Comment by eru

6 days ago

About the last point:

At this point in time, manned space exploration should come out of our entertainment budget. The same budget we use for football or olympic games.

I've often thought world leaders, upon election/selection, should get a free few orbits of the earth, to give them some perspective on the job they're about to undertake. Maybe offer the first one on Artemis II, a deferred one for the current US administration?

  • James May of Top Gear has flown with a U2 spy plane once [0][1]. When they reached to the edge of space, May said "If everybody could do that once, it would completely change the face of global politics, religion, education, everything".

    I can't agree more.

    Another thing I believe needs to be watched periodically is Pale Blue Dot [2].

    [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-COlil4tos

    [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtsZaDbxCgM

    [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wupToqz1e2g

    • I think you overestimate the effect that would have on the kind of people that most need that sort of humility.

      Look at what happened with William Shatner and Jeff Bezos when they came back from space. Shatner started to say something about what an impactful experience it was, but Bezos cut him off and was like “Woo! Partay!” and switched his attention to a magnum of champagne.

      6 replies →

    • "If everybody could do that once, it would completely change the face of global politics, religion, education, everything".

      You could have the same effect with LSD/Psilocybin for quite a bit less $$$$.

  • >I've often thought world leaders, upon election/selection, should get a free few orbits of the earth, to give them some perspective on the job they're about to undertake.

    Perhaps, but they should also get a few free orbits of the Earth *after* their term ends, on a launch system built by whichever contractor has given the most "campaign donations" to politicians. Surely they'll trust it to be safe, right?

    • I would also say give them a year of free vacations in various places. Say a maximum security prison in general population, any type of dark camps, hospitals, mental institutions and care homes.

      Give them the rest and recreation they need in these wonderful places.

  • Do you think sociopaths like current 'leader' would change significantly upon such experience? I unfortunately don't share such optimism.

    • "Houston, this is Golden One. I'm looking down on the big, beautiful, blue world. They love me down there. They all love me. I'm the greatest astronaut ever in the history of mankind. No one has ever orbited like this before."

      Yeah, you may be right.

      3 replies →

Based on some rough numbers, NASA's budget (around $24B) would be <4% of the US's total spending on entertainment, with a pretty great return in research, engineering and education to boot.

I also looked up the NSF's 2024 budget, which, at $9B, was much lower than I expected.

Hard disagree. some of our best technologies came about to solve problems related to space travel which we later found useful for mundane problems at home. gps, digital cameras immediately come to mind. The only other phenomena I can think of with similar effects on human progress is war... I'll take a space race thanks

  • Have you heard of opportunity costs?

    About war: in our universe we got the first digital computers because of military efforts during the second world war. However, without a war IBM and Konrad Zuse and others would have gotten there, too. With much less human suffering.

    • It's unlikely computing would have developed as quickly as it did without the Cold War. IBM's Sage and MIT's TX0 were both Cold War projects - one for a national early warning system, the other as an R&D platform for flight simulators.

      Most US investment in associated tech - including the Internet - came through DARPA.

      Not pointing this out because I support war, but to underline that the US doesn't have a culture of aggressive government investment in non-military R&D.

      NASA and the NSF both get pocket money in budget terms. And at its height Apollo was a Cold War PR battle with the USSR that happened to funnel a lot of of money to defence contractors.

      The original moon landings were not primarily motivated by science.

      4 replies →

    • I believe you are making the same argument: the GP prefers space race over war for large technological development at less or no human suffering.

      7 replies →

    • Firstly how is this related to opportunity costs. Secondly, no one said that to create digital computer you should start a war. It's just that war is already present, regardless of you invent digital computers or space travel.

    • You are serious? Up until this point I thought you're writing in jest, because all the things you mention are actually good ideas - including especially funding manned space flight from entertainment budget, because:

      1) It's better aligned with mission profile (inspirational, emotional, but not strictly necessary;

      2) There's much more of it to go than NASA gets;

      3) It would be a better use of that money than what it's currently used for.

      1 reply →

  • Broken window fallacy much? The amount of money spent on space race could have been spent somewhere else and you have no idea how to evaluate of this was a valid set of outcomes.

could the government rent out monopoly grants for televised football on the moon in exchange for sponsoring manned space exploration?

  • If the NFL were to somehow become involved, you can bet that they'd somehow manage to turn the financials around and get some of that sweet government money flowing in their direction, just like the dozens of taxpayer-funded or otherwise tax-advantaged stadium deals in the past 25 years that allow us to thank Big Football financially for gracing us with the presence of football teams.

    It is astounding to me how such a successful, rich group of companies manage to get subsidies in quantities that groups you'd think deserve or need it more, from valuable science endeavours to orphans dying of cancer, can only dream of.

  • Is there any research on the effect of apparent gravitational field strength on sports? I’d be willing to bet that rocketry and artillery takes account of 50mm/s2 difference at the equator. While the difference is obviously tiny, the margins in modern sports are also miniscule.

    Do Fijian rugby games see a 0.5% increase in longest drop goal distance?

    • I have no idea about the 0.5% increase in drop goal distance, but tongue-in-cheek, I would say only 0.5% as many attempted drop goals - given the Fijian team's emphasis on a ball-in-hand style of play instead of kicking the ball away.

      On a slightly related note, I always found the games played in Pretoria in South Africa fascinating. It's 1350 m above sea level, so kicks all go 10% to 15% further (my estimate) which makes quite a difference when there are players kicking penalties from over halfway even at sea level.

  • Which government? The moon doesn't belong to any one government.

    Though the US could just do it. Who's to stop them from selling these pieces of paper?

  • just wait until influencers start flying there. Not on SLS of course. Flyby on Starship cattle class - say 100 people (500 for LEO and "SFO to Shanghai" while for Moon - several days would require better accommodations, thus 100) - at $5M/launch, 10 launches (9 of them - tankers) - thus $50M 3 day roundtrip for 100 people. Half a mil per person.

No no no. Space will be colonized. At least our local solar system will see sustained human exploration and inhabitation. This requires physical presence. This is one of those black swans which seem silly when looking forward, but obvious in retrospective. The future belongs to those who do seemingly silly things today. The first industrialists often faced ridicule because they spent time designing machines instead of doing the task and making the immediate money. Set aside your need for immediate gratification. Hard things lead to good outcomes.