I think if a solar system similar to our developed in that nebula there would be significant amounts of light but I think the way the planets clear out their neighborhoods would work just the same. The amount of dust and nebular gases would differ greatly from in the solar system and outside the solar system.

Lot of really dark stuff there.

There's nothing I'd rather have the government spend more money on than science and exploration. ESO is a first-rate facility and if I was European I'd be proud of it. Heck I'm proud of it even though I'm not European.

Are you European muteheretic? Any way Jim said it best - There's nothing I'd rather have the government spend more money on than science and exploration (I would personally also add education to that list).

Three against one.

LOL strength in numbers.

Seriously??! The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost in the trillions of dollars. The entire U.S. economy is in the trillions of dollars. NASA has never had that kind of money. They have never had more than 5% of the total federal budget. When NASA did have 4.41% of the federal budget it was 1966 at the height of the Apollo project (you know, sending men to the moon for the first time) and they employed 34,000 NASA employees and 375,000 employees of industrial and university contractors. More than 400,000 men and women were employed in America helping to realize a dream unmatched by any other.

You have to be completely crazy to think that because of NASA our children will be worse off. That is insane Herman C, it's simply not the case. Our children, grandchildren, and their children will all be better off because of the efforts of the space program. If everyone ends up in cardboard shanty towns it will NOT be NASA's fault.

Yeah Herman, I guess we should just throw all our money and resources at world hunger, housing the homeless, combating diseases around the world, etc. etc. etc. Oh! Wait a minute! We already do all those things! Try pointing the fingure elsewhere as to why the U.S. is trillions of dollars in debt! I'll give you a little hint: IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF NASA!!

I agree although my attitude isn't quite as extreme as yours. Space exploration and eventually colonization of other planets is the only way to ensure the long term existence of our species. We can't live on this one forever.

seven,

says who??

why is it we cannot take (mine for or otherwise) what it is we need from other planets and bring it here? what makes you think we will find a habitable (by humans and our animals) planet anywhere close enough to earth to make colonization a possibility? how many light years can man travel to get to a possible solar system set up perfectly for life as we know it? if we do find one, what are the odds that the life there will be looking for another place for it's inhabitants? what makes us think they will invite us to live with them? we cant even live with ourselves here!

our solar system appears to be perfectly set up for life to exist on this planet only. the sun, the gas giants, everything in place for life here, not elsewhere.

im all for exploration, but let's at least be reasonable about what the possibilities truly are...if we do find (by some miracle) another planet ideally tuned for life as we know it, doesnt it make sense that life would have evolved there? if so, the likelyhood of that planet being in similar straits as ours would be more than a distinct possibility, no? we cant get along with other humans, likely they cant get along with themselves either and we would be asking for them to accept us, or will we battle for the planet?

@jim, i read one comment that seemed anti-nasa, but none that are anti-science. perhaps you are reading too much into a single sentence typed by someone??

Jackel64, I get where you are coming from but I think you are not looking at the bigger picture. Your argument is a good one but you fail to take into account comet/asteroid impacts to Earth and colonizing inhospitable planets and moons.

Earth as we live on it now is at a single point failure. What I mean by that is all it will take to wipe humanity from the face of the Earth will be a large rock or ball of ice falling from the heavens. One event will erase mankind from existence unless we spread beyond this world. The universe is a dangerous place and asteroids, comets, and meters are going to be a constant threat no matter where we live. Colonizing other planets and moons is our only hope for ensuring humanity's continued survival. (Comets and such have wiped out large amounts of flora and fauna from the Earth in this planets history, It has happened before and it will happen again.)

We need to colonize other planets and moons. And you are right that there is only one habitable planet in this system and that is our mother Earth. She gives humanity the opportunity to exist without any special consideration. Basically speaking if we have food, water, warmth, light, etc. we have a good life here. But we aren't going to find that on other moons or planets in this solar system so we will need to take these things with us and make a homestead in which we can survive. Human beings are an incredibly resilient bunch and we are creative almost to a fault. We can exist in harsh conditions. We will build bases on the Moon and on Mars in this century. We will spread as far as we can. Humanity will find a way to ensure it's survival.

mob,

while im not a sci-fi geek, i do find it intriguing. having read much in the way of Asimov and others, i find the possibility of colonization as not a far-fetched idea. colonizing lifeless planets is one thing, finding and colonizing planets that are habitable on their own is another.

and havent we always (through human history) been at a 'single point failure'?

i agree with your assessment of the human spirit, and am positive that humans will survive as long as our Creator chooses to allow it. wherever we are.

best to you.

i would also think that impact on any habitable planet (those that conceiveably have life already) would be catastrophic to that life as well, and if it is intelligent life, they would be looking at colonization themselves as well...

our off-spring will find out for sure over time.

jackel64, You hit the nail on the head. We have always been at a single point failure. That is true. But we have not always had an opportunity to do anything about it. As far fetched as this may sound we are now able to stave off such catastrophe and that capability will only get better with time. We currently have the technology to change and asteroid or comets trajectory thereby saving our planet (at least until the next time that asteroid crosses our path). Also we now have to capability to colonize other worlds. This is something we are not experienced at and will take vast amounts of effort, time, and money to accomplish. It won't be easy but we can do it. And I for one think we should do it. But I also think we should do it responsibly. We should never colonize a planet that contains life indigenous to itself.

You and I agree that if we were to colonize a "living" planet it would be catastrophic for the organisms on that planet. In one form or another our presence will undoubtedly be bad for their business. But this raises concerns about our ability to determine life on other worlds. What if we deem a planet as lifeless then set up shop and find out later that there is indeed life there? We will need to keep these things in mind as we make our journey to stars a reality.

best to you as well, a pleasure speaking with you.

mob,

agreed on all points.

and the 'recent' discovery at mono lake in California of life utilizing sulphur (i believe, it escapes me at this time, lol) increases the odds of life on other planets as well. (life as we dont yet know it).

The mono lake findings are intriguing. It will take a little more time for more scientists to get on board and verify those results but if it's true that the bacteria can replace their phosphorous with arsenic it is indeed a tremendous find. It's a big deal because arsenic is supposed to be poisonous to all life. And here's is something that opens the doors of it's DNA to the stuff. Amazing if true. I am a firm believer that ours is not the only world with life on it, and I think it's perfectly possible to find life in such places as on Titan (the moon of Saturn). I don't know that we will find life forms there, but there is liquid hydrocarbons on the surface and who knows, life might find a way.

Jackal,

FYI, the Mono Lake microbes utilize arsenic, which is usually toxic, instead of phosphorous.

Regarding the other points, colonization of other planets or moons as a fail safe measure to protect against a catastrophic event wiping out all of humanity on Earth, that's a nice idea in theory, but I don't think it's anywhere near reality at the present time.

Our moon is completely inhospitable, cold and empty. There is, apparently, water in fairly good supply, but that's all. A "colony" there could never be self sustaining. Even imagining a huge dome contained artificial environment with growing facilities etc, it would still have to rely on supplies "flown in" from Earth, and if Earth were destroyed the colony would last. The Space 1999 TV series cleverly explored the possibility, but it was, of course, total fiction.

Mars might be another candidate, but again, little atmosphere, not enough oxygen, too cold for water to remain liquid. All of these factors again mean that a containment dome methodology would likely be the only way to create an environment in which colonists could survive. Various sci-fi scenarios have been sketched which involve "terra-forming" of hostile environments to make them more hospitable but this is again, fiction. The energy requirements are just too vast. I suppose that if we were able to "seed" the Martian planet with some sort of bacteria that were capable of not only living in but thriving in those harsh conditions and which would produce the atmospheric components which would alter the environment to make it more to our liking, then we could give it oh... say a billion years or so to take effect, then we might be able do something, but the time frame kind of defeats the purpose.

So, other local options? Venus? Too damn hot. Impossible. Europa? Hmm... Possible liquid water beneath a frozen surface. Still, not enough light to grow anything unless, like Arthur C. Clarke wrote in 2010, you magically add a bazillion tons more mass to Jupiter and cause it to ignite in fusion as a second star. Nice poetic vision, again, obviously not reality.

That leaves other star systems. As this current article describes, it's gonna take 30 more years just for this probe, launched with our "fastest" rocket ever, to reach a few objects in the kuiper belt. To get to the stars with current technology is basically impossible. OK, so maybe in the future we will invent, let's see... warp drive? Uh... Not likely. If I understand relativity correctly, the faster you go, the more your mass increases, until at the speed of light you theoretically attain infinite mass. So, uh, no, that ain't gonna happen. Ion drives, solar sails, nuclear pulse engines, lots of possibilties, I don't see any of them as a serious method for sending a colony ship into interstellar space, even if we were just aiming for Proxima Centauri.

One more option, a self contained "ark ship" like in Silent Running, to preserve the basic elements of life until the earth based holocaust, whether from self-inflicted nuclear war or from outside bombardment has passed and the planet becomes something like a habitable place again. In the nuclear scenario there might be dangerous levels of radiation for a few hundred years. In the asteroid strike situation the recovery period might be mercifully brief. Then the survivors could return, like Noah to the muddy mount Ararat, and we could begin again. This then only leaves one question unresolved, who will these lucky few survivors be, and how will they be selected? I'll leave that one for you to consider.

mob,

lol, arsenic -- thank you.

my understanding on this is that it had been 'discovered' prior to the recent announcement, though it is most certainly a big deal. and definitely facinating that life (microbial or bacterial) can exist outside what we consider 'normal' - at least here on earth. and if it can on earth, who knows what we can find elsewhere, if we know what to look for...deepsea exploration as well is finding life in the most unusual places and extreme conditions.

i agree with the possibility of life elsewhere, though im unsure about intelligent life. who knows at this point. i dont think we will find out, however our kids' kids may well.

great time to be alive.

mikeymike,

preaching to the choir brother. i think you will find post 10.2 covering most of what you are stating.

regarding local planets (those within our system) you failed to mention atmospheric pressures as well.

your last paragraph is more or less what i envision, since i would believe that if there were other 'life-giving' planets out there, they would already be populated. (though, per our previous conversations you are aware i hold a belief in our Creator, and that humanity is a special creation in the universe. and that we are alone in this universe) i wont and dont rule out non-intelligent life being out there.

well, I'll just say that I'm an unbelievable optimist. I have tremendous faith in the inventiveness of humanity. If there is something someone says is impossible someone else will eventually come along and find a way to do it, one way or another. Humans don't fly, that's impossible, but we have airplanes. can't go to the moon, that's impossible, we went. Voyager 1 is exiting our solar system. VASMIR is a game changer and that'll be going to the ISS in the next couple years. We don't have all the answers for colonizing space as of yet. It's a long time off especially in terms of self sustaining colonies. A moon base and a Mars base are technically possible and will likely happen inside this century.

I love the movie Silent Running. It'll be interesting to see what botanists and engineers come up with as far as creating enclosed environments for plants and animals.

We are a very long way away from not being a single point failure species. As has been stated colonies will be dependent on Earth for a long while yet. The Earth will not be destroyed, people might, animals and plants might (or at least a large percentage of them) but Earth will remain. Heck according to the best minds something the size of Mars hit the Earth and that's how the Moon formed. Earth survived that and is the way it is because of that event (amongst others). So it's hard for me to imagine a solar system without the Earth. But if something like that happens before we have self sustaining colonies, then all is lost, humanity will perish.

The main point I am trying to make here is that if you can dream it then it is possible. Humans can be some extremely ingenious creatures and we can invent some pretty amazing stuff. A plasma Jet like VASIMR is a great case in point. Basically you just create a small sun like environment inside of some magnets and other bits and bobbles and presto you have a 5 month trip to Mars. Efforts are being taken to figure out safer guards against all the known unknowns of space, like somehow creating a electro-magnetic shield to protect against cosmic rays and rotation to create artificial gravity to aide in the fight against bone and muscle loss as well as having the necessary gravity for human babies in the womb. There is a LOT to take into account when it comes to becoming a truly space faring civilization. I can be honest and admit we are definitely not there yet, but I am very optimistic that we have what it takes to get there.

Agreed. Mob

Mob,

sorry I missed your earlier post #10.8. That must have happened while I was typing and took a break. I see you beat me to the punch on arsenic.

I looked up VASIMR drives and did some reading on recent work with various ion drive configurations. The recent Japanese Hayabusa mission used a xenon ion engine so it can indeed be done. I'm not trying to pessimistic here, just realistic. If understand correctly, even the newest generation of ion drive technology provides very low thrust, although over long time periods this can get you where you want to go and quite quickly. The problem, as I see it, with what we're discussing here, is the issue of mass. Any of the possible colony scenarios would involve transporting literally hundreds if not thousands of tons of gear and supplies and people to whatever is their destination.

I don't know what the transit cost in dollars per ton is to get to Mars, but I think they probably charge for extra baggage. Considering the amount of money that's been basically wasted on these recent wars in Iraq and Afganistan, what is it, 3 Trillion and counting? I just don't think we're going to have the funding available anytime soon to do this sort of thing.

To try and be optimistic about it, the best I can say is, perhaps, if at some point in the distant future we can all stop squabbling over petty differences down here, we might then be able to unite as a planet to accomplish a mission of this sort.

You got it Mikey, You are exactly right. We can't afford things. I am often quite outspoken about the need to invest heavily into our space program (and science and education in general), but I realize there is some severe waste going on throughout the government. This is a bad thing, but it could also be a saving grace. Follow me on this one...

We have a lot of money in this country, or rather we have a very large, very productive economy. And because of some bad choices we are now in a recession. We have (or had) something like 12-15% unemployment. (I could be off on those numbers)

So, just looking around most people would say that we are in a real mess right now. And I suppose that's true. But, (and here's where my optimism kicks in) what looks like a mess to most looks like an opportunity to me. We can pretty clearly see the mistakes that were made financially. With some hard work we can work to turn that into a strength. We can turn the economy around but it's going to take a lot of hard work and we need politicians who will work for America and not their party agendas. Right now they are stagnating the world with their dang agendas. As for unemployment, I also see another golden opportunity. To turn around the Great Depression a public works project was created called the Tennessee Valley Authority. It put quite a few people to work, as I recall, and it provide dams which in turn provided people with cleaner energy. (Damming up all the rivers is not a good idea and it's becoming clear today, but the idea of putting people to work to help the overall population is a fine idea).

So, what's the point? The point is we need to work hard at balancing the budget. We need to come up with some big lofty goals to use our productive economy to strive towards. We need to provide an efficient way for people to be gainfully employed in a job that is rewarding financially, ethically, and socially. What I am proposing is a public works project to put people into space in a big way.

Goal number one, Getting as many tons of cargo and materials into space as possible. The Ares 5 heavy lift launch vehicle is designed to be able to carry up to around 130 metric tons of cargo into space in each launch. Congress has mandated, per the 2010 NASA authorization act, that the heavy lift launch vehicle be operational by December 31st, 2016. I would love to see more of these rockets be built. The price to launch these suckers is very large but goes down quite a bit the more often you use them. We need to develop a more robust space program involving many more people.

Jackel, if you believe that there are no other sentient beings in the Universe, apparently you don't believe in evolution. If we could evolve here, a life support system elsewhere could produce parallel beings. Read Harlow Shapley (1968, I think) "Of Stars and Men," not science fiction, but a thoughtfull and knowledgeable discussion of the probability of life elsewhere, by the director of the Harvard Observatory. He concluded that there are thousands of similar planets on which carbon-based life systems have evolved and that some are ahead of us, others behind. But, as we now know, most of these are too many light years away to allow us to reach them or them us.

My view is that barring the collision of a foreign body, we should make our peace on Earth, and perpetuate the human race here. But then, does it really matter whether or not mankind goes on for another several thousand years? Perhaps it is time for us to step aside and let the cockroaches run the earth.

cinclodesfuscus,

apparently you don't believe in evolution. - correct.

i do believe in adaptation, as we all can see this occurring everywhere, however, life was (IMHO) created. specially. there is nothing that points to 'random' generation of life, and everything we know bears this out. life cannot come from non-life. nor can the information necessary for upward progression be added to dna.

while i am open to the idea of sentient life elsewhere, i dont think we will find it. nor do i think it is out there. i could be wrong, and again, am open to the idea.

microbial or bacterial life is one thing. even here on earth, we find life in the most harsh, unforgiving and unusual places.

there is a possibility of similar planets out there, but lets look objectively. everything we know to this point shows that this earth is special. abundant water, perfect components in the atmosphere, temperate (for the most part) climate, and a solar system seemingly set up for life here on earth. gas giants in the correct places to absorb the majority of impacts, among other things.

our galaxy alone contains hundreds of millions of stars, and we have found planets orbiting some we have looked at. we dont yet have the technology to find earth-sized planets, and our search for (habitable) planets must narrow our focus considerably for what exactly we are looking for. the odds of finding "perfection" are literally a needle in a haystack. it could happen, but chances are remote.

bobmck,

agreed.

i trust that 'science' includes medical advances as being of primary importance?

Yep, Medical advances are a major focus of the space programs around the world.

Sadly there is a good deal of money wasted on bureaucracy and grift when it comes to the space program. There is not much that can be done about it save putting better managers in charge of these projects. But it's not always project management that fails. I'm not in the thick of things like this so I'm not sure how to fix these problems. But it would be amazing to see what the space program could do if it had more money spent more efficiently.

As for the cancellation of Constellation this was the exact point in time Obama lost me. Politically I didn't always agree with Obama but I thought he'd be great for our country, but when I heard he wanted to put an end to that plan in favor of a nebulous "flexible path" I was appalled. I speak out often trying to get people to understand the flexible path and I'm still trying to wrap my head around it, but my point is always that we have to make due with what the policymakers give us.

I couldn't agree more with you Tony, congresses and executive branches help no one by doing what they've done to Constellation. The program is said to have been over budget and behind schedule. The correct fix is NOT to cancel the program. The correct fix IS to properly manage the project from this point forward. The Augustine commission made a point to state that if NASA had an unconstrained budget (similar to when the Apollo project was happening) America would have it's new Ares rockets and Orion capsule by 2016.

The current Administration has used the Augustine commission to say that America doesn't want to give NASA an unconstrained budget. And so the policy makers are saying they want more fiscal accountability and better project management from the developers of the new rockets. Much of the language in S.3729 (the NASA authorization act of 2010) goes toward finding cheaper ways of getting the goals accomplished. In that law it is stated that the heavy lift launch vehicle (originally slated for Constellation) gets to proceed and is, by law, going to be finished by December 31st, 2016. Also, by law, Ares 1 can not stop it's production process right now. And the president has said that Orion will be used, but in a different role. The point of all this is that Constellation is still alive but only as a bare bones program with no concrete goal. The "back to the Moon" portion is pretty much non-existent and that to me is the saddest part.

But these things are all subject to change and sometimes positive changes occur, and so I am hopeful.

I'm not sure who's the "windier" of us, you or I, but I rather enjoy discussing ideas like these with thoughtful folks like you, and you too Jackal, even though we disagree on the religious side of things.

Thank you MikeyMike. I too am grateful for the opportunities to discuss these topics with you and everyone here. Whether we agree or disagree it's always worthwhile and very enjoyable.

mikeymike,

i understand what you are saying, and i appreciate it, but to clarify, i dont follow nor believe in 'religion'.

my focus is on God, and my (our) savior Jesus Christ. Christianity is not a religion, it is a way of life. it focuses on the Grace bestowed upon us from our Creator, and the fact (idea if you will) of salvation and reconnection with God above all else.

my view of modern science (which i will add was founded by Christians) is that the goal is to discover how God created, not if.

i as well greatly enjoy your input on the many vines i've seen you post to. always with knowledge. though sometimes snarky, who of us isnt?

the difference between Christian belief in science and modern belief in science is the starting point. modern science believes (forcibly i will add) that the universe and all within it 'created itself' whereas Christians (including the founder of modern science, Newton) believe that God created.

thoughtful, rational discussion should not be excluded based on whether one believes this way or that, many brilliant people are on both sides of the discussion.

thanks, and best to you both.

Best to you too, Jackal, until we meet again!

If the Bible explains tings then God needs to seriously get a proof reader, But you are right It is so much more believable that God created Mud man from a pile of dust and rib woman from Adams rib then their children committed incest to populate the planet, I would liek to know why the bible didnt mention the other boat Noah made, you know the one that would have to have been built to carry all the food for each species of animal, not to mention a stock of other animals for all the carnivores on Noahs Boat #1.

If that is your example of how the bible explains things then I will stick to science.

Even though I've been told that you, MUTEHERETIC, are a troll and not to waste my breath on you, I do just want to say this..

I do volunteer my time. I am part of Meels on Wheels. It's a program to take hot, ready to eat meals to senior citizens who need that service. So you see one can help humanity and still have time to discuss interesting things on the newsvine here.

And while we're talking about this, what happens when you turn your logic inward muteheretic? Your comments are ..lacking.. for lack of a better word. So, while the rest of us are discussing a subject we all enjoy very much and some of us (especially me) learn quite a bit about this science and technology you jump into the conversation with "let them give me the money and I promise I wont star gaze either. And at the end have the same results they find. lots of space and stars out there." You clearly don't care about this conversation, the science of astronomy, the possibilities of space travel, etc.. And you are just here to waste bandwidth. So, do us all a favor and go volunteer YOUR time. And if you come have something useful to add to the conversation then by all means come back and let us know.

*MEALS on wheels (not meels)

and the last sentence should read "And if you come BACK have something useful to add to the conversation then by all means come back and let us know.

$1.OO IS A DOLLAR TOO MUCH FOR NASA OR ANY SPACE PROGRAMS.

Can you please name me 1 thing we need from space to live? Because i think so far we been doing well and we have been here how long?

It's unbearable, simply aggravating, to read muteheretics comments. I've never ignored someone on the newsvine but I think I might have to ignore muteheretic. I can't stop myself from replying to the drivel that he posts.

Thank you Pirate C for posting some excellent links. I've seen them before but it's always nice to have a refresher. Sadly I don't think the people that really need to see that information will ever go look at the info.

Hey Mute, seems to me that you have deluded yourself with a lack of knowledge, dont take my word for it, do some research for yourself if you can handle a little enlightenment, if not then feel free to stay in your world of ignorance. I just feel bad for you because Society is going to leave you behind.

I made it easy for you, just click on the link I posted, its all there, just check all the spinoffs that came to be that are a part of our daily lives. If you cant do that then you are just a internet troll and you are on a diet as of now.

Hey private all that yak yak and still not one thing was named we need from space. I understand you guys are passionate about space. I can respect it as a hobby , like chasing ghosts. But when your talking about taking tax payers money for it. Then at that point I do have a strong opion about the waste of money. But i will leave this alone for now. Meantime I will continue following leads on the easter bunny. LOL

I'll give you a hint where the Easter Bunny is: he's at the North Pole hiding out with Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and Jebus. Why oh why do people insist on reading a scientific article then comment on it when they CLEARLY aren't interested in the subject or have little to no understanding of the contributions of any space program!?

Garret

It's like the enquirer, we like to see what crap they come up with now, its all. LOL

You thought wrong, I did answer you, in post #16.2.

But I'll answer you again just for fun.

"why are you guys wasting your time?" you asked. Survey says... We're not.

"why don't you spend some time volunteering?" you asked. Survery says... I do.

Listen, you have your opinions and your free to post them wherever you can. If you think the bible "explains life" then good for you. If you want to encourage people to volunteer more, good for you, more power to ya. But don't be surprised that when you post ignorant comments that you rub people the wrong way. I suppose that's most probably your goal. If you think that's a better use of your time than volunteering at a homeless shelter or children's organization then I've got news for you buddy, You are NOT changing anyone's life. You are not helping any cause you have so far said you care about.

I really try not to comment on the comments but I thought the old boy deserved at least one answear.....

Human interferon?

A view of the environment en total?

An understanding of gamma rays?

A sense of accomplishment?

An education in the limits of man?

The proverbial strategic high ground?

If I get up there I will toss you down a meteor...you catch it and prove to me that you are so smart that all the wiser minds of science shoulda sat down for a group tea YOU and listened to YOU explain that there is nothing beyond what YOU can see that WE need. Now help us find the center of the universe...cause it ain't us...(meaning ALL of us).....and it ain't HERE!.