Surely, Mars would at least make for an interesting vacation.

[Strikeout King]

That would be awesome but I hate hights

[OffTheHook]

^omg....lol!

[RunItUpTheGut]

The simple fact is one day, albeit, millions of years from now, the Sun will give out, and the Earth will no longer exist. If the human race is capable of doing so, it needs to be done so quickly IMO, but not millions of years, but probably a few thousand, the earth will be so overly populated and all the resources gone, that it will be impossible to sustain life anyways.

I be its those damn republicans just wanting to find another place to live so that they can keep burning holes in the o zone here, and get people off the green kick nicker:

[zaga_fan]

It's a pretty common sci-fi theme but if you apply any force to a object moving in space, it will change its trajectory. Smaller, faster computers and better telescopes, including space based ones, allow astronomers to compute orbital paths faster and more accurately than ever before and that capability is quickly improving.

Applying a force or repeatedly applying force to an object whose orbit already brings it close to Earth on a periodic basis would theoretically allow scientists to guide the object toward a specific target on Earth. Even something as simple as painting half of an asteroid black or white would affect its orbit to some degree. Detonating a high explosive or tactical nuclear weapon would definitely alter an object's orbit by a measurable amount.

The key for some country to pull off such a feat would be to identify a large object that would pass within a few hundred or thousand miles of Earth with no intervention and apply a small, carefully calculated force well in advance of its next approach to Earth. Another application of force could be used to "fine tune" the object's trajectory on its final approach.

There would be no point in cataloging large objects whose orbits make them potential threats to our planet if scientists believed that we would be powerless to do anything to protect ourselves if threats are identified with enough advance notice. If science can provide the planet with some protection against objects with near earth orbits, then those same objects are potential weapons in the hands of other scientists.

Here is a description of NASA's Near Earth Object program. Please read it and imagine adapting the defensive strategies discussed into a secret weapons program.
I don't think that the idea is far-fetched at all. We may not face this threat in our lifetime but our children or grandchildren could easily see the threat become a reality.

I'll give it a read.

Keep in mind that I haven't read the info before posting...
but it seems to me that knocking something away from the earth and knocking something onto the coast of the United States seem worlds apart.

With an object that big and moving that fast - if the math wasn't perfect you could knock something where you don't intend it to go (that pretty much goes without saying)

I know we can track an object's path, but to know how much force it would take to knock it into a specific target you would need to know it's weight.
The only way I would know to get that data would be to apply force and then see how it affects it and then go from there.
You're also dealing with objects that aren't perfectly spherical. Hitting it with a certain force isn't the only thing to think about. You would have to take into consideration where to apply that force.

My doubts are definitely reasonable ones, but I would imagine the greatest minds in the world are working on them right now. I would imagine there are countless factors that I've not even mentioned - that's just what I thought of at first.

I'll check out the link.
I'm sure it will be pretty interesting.

[Granny Bear]

I read an article years ago (late 90s) that was speculating that you could change an asteroid's projection with a magnifying glass. They theorized that if you could concentrate the sun's rays on to one side of the asteroid (like burning ants), it would change the shape and ultimately cause gas to spew from the heated side...thus changing the trajectory. They were studying how you could change an asteroid bound for earth, to miss the planet.

I don't know how you could control it toward a target, but anything is possible.

I'm also old enough to completely understand Hoot's point of view on technology. It astounds me how far we've come, comparatively recently, in technological issues. And, it effects everything from Mars exploration to every day life....anyone try frying an egg in a cast iron skillet???

Finally, I don't care if I could dunk the ball on a 100 ft goal, I wouldn't want to go to Mars...even for a vacation. But, I'm glad someone does!

[RunItUpTheGut]

^
Nothing beat Home (Harlan County) nicker:

[Granny Bear]

Even if you think it's pitiful; you've spoken my point of view.
I'm thankful that I was able to live my entire life in the mountains.

[nky]

http://www.nss.org/settlement/nasa/space...pace3.html

one of the better things the government could do to help the economy is space research and development.

'A payback of $7 or 8 for every $1 invested over a period of a decade or so has been calculated for the Apollo Program, which at its peak accounted for a mere 4 percent of the Federal budget. It has been further estimated that, because of the potential for technology transfer and spinoff industries, every $1 spent on basic research in space today will generate $40 worth of economic growth on Earth."


Not to mention advancements in technology(there's a reason we're a world leader), stronger Math and science in schools (need a real world practical ideas for kids), And besides it's really cool

[RunItUpTheGut]

Even if you think it's pitiful; you've spoken my point of view.
I'm thankful that I was able to live my entire life in the mountains.

In the deep dark hills of Eastern Mars....

[nky]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/09/us/nasa-te...?hpt=hp_t3

Then you get this The highs and lows

Moon lander prototype blows up in NASA test
(CNN) -- An unmanned moon lander under development crashed and blew up during an engine test Thursday afternoon at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, the space agency reported.
There were no injuries in the failed test of the lander, dubbed "Morpheus." The craft had gone through several previous exercises in which it was hung from a crane, but Thursday was to have been its first free flight.
Instead, the prototype rose a short distance, rolled over and slammed into the ground. The craft caught fire immediately and exploded about 30 seconds later.