Artemis (NASA moon mission)

We are the Borg.
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

I figured this one could use its own thread. Seems pretty cool. I wonder how soon it will happen.



It says the video is 4K, if you have a display big enough for that.

https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/
Last edited by Anaxagoras on Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 81086
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Abdul Alhazred »

I'm very pessimistic about this actually happening.

We don't want a territorial disputes with India and China.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

Abdul Alhazred wrote:
Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:42 am
I'm very pessimistic about this actually happening.

We don't want a territorial disputes with India and China.
There may be reasons to be skeptical, but I don't think that's one of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty
The treaty explicitly forbids any government to claim a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet.[12] Article II of the treaty states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means." However, the state that launches a space object retains jurisdiction and control over that object.[13] The state is also liable for damages caused by its space object.[14]
It's a bit like Antarctica. No country is allowed to claim it, but any country is allowed to build, say, a research station there. (Actually, I was mistaken. Some countries do claim parts of Antarctica, but those claims are generally not recognized by other countries. In practice, it hasn't really been a problem so far. Maybe if someone discovers oil in Antarctica.)
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

As far as the naming of the mission (Artemis), the first NASA manned mission to the moon was Apollo, and in Greek mythology, Artemis was the twin sister of Apollo. She is also the goddess of the moon (as well as other things). So there's both a moon connection and an Apollo connection there.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 16255
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by sparks »

Megabucks.

Never happen.

But good on someone for having a job thinking about such drivel. :)
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

User avatar
ceptimus
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: UK

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by ceptimus »

I expect the next people to walk on the moon, maybe fifteen years from now, will be Chinese.

It's still only wealthy nations that can afford a project like this. Even though it would be cheaper now, in real terms, than it was in the 1960s, I don't think the USA taxpayers want to fund a return trip - what would be the point? Remember that in the early 70s most of the public had become bored with Apollo after the first two or three landings. If it hadn't been for the plot-twist rescue mission Apollo 13 became, they'd have been bored even earlier.

The Chinese will be doing it for their first time, it will show off their technical and economic success, and the Chinese taxpayers won't get to vote - that's why I expect the Chinese to be next on the moon.

That may trigger a race between China and the USA for a manned Mars mission. That will be interesting, and I hope I live long enough to see it begin.

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

Well they're basically saying, and it's an argument that makes sense to me, that to do a manned Mars mission we first should try something a little easier like this. Yeah, we've been to the moon before, but it was almost 50 years ago now and it would be a good way to test and improve the technology that we'll need to go to Mars.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
ceptimus
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: UK

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by ceptimus »

There's no real scientific point in sending people to Mars, or the moon either. Any conceivable science mission can be done much more cheaply with unmanned missions.

The main reason for manned missions is because the public are more interested and involved, but the public quickly become bored. Who cares about the ISS right now? Other than space and technology nerds, no one. Only way for the space agencies to get the public interested in the ISS now would be a disaster or emergency.

I suppose if the ISS were turned over to an entertainment company, they could generate some interest - we could go through various stages of space porn - could sustain interest for a few years if planned properly.

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

I actually agree with all that, but we're spending a huge amount of money on the military (including the new "space force" that Trump wanted) compared to NASA. In the last couple years, since 2017, the military budget was increased by about $100 billion. NASA's budget is only $21 billion total, and compared to 1966 it's a tiny part of the total federal budget. You could easily double or even triple NASA's budget for less than the increased amount of DoD spending. And still have more than enough left over to gradually increase the military budget in line with inflation.

So yes, given the current budget constraints of NASA, it might not be the best use of the money, but do we really need so many surface ships in the Navy or I don't know, but there's probably a lot of unnecessary stuff in the DoD budget. Ending our misadventures in the Middle East would also be a nice way to save money there.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Bananas?-Yes
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:42 am

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Bananas?-Yes »

I don't have that fancy language/vocabulary those head doctor folks have about the brain we ended up with after all that changing of this and that to get this version of human like we have now on this planet, so I'll have to just try that kitchen table style of explanation.

We have to be exploring something or somewhere, or both. This exploring style of the brain we have is partly what got us out of the caves, I think. Easier outdoor weather helped a whole bunch, too. But some human within the group is always that weird one that pisses off the others because that weird one is always turning over this or that rock to find out what is underneath and most of the time finding trouble which others may have to get her/him out of; BUT once in a while that turning over of the rock produces a surprise that draws all the other group members around in that circle and they go: What the heck is that?

And "that" turns out to be something that proves useful down the road.

True, after a bit that novelty of having discovered something usefully new wears off and that idiot rock-turning human goes back to being the source of jokes and all that.

Humans just have this thing of turning over rocks and finding all sorts of new stuff and then that new stuff seems to have benefit for all humans in a way that is super hard to measure. But I think if humans stop exploring then that is it for that group of animals on this planet and they'll be replaced by the next even more curious group of animals that have those weird ones in their group that turn over those rocks.
+ + + Bananas are group oriented. + + +

User avatar
ceptimus
Posts: 1260
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: UK

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by ceptimus »

I agree with that, but the costs of sending humans to Mars are so high (transporting all the food, water, air, and other life support stuff humans need) that we could turn over ten times or a hundred times more Martian rocks for the same money by sending robots instead of humans.

To put in in terms of the cave man analogy, if our prehistoric explorers could have turned over more rocks by using very long sticks rather than climbing up/down to the rocks and using their hands, wouldn't they have chosen the easier, faster, and safer method?

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26499
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Anaxagoras »

Use levers to turn over rocks, not bare hands. Good point. We are also a tool-using species and we should take full advantage of tools where tools can do the job better than human hands.

We haven't quite achieved that yet for all conceivable purposes because human hands are extremely fucking useful tools for so many things. But for many other purposes, there's a tool that's far better.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Bananas?-Yes
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 11:42 am

Re: Artemis (NASA moon mission)

Post by Bananas?-Yes »

I fully agree that we use machines as much as we can. No problem with that style of thinking.

But the ultimate goal has to be getting humans to be able to get to certain places and stay there for possibly economic reasons and so we need that research about living in conditions like zero gravity or little gravity and having to haul your own air and food and water and have an environment where sleep is possible and all that stuff which we pretty much take for granted on the surface of this planet.

That is the value of the ISS. And it is really amazing all the experiments they do and learn from.

One way to be able to better understand this and something that helps me with my own medical trouble. I'm in my late sixties and that is mighty good when we think about what we learn from the history papers that one thousand years ago the life expectancy was maybe the forties or fifties in some cases.

I mean, human history has been one long experiment. We learn that this or that is good for us and pass around that information and it is so many little everyday things we do that help us stay alive longer and longer and longer and that has got to be the same way we will eventually survive off the surface of this planet, whether it is in zero gravity situations, or whatever that gravity is on that Moon rock or that Mars place.

Anyway, I have it on good authority that the former gov fella of California did some sort of work on that Mars place. I saw footage of him on Mars and somebody stated an image is worth a thousand words and the more words there are the truer it must be, yes? But the governments are all pretending that stuff is all Hollywood stuff and ain't true. I suspect from what I am reading in this thread, you folks also believe that he didn't go there.
+ + + Bananas are group oriented. + + +