3 ms·
Arguably, there's no advantage to sending humans to space at all. Robots can do the work. But space exploration isn't (just) about science. It's about national
by dalbasal 8y ago
Arguably, there's no advantage to sending humans to space at all. Robots can do the work.
But space exploration isn't (just) about science. It's about nationalism, or post nation humanism, or our 100k yr tradition of exploring new frontiers..etc etc.
You can't judge this (or Apollo) based on strictly rational grounds. There's a human spirit element, and humans are still better at that than robots.
- duxup 8y agoI certainly can understand the PR type reasons. Still I can ask what more logical reasons there might otherwise be for doing a thing. A landing would seem significantly cheaper, maybe not in PR result, but a long term moon base seems unusually costly.... assuming that is what this actually ends up being. Obviously China wants to go beyond a "hey us too" type event.
- dwaltrip 8y agoHumans can vastly outperform robots at research in space. The main advantage of robots is lower cost and risk. It's ok if a robot blows up.
- sevensor 8y agoThis could be the start of a land rush in space, driven as you suggest by nationalism, but with a distinct economic aspect as well. Cislunar orbits are lucrative property. A moonbase is sort-of positioned to dominate them. (Maybe more in the imagination than in fact, but thinking about position in terms of velocity and gravity wells is hard.)
- jacobush 8y agoHave robots build a hydrolysis and refueling station on Earth first, and I'll believe they can do the work in space.