Neil DGT on NASA's & Our Future

[Ghost]

Yay...the future...(sucks).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQWXc

Actually, it's not so much that the future sucks (it will, I'm sure) but what really sucks is the NOW that could have been/could be so much better than it is.

NASA used to lead the way, fund it so it can do so again--not like it's even a drop in the bucket compared to our defense spending...

[dirkterrell]

Don't get me started.

[Ghost]

Don't get me started.

Feel free to rant on...it's a topic that deserves it...

[dirkterrell]

Maybe later. I (and many others) have argued this sort of thing for so long with no apparent progress that I'm lately of the mind that only the inevitable pain of ignorance will enable my fellow citizens to see the value of pushing the boundaries of our knowledge of the universe around us.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Yay...the future...(sucks).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQWXc

Actually, it's not so much that the future sucks (it will, I'm sure) but what really sucks is the NOW that could have been/could be so much better than it is.

NASA used to lead the way, fund it so it can do so again--not like it's even a drop in the bucket compared to our defense spending...
I'm for funding both, obviously. But, one thing to remember, one of the few duties our Gov't is tasked with is to: "provide for the common defense", not: "explore space". ;) But, having worked both sides of that equation, there is a TON of cross-research that goes on, especially on the "aero" side I spent time working on, if not as much on the "space" side.

Get rid of all the parasites on welfare and food stamps, and all the other stupid social programs espoused by the libs and exploited by the generally worthless and the illegal immigrants, and we'd be WAY better able to fund NASA. ;)

[Ghost]

Maybe later. I (and many others) have argued this sort of thing for so long with no apparent progress that I'm lately of the mind that only the inevitable pain of ignorance will enable my fellow citizens to see the value of pushing the boundaries of our knowledge of the universe around us.

Yep. Depressing. And, unfortunately, "Ignorance is Bliss" is the ruling order of the day (cfr: Frank).

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Yep. Depressing. And, unfortunately, "Ignorance is Bliss" is the ruling order of the day (cfr: Frank).
Huh? I've actually done design work in both fields. You? Oh, that's right, you're an unemployed writer........ ;)

[Ghost]

Get rid of all the parasites on welfare and food stamps, and all the other stupid social programs espoused by the libs and exploited by the generally worthless and the illegal immigrants, and we'd be WAY better able to fund NASA. ;)


Huh? I've actually done design work in both fields. You? Oh, that's right, you're an unemployed writer........ ;)

And I'm still lightyears ahead of you. :king:

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

And I'm still lightyears ahead of you. :king:
How do you figure that? I mean, I've designed hardware that actually flew on the shuttle, and on Navy aircraft. And you're qualified.......how? I mean, not that I don't enjoy Road & Track etc., but seriously.....

[Zach929rr]

yup

[dirkterrell]

Entitlement:
Housing and Urban Development: 44.8b
Health and Human Services: 76.4b
Social Security: 11.7b
Total: 132.9b


Not sure what country's OMB data you're reading, but that's not the US. The FY2011 number for H&HS was $891 billion. Social Security was $786 billion. NASA is $17.6 billion. (Source (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=BUDGET&browsePath=Fiscal+Year+2013&isCollapsed=false&leafLevelBrowse=false&isDocumentResults=true&ycord=385), from the FY2013 budget document). Looking at your numbers again, it seems perhaps you misread the numbers. For example the $76.4 billion for H&HS is increase in the President's budget request for that department in FY 2013 over FT 2012 (see page 107 of the FY 2013 budget, first summary item).

[Zach929rr]

Yup, botched that one in a in-between doing homework.

[rforsythe]

How do you figure that? I mean, I've designed hardware that actually flew on the shuttle, and on Navy aircraft. And you're qualified.......how? I mean, not that I don't enjoy Road & Track etc., but seriously.....

And how does any of that qualify you to "espouse" on governmental programs any more than the next guy? Unless you've actually played politics at a grown-up level, you're pretty much on par with the rest of us little people. We all know you're an apparent badass with a CAD system, but that in no way, shape, or form means your opinion on government and its function carries any more weight than that of an unemployed writer, or anyone else.

Personally I disagree with many (not all) of your political views, and I'm a subject matter expert in my field. I can't draw cool mechanical parts to save my life, but then again you couldn't do what I do either so it's a wash there. In the end, neither of our opinions on the subject really mean a damn thing when it's all said and done or have relevance to our occupational skills; we're still just end-users of the system that has been created for us. Not to be all defeatist or pessimistic, but without real action outside of forum bitching, it's the truth.

[powers]

Last summer I spent 4 1/2 months of planning, 6400 miles in the air, 1500 miles in a car, 11 days in hotel rooms, a few days without sleep, a major hail storm, a diverted flight, and around $1500. - but I got to see STS-134 on the pad (APU failure delay) and STS-135 launch.

We were pretty much awake for 36 hours before STS-135 launched. Left DIA in the early AM, flew to Southern Florida, 5 hour drive, 8 hours at the Tilted kilt, 7 hours traveling from Orlando to Kennedy (40 miles), 3 hours waiting, ~30 seconds of flight before Atlantis hit cloud cover, and 4 hours back to Orlando.... and more time at the Tilted Kilt.

100% worth it in every way!!! I'll be honest, I teared up a little as Atlantis disappeared into the clouds. It also makes me sick to think how far we came and then gave it all up at this point in history.

Just go to Nasa's website and check out all the cool things they are still doing with a smaller budget. Give them the 1%!

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

And how does any of that qualify you to "espouse" on governmental programs any more than the next guy? Unless you've actually played politics at a grown-up level, you're pretty much on par with the rest of us little people. We all know you're an apparent badass with a CAD system, but that in no way, shape, or form means your opinion on government and its function carries any more weight than that of an unemployed writer, or anyone else.

Personally I disagree with many (not all) of your political views, and I'm a subject matter expert in my field. I can't draw cool mechanical parts to save my life, but then again you couldn't do what I do either so it's a wash there. In the end, neither of our opinions on the subject really mean a damn thing when it's all said and done or have relevance to our occupational skills; we're still just end-users of the system that has been created for us. Not to be all defeatist or pessimistic, but without real action outside of forum bitching, it's the truth.
Which is exactly why I don't question your IT skillset and have never made comment about those things. The huge difference is that, since I DID work in both fields for years, yes, I believe I have a much better understanding of what goes on in these industries, and why than the average sheeple. That's MY field of expertise, but I wouldn't expect a liberal to give that same due respect. ;)

Most of the technical advances you IT guys use on a daily basis and most else in our lives are derived from military programs. GPS? Check. PCB's? Check. IC's? Check. Jet engines? Check. 4-valve combustion chambers we all know and love? Check. I could go on and on.....

[dirkterrell]

100% worth it in every way!!! I'll be honest, I teared up a little as Atlantis disappeared into the clouds. It also makes me sick to think how far we came and then gave it all up at this point in history.


I saw 27 shuttle launches, mostly from the press site (STS-26 from the causeway and STS-29 from the VIP site), and every single one of them had the same effect on me. For those who never got to experience it, it was a very visceral experience, literally vibrating your insides from that distance. And because of the much greater dynamic response of the human eye over cameras, what you saw was quite different from what you saw on TV. The SRB flames are a deep, deep red, not the washed out yellow-white you see through a camera. This page shows some HDR photography of the last shuttle launch and gives you a better feeling for what I'm talking about. I wish they had done it in color:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/shuttle_station/features/sts-134_launch_photo-video.html

The HDR images are closer to what you saw with the eye.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

I saw 27 shuttle launches, mostly from the press site (STS-26 from the causeway and STS-29 from the VIP site), and every single one of them had the same effect on me. For those who never got to experience it, it was a very visceral experience, literally vibrating your insides from that distance. And because of the much greater dynamic response of the human eye over cameras, what you saw was quite different from what you saw on TV. The SRB flames are a deep, deep red, not the washed out yellow-white you see through a camera. This page shows some HDR photography of the last shuttle launch and gives you a better feeling for what I'm talking about. I wish they had done it in color:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/shuttle_station/features/sts-134_launch_photo-video.html

The HDR images are closer to what you saw with the eye.
Lucky dog! I would have LOVED to see a launch. Of note, I remember an interview with John Glenn, and he said the shuttle launch into orbit was FAR, far less brutal than the Saturn V. How cool would it have been to see one of those monsters launch! I'm sure it was way louder and more cisceral. I guess back in the day, they really weren't 100% sure what escape velocity really was, and so erred on the side of caution. In the intervening years, they must have a better handle on it, and so can dial back the G's on launch to be easier on the humans and the spaceframe, thus making it lighter as well. when I was at NASA, is when we lst the second shuttle. We watched the launch on a big screen with the raw NASA feed the civilians don't get. It's amazing seeing things like, oh, 17,500 mph! :) I think, what's more amazing, was how slow it was at first, and, the faster it went, the faster it accelerated.

I totally agree on the "washed-out" camera thing. When we had that fire down here, the sun shone thru the smoke in an amazing blood-red color.....which my camera washed out to the yellow you speak of. Drat!

[dirkterrell]

Most of the technical advances you IT guys use on a daily basis and most else in our lives are derived from military programs. GPS? Check. PCB's? Check. IC's? Check. Jet engines? Check. 4-valve combustion chambers we all know and love? Check. I could go on and on.....

And all of that derived from basic research in physics, so back off bitches. :D

People love to gripe about the military budget but there is definitely a lot of work that goes on under that budget umbrella that has very practical non-military applications. The military isn't the source of the budget problems we're having. Here is the spending on defense, human services (i.e. education, veterans benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, unemployment, etc), and science spending (i.e., NASA, National Science Foundation,etc) for giggles as a percentage of the budget going back to 1940:

http://www.boulder.swri.edu/%7Eterrell/images/usbudget_historical.png

(Source (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals), table 3.1)

So, Zach, federal domestic spending on human services first exceeded defense spending in the early 70's and is now several times larger. It's a shame you took your post down because I think it's an important lesson for everyone. Your numbers on "people spending" were an order of magnitude too small, and yet that didn't set off an alarm in your head. I think many people get the impression that we spend most of our money on defense and flying rockets. The data (from the OMB) show that we spend huge sums of money on people that dwarf those other two categories. We could eliminate NASA/NSF/etc altogether and give the money to the human services side, or we could quadruple NASA/NSF/etc's budget by taking from human services and it wouldn't make any difference to the immediate overall status of human resource issues in this country. But it would have tremendous effects on the status of human resource issues for our kids and grandkids.

We have to get past this bullshit that passes for political discourse in this country on both sides of the political aisle if we are to leave our descendants a better nation we have had. We have to understand issues and think for ourselves rather than offer blind allegiance to political parties or ideologies. We have to have an honest discussion about things like Medicare if we are to survive. Ignoring these issues and playing political point-scoring is going to lead to our demise, and when you're talking about things that grow geometrically, that demise comes quickly and devastatingly.

[dirkterrell]

Lucky dog! I would have LOVED to see a launch. Of note, I remember an interview with John Glenn, and he said the shuttle launch into orbit was FAR, far less brutal than the Saturn V.

Actually, the Saturn V launch acceleration profile wasn't all that much worse than the Shuttle. The Saturns lifted off pretty slowly while the Shuttle was up and out of there pretty fast. (I saw Apollo 17 launch but from significantly farther away, so I didn't get the visceral effects.) The Shuttle would hit 3 g's and the Saturn would hit 4 g's briefly. Here's the Saturn profile:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Apollo_8_acceleration.gif
and here is a Shuttle profile:

http://www.russellwestbrook.com/launch.jpg

It was the landings where the Shuttle was nicer. The Apollo capsules hit 6 g's or so on re-rentry, while the Shuttles stayed below 1.5 g's.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Actually, the Saturn V launch acceleration profile wasn't all that much worse than the Shuttle. The Saturns lifted off pretty slowly while the Shuttle was up and out of there pretty fast. (I saw Apollo 17 launch but from significantly farther away, so I didn't get the visceral effects.) The Shuttle would hit 3 g's and the Saturn would hit 4 g's briefly. Here's the Saturn profile:


and here is a Shuttle profile:



It was the landings where the Shuttle was nicer. The Apollo capsules hit 6 g's or so on re-rentry, while the Shuttles stayed below 1.5 g's.
Hey, what's 1G between friends! :) That's still a 33% increase though, right? And, if you look at the AVERAGE G's over the first stage of Saturn V, it looks more powerful and peaks at 4. I just remember what J. Glenn said about it. He said it definately made a lot more noise, pushed you into the seat a lot harder, and shook more. I'm sure the landing was a LOT better!

Thanks for the graph on welfare spending. That's a pretty significant set of numbers.....and I think pretty much validates my point. :)

Again, a veritable fountain on knowledge. Thank you kind sir! :)

[mathman1000]

Which is exactly why I don't question your IT skillset and have never made comment about those things. The huge difference is that, since I DID work in both fields for years, yes, I believe I have a much better understanding of what goes on in these industries, and why than the average sheeple. That's MY field of expertise, but I wouldn't expect a liberal to give that same due respect. ;)

Most of the technical advances you IT guys use on a daily basis and most else in our lives are derived from military programs. GPS? Check. PCB's? Check. IC's? Check. Jet engines? Check. 4-valve combustion chambers we all know and love? Check. I could go on and on.....


I think we're moments away from a penis size comparrison test here folks. Do I hear a challenge??

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

I think we're moments away from a penis size comparrison test here folks. Do I hear a challenge??
I wouldn't want to embarrass you guys. We all know Italians are second in penis size only to black men! :)

[Ghost]

I think we're moments away from a penis size comparrison test here folks. Do I hear a challenge??

I'm sure Frank's the expert on penises too.

[mathman1000]

I'm sure Frank's the expert on penises too.

If you're watching straight porn, but always stare at the mans penis, does that make you gay?

[#1Townie]

How do you figure that? I mean, I've designed hardware that actually flew on the shuttle, and on Navy aircraft. And you're qualified.......how? I mean, not that I don't enjoy Road & Track etc., but seriously.....

Oh yeah? My dicks bigger. How's that? Aren't you... or recently a out of engineer? Btw the stories of going to space came long before actually going. Writers help create the ideas for designing things. Ever look at things on startrek that we actually have today? That was made up by writers long before the technology was available.

[#1Townie]

I think we're moments away from a penis size comparrison test here folks. Do I hear a challenge??

Haha I was typing when you posted this!

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

If you're watching straight porn, but always stare at the mans penis, does that make you gay?
Why? Do you always find yourself staring at their penises and need affirmation of your sexual orientation?:p :)

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Oh yeah? My dicks bigger. How's that? Aren't you... or recently a out of engineer? Btw the stories of going to space came long before actually going. Writers help create the ideas for designing things. Ever look at things on startrek that we actually have today? That was made up by writers long before the technology was available.
No, actually, writers are usually just that: writers. The Engineering and Design people make it happen. And don't think that they aren't the guys who originally think all that up anyways, and the writers just find out about it and write about it. Pie-in-the-sky dreaming is worthless without the reality of the product.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Oh yeah? My dicks bigger. How's that?
I'm impressed.......too bad it's growing vertically out of your shoulders!:p :)

[Ghost]

If you're watching straight porn, but always stare at the mans penis, does that make you gay?

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6571/img0017bk5.jpg

[#1Townie]

No, actually, writers are usually just that: writers. The Engineering and Design people make it happen. And don't think that they aren't the guys who originally think all that up anyways, and the writers just find out about it and write about it. Pie-in-the-sky dreaming is worthless without the reality of the product.


Okay buddy you're right. Now go engineer me a sandwich.

[dirkterrell]

You have to zoom in on the graph I posted above to see what's happened to NASA/NSF/etc spending over the years. Here it is:

http://www.boulder.swri.edu/%7Eterrell/images/usbudget_science_historical.png

That's our investment in the future. We're riding the high of that big investment in the 60's but we are losing ground fast, and I tell you that as someone who is doing the sort of research that this represents. About 10 years ago I noticed a big increase in astronomy/astrophysics research coming out of China. Most of it back then was pretty crappy. I even told several journal editors that it was so consistently bad that I wasn't going to waste my time refereeing papers from China. But that has changed and now the quality of work is pretty good. They are beginning to see the rewards of their investments. You can see from the plot above that we are heading in the opposite direction, with funding dropping by almost 40% over the same period. If we continue on this path, it will come to haunt us down the road.

I always hear political types flapping their jaws about how we need more kids to go into science and engineering, and I always call bullshit on it. We have plenty of people trained to the highest levels in the sciences but a huge fraction of them aren't doing the work they trained to do because the funding situation has become so dire. I have sat on numerous review panels for NASA and NSF, reviewing proposals for funding in basic research. The typical funding rate in my field (astrophysics) is 20-25%. That is, we are given enough money to do 1 out of 4 or 5 proposals. My estimate is that 80-90% of them are well thought out proposals worth funding, things that would propel us forward in our basic knowledge (and hence, technologies down the road). We have the scientists. We just need to enable them.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

You have to zoom in on the graph I posted above to see what's happened to NASA/NSF/etc spending over the years. Here it is:



That's our investment in the future. We're riding the high of that big investment in the 60's but we are losing ground fast, and I tell you that as someone who is doing the sort of research that this represents. About 10 years ago I noticed a big increase in astronomy/astrophysics research coming out of China. Most of it back then was pretty crappy. I even told several journal editors that it was so consistently bad that I wasn't going to waste my time refereeing papers from China. But that has changed and now the quality of work is pretty good. They are beginning to see the rewards of their investments. You can see from the plot above that we are heading in the opposite direction, with funding dropping by almost 40% over the same period. If we continue on this path, it will come to haunt us down the road.

I always hear political types flapping their jaws about how we need more kids to go into science and engineering, and I always call bullshit on it. We have plenty of people trained to the highest levels in the sciences but a huge fraction of them aren't doing the work they trained to do because the funding situation has become so dire. I have sat on numerous review panels for NASA and NSF, reviewing proposals for funding in basic research. The typical funding rate in my field (astrophysics) is 20-25%. That is, we are given enough money to do 1 out of 4 or 5 proposals. My estimate is that 80-90% of them are well thought out proposals worth funding, things that would propel us forward in our basic knowledge (and hence, technologies down the road). We have the scientists. We just need to enable them.
When I go vote twice this year, I'll make sure to pencil you in for President the second time! :) Actually, I keed. I would seriously vote for you if you would only run, dammit!