Failed Dreams

  • Thread starter Thread starter Condraz23
  • 11 comments
  • 831 views

Condraz23

(Banned)
Messages
215
Have we lost the will to explore and colonize space?

Back in the 1950's and 1960's, America was enthusiastically anticipating the future. Space travel was in and many wondered what it would be like to trade in their old automobile for a space ship, just like... “The Jetsons”. Architects envisioned what "future world" was to look like and began designing buildings with huge "caddy-like" tail-fins, pronounced shapes, and boomerang angles, just to name a few. Not to mention some that just designed the building like a flying saucer.

The general theme of the space age was fairly consistent and uniform...

"Man left his caves and grass huts and through hard work and ingenuity has built an amazing modern world. Tomorrow he will conquer any remaining problems and colonize the rest of the galaxy. However, for all his achievements and modern science, man will never lose touch with the natural world and his noble roots."

The space age was about the past, the present, and the future. But mostly the future. It was part of the popular culture, which reinforced a unified vision of a utopian future built on mankind's work and ingenuity.

The space age went out of fashion in the mid-1960's. It died when the story of our grand future died in the hearts of Americans.

“I sure have lost the will to colonize space. “Star Wars” and the first Space Shuttle launch set the tone of my youth, but as the years went by, it became increasingly obvious that the American space program was lost in a bureaucratic muddle. Not only was there no hope that I would ever get to Mars, but it became obvious that nobody else was going there, either. The Moon is farther away now than it was two generations ago.”

Why did we stop believing our own promises? For indeed, the death of our dreams and optimism also marked the death of the space age.

Today, most people have lost not just the will, but the desire. Not only the desire but even the interest. It's easy to think otherwise if all your friends are science fiction geeks but among the lay public there just isn't much interest in space exploration. Most people are satisfied hearing occasional bulletins from the space exploration front, that Pluto's not a planet after all, or that some comets are going to slam into Jupiter and release an big load of energy and we'll get it all on video.

Even those who grew up in the 1970's and 1980's are likely to have fond memories of burgers and milkshakes in space-age restaurants, bowling in themed bowling alleys, or seeing an aging depiction of the future in Disney's “Tomorrowland”.

The familiar boomerang arches, tapered columns, cantilevers, parabolas and curved domes are being bulldozed at an alarming rate. These buildings stand at an unfortunate juncture, not new enough to look modern, yet not old enough to be considered historically significant. As the best examples of the genre disappear, we are loosing not only part of our history, but also the last reminders of our shared dream of a shining future in a better world.

Ray Bradbury's story, “The Toynbee Convector”, is parable of man's need for a unified dream of a better future. The hero of the story says...

"I was raised in a time, in the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's, when people had stopped believing in themselves. I saw that disbelief, the reason that no longer gave itself reasons to survive, and was moved, depressed and angered by it... Everywhere was professional despair, intellectual ennui, political cynicism... The impossibility of change was the vogue... Bombarded by dark chaff and no bright seed, what sort of harvest was there for man in the latter part of the incredible twentieth century? Forgotten was the moon, forgotten the red landscapes of Mars, the great eye of Jupiter, the stunning rings of Saturn. Life has always been lying to ourselves... To gently lie and prove the lie true to weave dreams and put brains and ideas and flesh and the truly real beneath the dreams. Everything, finally, is a promise. What seems a lie is a ramshackle need, wishing to be born."

The general consensus seemed to be that even mudane things in life such as "food" was destined to break its surly bonds to nature, float free of agriculture, and hitch its future to technology. If not literally served in a pill, the meal of the future would be fabricated "in the laboratory out of a wide variety of materials", as one food historian predicted at the time, including not only algae and soybeans but also petrochemicals. Protein would be extracted directly from fuel oil.

Unfortunetly, the space age vision didn’t pan out. After the optimistic 1950's an 1960's, we headed right into the turmoil and revolution of the 1970's and 1980's. Are we still as optimistic about technology and its ability to change our lives as we were back then? Do we speak about “the future” with the reverence we used to?

I don’t think so. I wonder why. Where exactly did the vision of a shining future fall apart?
 
Well what would be the point? It would only lead to everything that wrong with the current planet, jus ton a much larger scale, space wars, although spectacular, would be incredibly terrifying and destructive..

I think we are better off stuck on good ol'Earth for now..
 
First of all, people had a notion of the future that was entirely unrealistic. They saw the moon landing and thought anything and everything was possible. Most people don't understand how simple something like landing on the moon is - especially when compared to a feat like landing on Mars. It's not necessarily as easy to construct a wonder-material that can withstand enough force to create a building as tall as the clouds as it is to go to the moon. It's not necessarily as easy to make a practical flying car, invent artificial gravity, or create a warp drive, as it is to go to the moon.

That's why it always kinda bugs me when people point to the moon landings as being the pinnacle of human achievement. We're doing more complicated things today in space travel than we did then, but it isn't as flashy - because there isn't as much at stake. Saying something like "We can put a man on the moon but we can't do blah blah blah" devalues other areas of scientific achievement while overvaluing space flight.

Don't get me wrong. I have a lot of respect for the folks that pulled off the moon landings. They did it with a remarkable success rate and in a very short time. But there are more difficult challenges in other areas of science. The cure for cancer, a mastery of gravity, efficient transportation in general, these things have proven far more difficult... and yet people in the 60's probalby expected that we'd have those problems licked by now.

There are other factors of course. People have been taught over the years to elevate the ending of the suffering of others to be the most noble endevour to undertake. Today our society is far more communist than it was in the 60's. Today, many people feel that any money spent on the space program would have been better used to feed a bum somewhere. They think that until there is no more suffering anywhere on earth, we can't explore beyond. What they don't realize is that such a proposition postpones human development infinitely, because the ending of human suffering is an impossible goal.

Today, we'd have trouble returning to the moon. We haven't done it in a long time, NASA has gotten more wasteful since the 60's, and we've lost the Saturn V type rocket capability due to lack of use.

But as much trouble as it would be to return to the moon, I'd say it's at least two orders of magnitude more difficult to put a man on mars and bring him back alive (that last part is the most important). If we really want to do that (which I think is not the case), then we should properly fund the manned space program (try prying the money away from people with pet causes). Instead, the public rightly asks "why" when they're faced with the prospect of a man on mars... can you answer them?

Instead, we should be (and are planning on) landing various probes/drills/excavating robots on the surface of mars near the most likely areas for liquid water. We need to explore mars subsurface because there is a good chance water exists... and where there's water there's a chance for life - at least fossilized life.

And that would be the biggest discovery in human history.
 
Let's not forget that space is absolutely 🤬 huge!!!. The moon is 200,000 miles away. Mars, at its closest, is 140,000,000 miles away from Earth. It takes a hell of a long time to get there, and a hell of a long time to get back. Want to build a colony? You can go ahead and build that colony, one load of building materials at a time. I'll stay here and watch TV.
 
Have we lost the will to explore and colonize space?

<snip>

Where exactly did the vision of a shining future fall apart?
No.

Plans for the moon.
FAA Sets Rules for Space Travel.

Really, when you look at it we haven't given up. It just isn't trendy to build things like flying saucer buldings anymore. I bet that if you took someone from the 50s and 60s and brought them forward to today and told them all of NASAs projects they would freak out. I mean, we have people that live in space on board a long-term space station. We are going to send people back to the moon with the intention of building a base there. No one ever gave up on going to Mars, but some of our partners ran low on money and so now NASA is footing a much larger bill than they planned and had to slow down to meet their budget. We have building-sized telescopes in the sky that can see so far away that they can almost see the beginning of the universe (supposedly).

Sure we don't live in the world of Arthur C Clarke's imaginings, but we are working towards those things. As Danoff pointed out it takes time and money, something which we have begun to wish to spend very little of.

Don't fear, the future is coming but it doesn't have to look the way we thought it would. Technology here on Earth will improve and it will then be adapted for space use, making things move along better every time.

Bee
Well what would be the point? It would only lead to everything that wrong with the current planet, jus ton a much larger scale, space wars, although spectacular, would be incredibly terrifying and destructive..

I think we are better off stuck on good ol'Earth for now..
If we all had that mindset I would be your neighbor.

I mean, why sail across the sea, traverse the mountains, or look over the horizon? The problems we have here will just be there too, right? If you want to wait for no war and no disease then you will never leave your neighborhood.

Let's not forget that space is absolutely 🤬 huge!!!. The moon is 200,000 miles away. Mars, at its closest, is 140,000,000 miles away from Earth. It takes a hell of a long time to get there, and a hell of a long time to get back. Want to build a colony? You can go ahead and build that colony, one load of building materials at a time. I'll stay here and watch TV.
And the oceans were vast and took forever to cross with nothing more than the wind to power your ship. The land was a massive continent that an expedition led by two men would have to explore for a long time. Those mountains are too high to get over.

Never look at the size of something and say it can't be done. I have the idea that the bigger it is the more challenging it will be, but that just makes it all the more fun.
 
the reason nothing is happening is they are still sending probes to planets to see what the surface of the planets are like and not only that it takes 10 years for a satelite to travel to mars, not only this another major problem with space travel is that the human body isnt designed to float around in zero gravity and this is why astonaughts go through years of training and even then there bodies have trouble with coping with gravity after they get back after say a 6 month mission because your muscles begin to deteriate because you arent using them and then theres the whole mental side to it because you in the middle of complete darkness with absolutely nothing there and some times this drives even proffesionals to madness
 
the reason nothing is happening is they are still sending probes to planets to see what the surface of the planets are like and not only that it takes 10 years for a satelite to travel to mars, not only this another major problem with space travel is that the human body isnt designed to float around in zero gravity and this is why astonaughts go through years of training and even then there bodies have trouble with coping with gravity after they get back after say a 6 month mission because your muscles begin to deteriate because you arent using them and then theres the whole mental side to it because you in the middle of complete darkness with absolutely nothing there and some times this drives even proffesionals to madness
Aaaand breathe....
 
Very nope - nearer 6-8 months.

Hell, Cassini-Huygens took less than 7 years to get to Saturn, and that's 17 times further away...

...and it didn't take the most direct route. It's possible to get a spacecraft to Saturn much faster than 7 years. 6-8 months is a good number for Mars though. It can take longer if you really want to save fuel, but not 10 years.
 
Back