3 ms·

The crux of your argument is the ‘sheer cost’ and what people like Elon is arguing is that the cost is orders of magnitude higher than what it should be given 5

The crux of your argument is the ‘sheer cost’ and what people like Elon is arguing is that the cost is orders of magnitude higher than what it should be given 50 years of advancement. Would you be more open to exploring the Moon and Mars if it was 100x cheaper? Yes/no

Dalewyn 4y ago
If the costs make sense? Yes. Absolutely. The problem is human space exploration as it stands today makes no sense anymore compared to 50+ years ago. Exploring the unknown is a good thing, but that takes substantial time and resources. Sending live humans out into space is very, very, very, very expensive and challenges the absolute limits of our logistics. There must be a net positive return on all that investment for human space exploration to make any sense.
- bottlepalm 4y ago
  Fundamental R&D by the government is always about the long term. Longer than any business can stay solvent - that’s why the government does it. Think of this scenario. We give up on space exploration. 20 years from now China or some other county did not give up, they created economic ways to reach, build and sustain outposts on the Moon and Mars. They are now able to perform R&D in low gravity and environments with low EM interference. Possibly advancements in manufacturing, biotechnology, weapons, chemistry and physics. Those advancements give their industries an economic advantage on Earth. Maybe, maybe not, that’s the gamble we take when we stop pushing things forward in one sector and allow others to catch up and surpass us. We may not see the net return for 100 years but if it’s out there you probably want to get it first.
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    I'm not saying we should ditch R&D, that's ridiculous and stupid. I'm saying the SLS is a tremendous waste of time and money we could be spending on proper R&D instead. I'm saying we haven't gotten human space launch and habitation costs to be economical and practical enough (and/or found something immensely worthwhile out in the black) yet to be fantasizing about Moon bases.

Dalewyn 4y ago

If the costs make sense? Yes. Absolutely. The problem is human space exploration as it stands today makes no sense anymore compared to 50+ years ago. Exploring the unknown is a good thing, but that takes substantial time and resources. Sending live humans out into space is very, very, very, very expensive and challenges the absolute limits of our logistics. There must be a net positive return on all that investment for human space exploration to make any sense.

bottlepalm 4y ago
Fundamental R&D by the government is always about the long term. Longer than any business can stay solvent - that’s why the government does it. Think of this scenario. We give up on space exploration. 20 years from now China or some other county did not give up, they created economic ways to reach, build and sustain outposts on the Moon and Mars. They are now able to perform R&D in low gravity and environments with low EM interference. Possibly advancements in manufacturing, biotechnology, weapons, chemistry and physics. Those advancements give their industries an economic advantage on Earth. Maybe, maybe not, that’s the gamble we take when we stop pushing things forward in one sector and allow others to catch up and surpass us. We may not see the net return for 100 years but if it’s out there you probably want to get it first.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  I'm not saying we should ditch R&D, that's ridiculous and stupid. I'm saying the SLS is a tremendous waste of time and money we could be spending on proper R&D instead. I'm saying we haven't gotten human space launch and habitation costs to be economical and practical enough (and/or found something immensely worthwhile out in the black) yet to be fantasizing about Moon bases.