Human Space Exploration Nearing End

[spacefire]

cause they won't be able to build a lander that's why. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[josh1943]

jon clarke your suggestions have little backing them up, show me how eu has larger scientific output. i cant even find a ranking.<br /><br />civil aerospace industry check http://www.justplanes.com/ to see who is selling more aircraft. <br /><br />economy lets see useing cia world fact book (fastest place i could find easyly compareable stats) <br /><br />USA<br />population 296 million<br />gdp purchasing power parity - $11.75 trillion (2004 est.) <br />gdp percap purchasing power parity - $40,100 (2004 est.)<br />unemployment 5.5% (2004 est.)<br />GDP - real growth rate 4.4% (2004 est.)<br /><br />EU <br />population 456 million<br />gdp purchasing power parity - $11.65 trillion (2004 est.) <br />gdp percap purchasing power parity - $26,900 (2004 est.) <br />unemployment 9.5% (2004 est.)<br />GDP - real growth rate 2.4% (2004 est.) <br /><br />china<br />population 1300 million<br />gdp purchasing power parity - $7.262 trillion (2004 est.) <br />gdp purchasing power parity - $5,600 (2004 est.)<br /><br />unemployment 9.8% in urban areas; substantial unemployment and underemployment in rural areas; an official Chinese journal estimated overall unemployment (including rural areas) for 2003 at 20% (2004 est.) <br />gdp growth 9.1% (official data) (2004 est.) <br /><br />india<br />population 1000 million<br />gdp purchasing power parity - $3.319 trillion (2004 est.)<br />gdp percap purchasing power parity - $3,100 (2004 est.) <br />unemployment 9.2% (2004 est.) <br />gdp growth 6.2% (2004 est.)<br /><br />india's population is growing much faster then china atm anyway. unemployment on both india and china i would guess is higher. <br /><br />source http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in.html<br /><br />and to the spacey part of this form i think unless we see something like we seen in the 60s with JFK and his moon goal we will keep going at the same

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">and anti-science sentiments are widespread (the boycott of GM food is a good exapmle).</font>/i><br /><br />I saw a statistic on CNN the other day that more Americans objected to teaching evolution in schools than teaching creation in schools. Sir Richard Dawkins cites polls suggesting 47% of the American electorate believe the entire universe was created just a few thousand years ago.<br /><br />Science is a tough sale everywhere it seems.</i>

 

[lunatio_gordin]

And there's nothing we can do about it.<br />except separate the smart people. like this. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" />

 

[JonClarke]

All countries have their economic problems. Take the US's problems with deficits and debt, not to mention it's dependence with cheap oil. None of this alters the fact that in aggregate the EU's GDP is larger than the US and has a higher scientific output.<br /><br />China might have a depression, or revolution. But there is no reason to suggest it is likely. So, on current growth rates China will exceed the US in GDP on a PPP basis inside 10 years.<br /><br />These are facts (at least, in so far as anything economic is facts). It also shows that, economically or technologically at least, there is no reason why the future of human spaceflight is dependent on the US.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Why not? The technology is nearly 50 years old.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[toymaker]

Unlike China or USA, EU is just a enhanced trading bloc of 25 seperate nations with various and often different national interests.Internal problems of the structure will ensure that it will never be a force comperable to China or USA on the world stage.<br /><br />"All countries have their economic problems. Take the US's problems with deficits and debt, not to mention it's dependence with cheap oil. None of this alters the fact that in aggregate the EU's GDP is larger than the US and has a higher scientific output. "<br />However EU is not a country <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> And I can assure that it won't be in forseable future.As to higher scientific output-European scientists are flocking en masse to the States...<br />

 

[JonClarke]

Your figures are near identical to mine except my Europe figures include Norway, which puses total GDP past the US. Norway is not formally part of the EU (yet), but is economically slow closely tied it might as well be.<br /><br />The Chinese growth rate of 9.1% and the Indian rate of 6.2% will lead to them overovertaking the US in less than 10 and 30 years, respectively.<br /><br />I never said the US will not be a major space explorer. I hope it will be. But to think that it will the dominant player in space in 50 years time ignores the likely economic future.<br /><br />Jon<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

EU scientists flocking to the US? Having recently attended a major European science conference I can assure you there are a lot of US scientists that have moved to Europe. And this is how it should be. Movement between nations and other entities is a good thing. As for pan European identity, Iwas surprised at how fast this is emerging. Give another 50 years and most people in Europe will thing of themselves as Europeans first. And this too is a good thing, especially for space flight.<br /><br />Jon<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[toymaker]

"As for pan European identity, Iwas surprised at how fast this is emerging. Give another 50 years and most people in Europe will thing of themselves as Europeans first"<br />As a member of EU country and EU "citizen" I can assure you that European identity is a myth, and you understimate cultural differencess.Poles have more in common with average Bush voter when it comes to religion and traditional values then any French person for example.I might add that the youth is mostly even more radical <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br />http://www.economist.com/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=1511812<br /><br />"Movement between nations and other entities is a good thing"<br />Which nations are more prone to terror attacks, those with large immigrant population or those who are unified ethnicly ? I am writing this because several EU countries will be faced with domestic terrorism due to their flawed ethnic policies.<br /><br />"EU scientists flocking to the US?"<br />Indeed they are(its a widely reckognised problem btw) :<br />http://www.time.com/time/europe/html/040119/brain/story.html<br />"How To Plug Europe's Brain Drain <br /> <br /> Europe's best and brightest scientific minds are leaving in droves for the U.S. — and billions of euros and thousands of jobs are at stake. "<br />http://www.the-scientist.com/news/20031215/02<br />EC to propose scientific visa for travel to and within EUBy Charles Q. Choi <br />NEW YORK—To attract researchers to Europe and keep talented scientists from leaving the continent, EU policy developers Thursday (December 11) outlined near- and long-term initiatives that enhance career development and ease of working anywhere in Europe.<br /><br />In January 2004, the European Commission (EC) plans to propose a

 

[toymaker]

"There might be a revolution in China or a depression. "<br />Hopefully revolution in China is rather unlikely, however depression is possible.The heavy use of nationalism in the country could however led the society thru hard times succesfully.

 

[lunatio_gordin]

I had always heard the opposite, that US scientists were moving to Europe so they could get rid of some of the stupid restrictions and political red tape they have placed on them here...

 

[drwayne]

The word scientist is perhaps a little too broad in this context. The motivations and movements of materials scientists can be very different from a biochemist.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">EU scientists flocking to the US? Having recently attended a major European science conference I can assure you there are a lot of US scientists that have moved to Europe. And this is how it should be. Movement between nations and other entities is a good thing.</font>/i><br /><br />This has become a problem for the US with (1) visa limitations on students coming to the US, (2) funding limitations for non-residents, and (3) tech markets growing in other countries (e.g., India and China).<br /><br />Ten years ago the US used to suck the most intelligent people out of other countries, typically as they came here to pursue graduate work, and then they would settle in the US. Graduate programs at US universities had a very large percentage of non-US students.<br /><br />Following 9-11 the US started restricting the number of students coming to graduate programs. Funding agencies (e.g., DARPA - a major funder in Computer Science programs) either restricted their funding to US citizens or simply classified their funding making it harder to fund graduate students from other countries. And the tech markets in other countries are starting to grow. Before, if you were in China or India and wanted to work in your chosen field, you often had to leave your country. This isn't the case anymore.<br /><br />The end result is that in some fields, it isn't so much that US citizens are leaving the US (which may also be a problem (e.g., in Physics)), but that the brains from around the world aren't coming to the US in numbers that they used to.</i>

 

[benb]

I agree that HSF is incredibly hindered by shuttle. SH=special housing U=21 or ba. The tyranny of Special housing battles. I myself am subjected to appalling subliminal subjegation which I attribute to NASA's HSF (H2 sixth sense) programs. When H2 Holdings Llc. took over my 620 apartment two years ago a bone- crushing protocol of mind blowing subliminal and physical attacks was initiated. <br /><br />If NASA ever wakes up to the fact that no one wants to have anything to do with their nonsense (which takes years and decades out of non-consensually conscribed Peoples' lives) they may be on to something. <br /><br />In Grants Pass, Oregon they subjegate "candidates" and expose them to unspeakable psychological cruelty and de facto sterilization and near-lobotomization. I find this reprehensible and with protections like Public Law 85-804 protecting all of NASA's "sub"contractors a person exposed to this atrocity (a total recall op city) has no way out or to fight back. <br /><br />A this point in time the Space Shuttle has a 100% chance of disaster. The spacecraft itself is fine; it's the people and the policies which doom it. <br /><br />Now with these assertions I am sure that some group of underground NASA-paid GP ethernet predators will chime in on this and embark on yet another day psycho-subliminal terror. <br /><br />"The Space be twin, the wicked lies"- Dave Matthews

 

[wvbraun]

"China might have a depression, or revolution. But there is no reason to suggest it is likely."<br /><br />Just as it wasn't likely that the Soviet Union would collapse in 1990....

 

[rubicondsrv]

I hope that that post is meant as a joke. If not please take your conspiricy theory garbage to phenomena.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"I hope that that post is meant as a joke."</font><br /><br />ru<font color="red">B</font>, rubi, rubi... what do you m<font color="red">E</font><font color="red">N</font> it makes perfect sense to me. nasa is well known for sending su<font color="red">B</font>im<font color="red">I</font>al message<font color="red">S</font>out th<font color="red">A</font> i<font color="red">N</font><font color="red">I</font>rate the weak min<font color="red">D</font>d and force them to do the b<font color="red">I</font>ding <font color="red">O</font> <font color="red">T</font>e space elite<font color="red">!</font>/safety_wrapper>

 

[wvbraun]

<img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

 

[toymaker]

"Just as it wasn't likely that the Soviet Union would collapse in 1990...."<br />I don't want to digress that much but :Well the difference is that the Russians never had an overwhelming majority against Ukrainians, Baltics, Kazakhs who wanted to go out...In China in terms of percentages the main ethnic group dominates completely.When you look at Russia, many Russians supported USSR etc.Don't understimate nationalism, the appeal of democracy is overated, especially to people who have chances of earning a good living...

 

[toymaker]

"The two are not opposed to each other. In fact one makes the other stronger than if alone."<br />Depends on society really, democracy has been blamed by many nationalists as reason for weakness in Russia(both within Russia and by political analysts in China). I think you would be surprised how many people would trade back authoritarian rule instead of democracy.

 

[toymaker]

"The two are not opposed to each other. In fact one makes the other stronger than if alone."<br />Depends on society really, democracy has been blamed by many nationalists as reason for weakness in Russia(both within Russia and by political analysts in China). I think you would be surprised how many people would back authoritarian rule instead of democracy.<br />

 

[wvbraun]

"Don't understimate nationalism, the appeal of democracy is overated, especially to people who have chances of earning a good living..."<br /><br />Maybe so. But free societies are more successful in the long run. China will either learn that lesson the hard way or it will adapt, i.e. become a free country. I certainly hope for the latter.<br /><br />

 

[JonClarke]

The USSR and China are quite different cases culturally, politically, and economically. people have been predicting the collapse and disintergration of China for at least 40 years. There is a strong element of wishful thinking in this, I suggest. China has gone through many cycles of fragmentation in its 4000 year history, but they have generally happened at a period of dynastic decline and loss of power actual as wwell as relative power. This is not the present situation.<br /><br />Given the enormous economic and social liberalisations that have happened in China over the last 30 years (since the end of the cultural revolution) I suspect that they will manage the transition well.<br /><br />What is more unclear (trying to bring this back to the point) is what this means for Chinese human spaceflight. What is unclear to me is whether the likely Chinese century will be accompanied by a strong committment to spaceflight beyond token human missions and probes beyond LEO. Unlike the US or Russia, there is not a clear long term committment to human spaceflight in China, at least not yet. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[toymaker]

"Maybe so. But free societies are more successful in the long run. China will either learn that lesson the hard way or it will adapt, i.e. become a free country. I certainly hope for the latter. "<br />That sounds a bit like Marxist dogma <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br />I do not think China is enslaved country, only authoritarian.As to "they are better in the long run", that's not a rule of nature.Different political systems have different merits and flaws.It's actually easier to modernise a country under authoritarian system, while its easier to control corruption in democracy with free press.<br /><br />"What is more unclear (trying to bring this back to the point) is what this means for Chinese human spaceflight. What is unclear to me is whether the likely Chinese century will be accompanied by a strong committment to spaceflight beyond token human missions and probes beyond LEO. Unlike the US or Russia, there is not a clear long term committment to human spaceflight in China, at least not yet."<br />I would certainly hope that there would be.However from my point view, Chinese leadership can be described in one word: "pragmatic".They will support human space exploration if it will give any short or long term benefit.<br />I do think a small resarch space station is within China's grasp.However I believe they will restrict themselfs to learning experience, and potentially beneficial missions( years ago there was an article on spacedaily about China's purchase of solar power sattelites plans IIRC ).<br />If Euro/Russia plans for Klipper will succeed and other countries will gain access to space, China will mobilize its resources for quick expansion using knowledge and experience it gathered.<br />