When it's noon on the moon what time is it here?

[cosmolinguist]

Today is the 35th anniversary of Apollo 11 landing on the moon.

I sometimes look at space.com anyway, so figured I'd probably find something intesrting on the subject today. What I found said things like 'On January 14, 2004, President George W. Bush announced that America was going to return to the moon and expand the "human presence across the solar system ".' Which sounds a bit ominous to me, considering America's recent record at expanding their presence in other places.

When I got to The Guardian today, I discovered that the moon landing was, unsurprisingly, their 'from the archive' story for the day. So I read that. I had to smile because it starts with 'Men are on the moon.' I like that. And, really, what else is there to say about it?

It's nice to read about, but ever since I was little I've wondered what it would be like to have seen it on TV, to know that it was really happening, now.

My dad told me once when I was quite young that he looked at the moon that night and thought about the people up there, walking around and doing things. My young self was amazed at this and could not imagine such a thing; my 22-year-old self is little different really. People first landed on the moon 12 years before I was born; people last landed on the moon 9 years before I was born.

It always makes me sad that, after we got to the moon, we seemed to lose interest. The Vikings and Voyagers and new things like Cassini and the Martian landers are great. I love the Hubble Telescope. And I think the International Space Station is a great endeavour. But still, it's not like a president saying 'By the end of this decade we shall land a man on the surface of the moon and bring him safely back again' and have that happen. And then going back again, and again, with an amazing record of success (okay, there's Apollo 13, but even getting those people back in one piece--well, three pieces, as there were three of them--was quite an achievement).

Despite what Bush may say now, I am not impresed, and I am not getting my hopes up. NASA, after all, is planning to let the Hubble Space Telescope die early because it doesn't want to send people out to fix it after the Columbia accident. I don't mean to sound as if I don't care about the people who died there, but it drives me crazy that what little progress we make in space exploration recently can be halted by such a thing.

We've gotten complacent about these shuttle missions; they're mentioned, if at all, as an afterthought to the evening news. We've gotten spoiled by NASA's excellent record of success in both accomplishing its missions and keeping its people safe. Eventually something will go wrong, and that's horrible, but it's no reason to stop trying altogether. I know the same thing happened after Challenger, and I can understand it, but still ... Losing those astronauts was tragic enough; it'd be much worse if the US also lost its manned space program.

It's especially a shame to see Hubble meet an untimely end over this. I remember the launch of that telescope, the grandiose language of hopes and excitement. And while most of us think of it, if at all, as a source of pretty pictures (though it's that, too!) it's also allowed scientists to find out all kinds of stuff about our universe that Earth-bound telescopes can't, and it would be a shame to lose that.

Sorry; I didn't mean for this rant to go on so long. Done now.

Comments

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

I'm not impressed, either. Bush is only saying this stuff about space to deflect people's attentions away from the shit he's doing elsewhere. I'm sure he has no plans for space other than to get his friends rich from stripping everything useful out of the solar system.

NASA's really starting to tick me off with its new "let everything decay" policy. What are they, stupid? It'll cost far more to replace Hubble in the future than it will to maintain it now and upgrade it later.

I get far more excited about the X-Prize these days than anything NASA's doing.

[cosmolinguist]

Yeah, the X Prize is way cool. Privatization seems inevitable. Still, I miss the presidential-mandate type stuff ... and also the devotion to science. M&Ms flying in zero-g is okay, but that's not what I'm really longing for.

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

Zero-G porn is where the money is. :p

[cosmolinguist]

Ooo, wanna try it sometime?

I can hope, can't I?

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

I'll start saving up for my shuttle ticket now.

Ooh, we can start the Orbital Club. :D

[cosmolinguist]

On an only-slightly-related note, did you know that I apparently have a thing for big, hairy, cute guys even though I don't know what they look like when I start to like them? (Well, except for the one boyfriend I went to high school with and was friends with for a long time before we started dating; I know what he looked like. Still, he started this whole pattern!) Just warning you; I'd look out if I were you.

Actually, if I were you, I'd come to Manchester. Yep. It's a cool place, really. :-)

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I don't think I can make it over there before you come back. :(

But since I know you're going to wind up there again, I'll make plans to visit Manchester next time you'll be there. :)

[stealthmunchkin.livejournal.com]

Since we don't know how long she'll be over here, you might be surprised ;)

[cosmolinguist]

You're just saying that because you're not ever going to let me leave!

[gentleman-lech.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but I get the impression you don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. :)

[strangeidea.livejournal.com]

Which sounds a bit ominous to me, considering America's recent record at expanding their presence in other places.

Them Matians and their Weapons Of Mass Destruction! I know they've got 'em, I saw it in Plan Nine From Outer Space!

Alfred Hitchcock will, of course, be found in the spider hole (spider crater?).

[cosmolinguist]

Let's hope Bush's administration better at proving the existence of Martians--with or without weapons!--than they've been at proving the existence of certain other WMDs.

[strangeidea.livejournal.com]

Ha! Let's see that nosy UN try to stick their inspectors all the way up there!

[ted-souleater.livejournal.com]

The problem is, without the Soviet Union as competition, there's nothing to drive the US into space exploration now, other than curiosity as to "what's out there." The Apollo missions came about because we wanted to beat the Soviets to the moon, and it was easy to find funding for NASA in those days, because space exploration was a national security issue. But today, space exploration is just a curiosity, and funding has essentially dried up. The missions that sent robots to Mars (that landed earlier this year) were all done on the cheap.....for a couple hundred million dollars. There's more support among conservatives for space exploration than there is among liberals (who argue that NASA's money would be better used to upgrade city schools, provide better health care, etc.).

Liberal and conservative aside (I'm somewhere in the middle), I've always supported space exploration cuz I really want to know what's out there. One thing we know is that where there's liquid water on earth, there's life. It isn't far-fetched to think the same rule applies to other places in the universe (although our solar system doesn't look too promising, in terms of extra-terrestrial water).

[cosmolinguist]

Actually, evidence of water was found on Mars last month. But even so, that doesn't necessarily mean there's anything more interesting as far as life goes ... though if there's sufficient water there to sustain a human colony, that sort of thing might provide the impetus that, as you say, has been sorely lacking since the 'Space Race' days.

Capitalism won, so now we can go about exploiting the solar system. :-)

Mars wouldn't be too nice even with water--the lack of atmosphere, for one, might be a bit of a problem--but finding it's not totally inhospitable to our sort of life is still encouraging, whether we end up living there or not (and while colonies are rather fanciful at this point, it'd be nice to at least arrange a visit some time sooner ... )

Current mood: pedantic

[czircon.livejournal.com]

Mars has an atmosphere; it's just very thin.

Re: Current mood: pedantic

[angel-thane.livejournal.com]

They actually think they may have found ammonia in it. Ammonia = life.

Re: Current mood: pedantic

[kwakhed.livejournal.com]

ammonia = NH₃

there are other processes that could produce ammonia other than metabolic ones. ammonia is also found in comets. if we found a good size molecule that looks like it was synthesized there, like a protein or something, then i'd get excited.

Re: Current mood: pedantic

[cosmolinguist]

Of course. But it's negligible, for human purposes.

[ted-souleater.livejournal.com]

I don't think they've found any *hard* evidence of existing water on Mars......as far as I know, the potential ice that they have seen is most likely frozen carbon dioxide.

Personally, from what I've read, I think Mars is a big dead rock....no volcanic activity, no water, no nothing. Whether it was once alive is another question....and we probably won't know until we actually land scientists there and study it. NASA is under a lot of pressure to justify itself, so they tend to over-hype their findings in the hope that their budget will be increased. So anything that *might* indicate water on Mars tends to get a lot of fanfare.....

I'd be surprised if either Kerry or Bush *mentions* space exploration between now and the election. Bush talked about it for a couple days back in January, got ridiculed, and no one's said a word about it since.

[cosmolinguist]

For all that's said about HASA's budget, their ability to make these Mars rovers and interplanetary probes with relatively little money still impresses me. They send things the size of skateboards into space that give us all kinds of cool data about other planets. And I'll not begrudge them their few hundred million dollars per mission ... especially when we're fighting an extremely expensive war right now, thanks to the conservatives. :-)

[ted-souleater.livejournal.com]

The money is there, we just need to redirect it. The US spends more money on its military than the rest of the world combined. You're not going to get NASA money by raising taxes or cutting social programs, you'll only get it by redirecting money from the military, which is practically impossible, unofortunately. The pentagon sucks up *so much money* it's mind-boggling.

[cosmolinguist]

The military getting less money would be good. Space exploration getting more money would be good. One causing the other would be doubleplusgood. :-) Too bad only about three people in the country seem to think so.

[ted-souleater.livejournal.com]

Yeah, space development (satellites, etc.) is always going to be an issue, particularly in terms of how it impacts the economy on the ground.

you've touched on a favorite subject ...

[salaryman.livejournal.com]

I believe putting humans on the moon is our greatest peacetime achievement, and have, for about fifteen years, always celebrated Moon Day, sometimes just remembering that this is the day when it happened, and other times having parties.

I think it should be a public holiday, where we pause, and look up, and consider what we can do when we all pull together.

During childhood a picture of Buzz Aldrin graced my bedroom wall, the one of Buzz standing on the moon, Neil reflected in his gold-plated visor, taking the photo.

If you haven't yet seen it yet, I highly recommend the documentary "For All Mankind", which is made up of footage rarely seen, much of it taken by the astronauts themselves en route. It's a stunning documenary and a great way to celebrate moon day.

happy moon day!

http://www.wherewereyou.com/frames/intl.html

Re: you've touched on a favorite subject ...

[cosmolinguist]

Having parties for Moon Day is a great idea. :-)

And the link you shared is cool too. Thanks.

[angel-thane.livejournal.com]

Bush did say he wanted to land on Mars, but the public didn't seem to care for it.

The X prize will change everything though. It will force NASA to start doing more for less, it will repopularize space. Mars by 2030.

[kratkrat.livejournal.com]

People first landed on the moon 22 years before I was born

Gosh... you're even younger than I thought... :-)

[cosmolinguist]

I meant 12! You know that!

[kratkrat.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I know... but it was more fun to be a dork about it. [CHUCKLE]

[cosmolinguist]

Yeah, we like dorks around here.

The 1 is right next to the 2, though! So easy to miss! I'm not really as good a touch-typist as I appear. :-)

[kwakhed.livejournal.com]

have you read zubrin's "the case for mars"? it details a well-planned, less expensive alternative for getting humans to the surface of the red planet. granted, once the crew is there, they have to stay there for 18 months. but that's a much better length of time for conducting science than a few days.

happy moon day to you -- just wish it was more promising.

[cosmolinguist]

I haven't read it but I do know that a trip to Mars would not be a quick one, what with how long it takes to get there (barring massively great new technology) and how long they'd have to stay until the planets line up for a good trip back.

Thanks for the picture. :-) One of yours?

[kwakhed.livejournal.com]

yep, you're welcome... mostly the sea of tranquility, so i thought it was apropos. :-) neil and buzz's old neighborhood would be near top-center.

[davmoo.livejournal.com]

The prickish part of my personality started to post a reply that said "happy moon day" over a picture of my butt. Thankfully, that urge has passed.

Seriously, the winding down of the moon missions wasn't so much because of lack of interest as it was because of seemingly more pressing issues. In the early 70s the economy was having problems, there was the first energy crisis, there was the Viet Nam War. So on and so forth. President Nixon and congress decided, right or wrong, that those issues were more pressing than further moon exploration. Plus, as someone else has already pointed out, we had already beaten them damned Ruskies, so that encouragement was gone.

As for Bush and his space program, he talks a great talk. And so does his ass-kissers puppets in congress. But since we've seen absolutely no additional funding for the program, talk is all it is. No bucks, no Buck Rogers. As is typical of his administration, we can find an extra hundred billion to go bomb the shit out of a foreign country for invisible weapons of mass destruction, but we can't find an extra $5 for science.

[cosmolinguist]

I know it was more than lack of interest; I didn't mean to imply that that was the single cause--or indeed, that there is a single cause. In the version of 2001: A Space Odyssey I first read, there was an afterword by the author, saying that he's often asked if 2001 will happen by 2001. He said no, though it'd seemed a reasonable guess (besides being a cool futuristic year for a title, I imagine) at the time, but that was in the mid-60s, before our massive involvement in Vietnam and other things that could not have been forseen at the time the book was written.

I know nothing more will happen with government-funded space exploration in this country, and we'll be lucky if we can keep it at its current, meager levels. It comes as no surprise to me. But that doesn't mean I can't lament the fact. :-)