THE STUDY JULY 20, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The Atlantis space shuttle’s planned landing tomorrow marks the historic end of the Space Shuttle program. But it’s also another significant anniversary in space exploration: 42 years ago today, humans first walked on the Moon. Apollo 11 left earth on July 16, 1969, landing on the Moon’s surface on July 20 and returning to Earth four days after that. The final manned mission in the Apollo space program, Apollo 17, was completed in December 1972, making Eugene Cernan the last man to walk on the Moon to date. With the retirement of NASA’s Space Shuttle program, that will likely be true for the foreseeable future.
This could be a mistake, argues Paul D. Spudis in “The Case for Renewed Human Exploration of the Moon.” In his study, Spudis argues that Moon exploration could reinvigorate the space program and provide a starting point for future research missions. Spudis suggests using the Moon as a testing ground for new technologies and strategies. He says the Moon’s geological make-up can teach us more about other planets and Earth’s own history. And since it has no atmosphere and a dark sky, the Moon could serve as a better home base for astronomical observation. Furthermore, Spudis specifically makes the case for human exploration, rather than just unmanned missions. As an example, he argues that trained scientists can give context to the evidence they collect, whereas robots just pick rock samples at random. He writes, “[Robots] cannot undertake scientific study, make new observations and let these observations guide subsequent work and iteratively apply the lessons learned to an evolving conceptual paradigm […] Although significant gathering of data can be done with robots, conducting science in space requires scientists.” While Spudis is realistic about the political and financial hurdles, he maintains there’s only one way to prevent NASA’s demise: “We must return people to the Moon.”
6 comments
The question is not "will a manned moon base provide any scientific value whatsoever", I have no doubt that it would. But as a scientist, if I were given several hundred billion dollars (and that is what it will cost) to spend on research there is no way I would blow it on a moon base. It would be an obscenely bad return on investment. Same goes for a manned Mars mission.
- WillPastor
July 20, 2011 at 7:12pm
WillPastor nails it. There are more than sufficient problems to be solved right here on earth to absorb any and all funds for research we can muster. I know astronomers and planetologists and all think it is somehow key to the human spirit that we learn more about the moon, and use it for telescopes to explore ever deeper into the universe, but there will be plenty of time in the future for those things - provided we have a future. right now, we need spend our dollars and minds on keeping the human species viable so we get those chances. Ditto, BTW, on renewed emphasis on high-energy physics. Great stuff. Completely fails the cost/benefit test.
- IowaBeauty
July 20, 2011 at 8:12pm
The space shuttle mission was an attempt to make space flight 'routine'. In 30 years, it flew only 134 times, with two of those times ending in a disaster killing all aboard and destroying the shuttle. It cost 196 billion (which come to think of it is not much these days, less than 7B/year). Having grown up in the 50s and 60s, I am all for space flight and would love to see a manned Mars trip sometime before I die. But, I think it is time to let private enterprises take over. If it is possible to make space flight cost-effective, they will do so. Or maybe the Chinese will invent a new fuel - I won't begrudge them that! I would like the science dollars to be directed more at exploring deep ocean. The technical problems are just as tricky, and we do know that there is life down there.
- polijunky
July 21, 2011 at 8:51am
The Space Shuttle was not only supposed to make space flight routine, it was also supposed to make it cheap. It failed. We need both NASA and private industry to focus on getting into orbit cheaply. Once we can do that, everything else will follow.
- Attrill
July 21, 2011 at 2:01pm
Maybe men and/or women employed by NASA could return to the moon to form scientific outposts or engineering facilities. Future space travel could then begin and end on the moon because it's cheaper to construct and maintain space travel machines within a gravity free environment. Isaac Newton could conjure up the idea of gravity at no cost by looking upward towards the sky.
- Doug12
July 21, 2011 at 4:13pm
As soon as the Chinese announce a program to colonize the moon, we'll suddenly find both the will and the money to start a huge moon colonization program of our own.
- DAVIDDREIER@EARTHLINK.NET-old
July 22, 2011 at 12:21pm