Dec 2 - NASA Finds Alien DNA in California

most viewed right now
 189
Article inside Details in Child Sex Complaint Against Rapper 6ix9ine Contradict His ..
67 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 136
Video inside 2 Arrest Made in The Murder of Rapper Chinx
78 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 126
NBA JR Smith has a supreme shooting sleeve
44 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 95
Image(s) inside Michael Blackson comes for Kevin Hart, t.i. Comments
122 comments
@hiphop

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 12-03-2010, 04:48 PM         #161
-BigC- 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
Well thats not the biggest thing that slowed our advancement of technology, but again its not like they knew could see what was out there. We have enough tools to know whats out there, we just need to use some probes to try and collect some samples. The biggest advancement right now as far as our space exploration has to come from developing new technologies that can see in more detail further away. So Meta has a point there that we need to keep researching, but at the same time we shouldn't let any field become stagnant just because then we could be missing potential advancements that could be made.
 12-03-2010, 04:56 PM         #162
Ni2 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 -BigC- said:
Well thats not the biggest thing that slowed our advancement of technology, but again its not like they knew could see what was out there. We have enough tools to know whats out there, we just need to use some probes to try and collect some samples. The biggest advancement right now as far as our space exploration has to come from developing new technologies that can see in more detail further away. So Meta has a point there that we need to keep researching, but at the same time we shouldn't let any field become stagnant just because then we could be missing potential advancements that could be made.
right, because our rovers, probes, telescopes, all that stuff guides us in our advancement in technology, points us in the direction we need to go. without them we'd be lost, gotta start somewhere.

i dont think anyone has disagreed with research. i just dont understand how without applying your research you can further it.
 12-03-2010, 05:15 PM         #163
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 -BigC- said:
But they didn't really know what he might come back with. As of right now it appears its not effective, but all it takes is one discovery to potentially change man kind forever. One discovery could advance our civilization faster then we ever could by just doing research here on Earth.
I agree with you.

What Im saying is that launching a probe is a gamble. Nobody wants to be stagnant in any area, but you must understand that this gamble is not worth the risk when for the same amount of money and time we can do better research with more immediate applications than a really expensive probe.

i mean, we could take that gamble, but after how many probes will you decide maybe there's cheaper ways to boost our scientific knowledge?

 -BigC- said:
Honestly with how dumbed down America has become, any money towards a legitimate science is ok with me regardless of it appearing wasteful. Plus its stuff like this that draws interest, there is a reason they called this alien DNA and made sure to attach NASA to it. The majority of people wouldn't give two s**ts if they just said some biological organization discovered a new life form that contradicts what we thought we knew. We need interesting crap like the exploration into space just to draw some attention and interest future generations into science.
Advertising, drumming up attention and support for an important cause is no reason to take epic gambles. An ad campaign to keep commercials up during prime time everyday for a year about space exploration will not cost as much as one probe, yet will yield enough money to build 2 at the very least.

Space Exploration (manned or umanned) is still expensive. Lets wait till the price comes down and we can make use of what we learn in a better way.
 12-03-2010, 05:25 PM         #164
-BigC- 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
How does the price go down though? The only way for the price to come down is advancement in technology which would come about from the programs being funded by the trips to space.
 12-03-2010, 05:26 PM         #165
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
The cost of technology goes down.

The price of a computer 10 years ago versus the price of one today and you can see how much more of a bang for your buck you get in just 10 years.

Imagine 100 ...
 12-03-2010, 05:33 PM         #166
-BigC- 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
The price goes down for consumer products, it doesn't work that way for everything. The cost of doing exactly what we did 1969 is still expensive as f**k, the price for this type of technology won't go down until there is some sort of consumer support which can't happen until we have a huge break through or three.

From a short google search I see the figure of 100 billion just to get to the moon...
 12-03-2010, 07:08 PM         #167
JerseyLegend 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
Ok, but how do you explain the sun. Its a living thing and has not water....
No way

While I do agree that we should be researching here through many, many combinations of experiments based on chemical composition, temperature, habitat extremes (ie pressure etc), what better way to research than practical application ie building s**t to send to space.

The sending of the probes is the research. There seems to be a confusion between the arrogance/ignorance of scientist on the subject of whether carbon based life forms only exist and not knowing anything about any kind of composition of life. This is where the probes come in to play. They aren't a waste of money. We know life on Earth is and where to look for it. Sending these probes gives us a head start in on the search for life. Time is precious. One of probes has recently or about to leave our solar system. f**king fascinating!


Besides you know how this world works. The government wont keep funding an organization or what not if they aren't bringing back worth the money spent on them.
 12-04-2010, 03:55 AM         #168
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 JerseyLegend said:
Besides you know how this world works. The government wont keep funding an organization or what not if they aren't bringing back worth the money spent on them.
DING DING DING!

I would love to send probes but they are not cost effective research nor does it ever bring back info that will generate financial leads in the near future.

Which is why I brought up tax dollars and governmental obligation. The government can easily justify research on earth because of low overhead and real world application today or in the near future.

Space probes have a natural delay time of how long it takes for a probe to get to its destination. It usually takes years just to start getting near the area. Many bots get stuck on foreign terrain because we don't have the best terrain navigation scripts or designs for the robots. How many billion dollars are stuck in a ditch millions of miles away, unable to gather evidence of life that may be 5m in front of them?

Don't get me wrong people ... I wish space probes were the answer. Realistically, maybe the next 20 ~ 50 years should be working on better propulsion engines and smarter, more powerful computers. WHen we got bots that can go to deep space, gather data on multiple things and make a return trip in 5 years flat, that's when it starts looking profitable to go. Until then, there's still a huge turn around time and a high over-head cost with even higher risks.

Research gives you the best bang for your buck, and it costs less. There's very little other ways I can say the same thing. If it doesn't sound appealing to you then you must be even worse than I am at planning budgets.
 12-04-2010, 04:13 AM         #169
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
In fact, take a look at the type of things NASA is pouring money into. Seems like they are thinking along the same lines as me, launching less probe and doing more research on earth.

Source:




Four NASA Glenn Research Teams Earn R&D 100 Awards


CLEVELAND -- R&D Magazine editors have recognized the innovative technology of four research teams at NASA's Glenn Research Center in Cleveland. An award banquet for the winners will be held Nov. 11 in Orlando, Fla.

The annual R&D 100 awards recognize the 100 most technologically significant products and innovations introduced over the past year. The technologies demonstrated in this worldwide competition are from academia, government and industry.

The four Glenn award winning innovations are:
The GATR Inflatable Satellite Communications System, developed by GATR Technologies Inc., and further tested and refined through a partnership with NASA's Glenn Research Center, is the first Federal Communications Commission-certified inflatable antenna for ground-based applications.
the low plasticity burnishing process increases the surface cracking resistance of a turbine engine's metal components. The process produces a deep layer of compressive residual stress near the surface that increases fatigue life of metallic materials and their ability to withstand impacts at high temperatures approaching 800 degrees Celsius or 1470 degrees Fahrenheit.

It has been shown to produce superior results compared to those from conventional shot peening; and produces comparable results to those from laser shock peening at much lower cost. The technology can extend the life of aging aircraft and substantially reduce the overall cost of ownership, which could be used for commercial and military purposes.
The Spring Tire design is a simple network of coiled wires designed to safely and efficiently carry vehicles over rough terrain, whether on Earth, another planet or a lunar surface. The tire contains load-bearing helical springs, requires no air or rubber, uniquely contours to the terrain surface while consuming less energy than other tires and offers high resiliency even when damaged. It can be used in the harsh temperature extremes of space and as a safer alternative for military and off-road vehicles in which traditional pneumatic tires can fail if hit by bullets or driven over sharp terrain.
The Thin Film Ferroelectric High Resolution Scanning Reflectarray Antenna uses innovative phase shifter technology to improve performance and reduce cost of electronically steerable phased arrays. The system offers functionality comparable to conventional phased array antennas while increasing efficiency and decreasing cost through simpler device fabrication and a.ssembly techniques. This new technology could enhance space exploration to other planets, can improve radar detection of orbital debris and can improve rendezvous and docking maneuvers of spacecraft. It also has terrestrial applications, such as developing collision avoidance radar systems for cars on Earth.

Basically ... NASA stopped launching probes and is researching in better technology so that the probes they launch are more efficient. I really hadn't looked into their playbook recently but even their top innovation awards can tell you where their mind is at. And quite frankly, it sounds around the lines of what I was thinking. Correct me if Im wrong.

Ps.
Speaking of propulsion system innovation and research ...


Last edited by Metalzoa; 12-04-2010 at 04:24 AM..
 7 years ago '04        #170
HHS 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$5,554 | Props total: 93 93
 Metalzoa said:
In fact, take a look at the type of things NASA is pouring money into. Seems like they are thinking along the same lines as me, launching less probe and doing more research on earth.

Source:















Basically ... NASA stopped launching probes and is researching in better technology so that the probes they launch are more efficient. I really hadn't looked into their playbook recently but even their top innovation awards can tell you where their mind is at. And quite frankly, it sounds around the lines of what I was thinking. Correct me if Im wrong.

Ps.
Speaking of propulsion system innovation and research ...
They've always done this. I don't see anything in what you've posted that indicates a major shift in strategy. They always put years of R&D into their launches. This is, by the way, why building and launching probes isn't just a money pit. The technologies they've developed just in the process of planning and designing are often of immediate usefulness right here on earth, so the financial worth of launching probes does not just rest on the discoveries they make once the probe is launched.

This whole argument of yours seems sort of like a straw man argument to me. Of course they should do years of research, and not just be launching probes willy-nilly in some blind hope of finding something. Thing is, they've never done that to begin with. Every project they do goes through years of R&D. Of course, there have been projects that have still gone wrong in the end, but they've developed tons of technology that has proven very useful right here on earth, and of course made great scientific discoveries.

And ultimately, this type of research is a relatively small part of our country's spending.


Last edited by HHS; 12-04-2010 at 08:08 AM..
 12-04-2010, 08:11 AM         #171
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 HHS said:
They've always done this. I don't see anything in what you've posted that indicates a major shift in strategy. They always put years of R&D into their launches. This is, by the way, why building and launching probes isn't just a money pit. The technologies they've developed just in the process of planning and designing are often of immediate usefulness right here on earth, so the financial worth of launching probes does not just rest on the discoveries they make once the probe is launch.

This whole argument of yours seems sort of like a straw man argument to me. Of course they should do years of research, and not just be launching probes willy-nilly in some blind hope of finding something. Thing is, they've never done that to begin with.
My point exactly. You understand my reasoning, you just don't see my point.


This new discovery changes a lot about how we search space in for life. The fundamental definition needs to be altered and as such new equipment, new plans of effective detection and whatnot. There is no immediate benefit to launching probes in an attempt to locate foreign life. Especially given the economical situation, it's a really hard sell to the public.

Save that money for more pressing issues. The hunt for life can wait 100 years.
 7 years ago '04        #172
HHS 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$5,554 | Props total: 93 93
 Metalzoa said:
My point exactly. You understand my reasoning, you just don't see my point.


This new discovery changes a lot about how we search space in for life. The fundamental definition needs to be altered and as such new equipment, new plans of effective detection and whatnot. There is no immediate benefit to launching probes in an attempt to locate foreign life. Especially given the economical situation, it's a really hard sell to the public.

Save that money for more pressing issues. The hunt for life can wait 100 years.
The immediate benefit is the new technology developed in the research. For example, one pressing issue right here on earth is the fossil fuel problem. One area of research preceding the launch of new probes involves developing sustainable power for a long term mission. One pressing issue right here on earth are the droughts brought on by climate change, and their effect on the food supply. One area of great importance to any potential manned mission would be finding a sustainable way to grow food with very limited resources. The benefits of the missions don't rest on the knowledge they bring back.

Basically, other than your time frame, you're arguing for what they already do. There's no one arguing to just throw probes off into space without the R&D time to develop "new equipment, new plans of effective detection and whatnot." And putting off the search, severely limiting the budget, is only slowing down the development of technology that is of immediate benefit here. Putting missions on the books for the not-too-distant future, funding them, having that push to develop new technology, is of great benefit.

I do agree that it is hard to sell to the public, because they often lack the foresight to see the benefits, and they view it as some sort of leisurely search for unimportant knowledge. But they're wrong.


Last edited by HHS; 12-04-2010 at 08:31 AM..
 12-04-2010, 08:31 AM         #173
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 HHS said:
Basically, other than your time frame, you're arguing for what they already do. And putting off the search, severely limiting the budget, is only slowing down the development of technology that is of immediate benefit here.
Thank you.

Now rewind back to page 4 and ask these people why they've been arguing about NASA's basic modus operani? Just cause there's a discovery ...

They aren't launching tomorrow. Given the national financial situation, I doubt they are going to be making any launches relating to this matter for a while.

Others have been in argument of launching NOW. Im in favor of a deferred launch.
Nobody is slowing s**t down. If you launch today, what you launch will be far behind what we are capable of in the next 10 years. Why not develop to a benchmark that works under all sorts of stress and then start launching, like Apple.

Is it asking too much for a research agency to minimize waste?


Last edited by Metalzoa; 12-04-2010 at 08:33 AM..
 7 years ago '04        #174
HHS 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$5,554 | Props total: 93 93
 Metalzoa said:
Thank you. Now rewind back to page 4 and ask these people why they've been arguing about NASA's basic modus operani? Just cause there's a discovery they aren't launching tomorrow. Given the national financial situation, I doubt they are going to be making any launches relating to this matter for a while.

Others have been in argument of launching NOW. Im in favor of a deferred launch.
Nobody is slowing s**t down. If you launch today, in the next 10 years what you launch will be far behind what we are capable of. Why not develop to a benchmark that works under all sorts of stress and then start launching, like Apple.

Is it asking too much for a research agency to minimize waste?
Yes, I agree. Anyone arguing for launching NOW doesn't even really know how the process works. The research time is a prerequisite in how NASA operates.
 12-04-2010, 08:42 AM         #175
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 HHS said:
Yes, I agree. Anyone arguing for launching NOW doesn't even really know how the process works. The research time is a prerequisite in how NASA operates.
Might want to talk to all these cats who have been "ethering me" cause they are under the impression im here to win some argument instead of just speak the straight facts.

Of course they are all done with the discussion by now and Camp Winslow has relocated elsewhere to nurse their feelings.
 12-04-2010, 09:20 AM         #176
Ni2 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
^lol you changed your stance from 100 years to 10 years. and from what i just skimmed through you changed from this whole thing being against what nasa is doing to 'they seem to be thinking like me' or whatever you said exactly. either way they didnt change cause of this thread, what i think you meant to say was, im starting to agree with what they are already doing, what theyve been doing all along.

you also have changed our stance, as if we have been saying launch now. nobody but you has put forth timetables and whatnot. from what i thought everyone has been agreeing with the current process but you.

you also have talked down and called everyone names this entire time, camp winslow isnt twisting both sides of the argument and stalking a thread for 2 days just so they can feel like they have some dignity left when its over.
 12-04-2010, 09:56 AM         #177
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Ni2 said:
you also have changed our stance, as if we have been saying launch now. nobody but you has put forth timetables and whatnot. from what i thought everyone has been agreeing with the current process but you.

you also have talked down and called everyone names this entire time, camp winslow isnt twisting both sides of the argument and stalking a thread for 2 days just so they can feel like they have some dignity left when its over.
 Ni2 said:
just seems to me as if theirs 2 diff kinds of people in this thread, one who wants to go find out whats on the other side of the mountain and the other who wants to do all the research they can so the trip has a higher success rate, even if it takes 100 years.
 Reppindaburghh said:
I could agree with that. I'll be on the other side of the mountain looking around at uncharted territory discovering new things accidentally while they are planning to make the trip a century from now for a discount price.
 Ni2 said:
exactly. if columbus did his research how much longer would it have taken europeans to discover the continents, then how much longer would it have been before they colonized it(especially if they bothered to research natives, the land, etc.) and how much father behind would nasa be right now, we wouldnt even be having this debate.
 Ni2 said:
right, because our rovers, probes, telescopes, all that stuff guides us in our advancement in technology, points us in the direction we need to go. without them we'd be lost, gotta start somewhere.

i dont think anyone has disagreed with research. i just dont understand how without applying your research you can further it.
Now here is my first post in this thread where Im actually trying to make my point known:

 Metalzoa said:
precisely.

you want to launch machines out there to look with our primitive knowledge, each project costing trillions of dollars and incalculable man and computing power and other resources to launch probes that:

i. may not actually be able to detect the life forms it encounters
ii. may not actually encounter any life form for thousands of years
iii. may never encounter life


As opposed to Dos and I's perspective where we should broaden our scope as wide as possible (while our technology is getting better and cheaper to mass produce) so by the time we are confident in our understanding of life, we can effectively search far and near (maybe even visit?) when we discover life.
So whose stance was the one changing all over the thread?
 12-04-2010, 10:03 AM         #178
Ni2 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
lol ill entertain you with one more post. lets go back to page 4 and you were asked if the process should be halted entirely and you said 'precisely', now on page 9 you are agreeing with the process. so there is no discussion anymore if you folded.

tell me where i said no research, then it'll mean something when i said 'nobody is disagreeing with research' then youll have something. tell me when i said launch NOW, and you can say that was my argument.
 12-04-2010, 10:03 AM         #179
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
Talking bout trying to leave with dignity.

You can not admit you were riding the d!ck of an idiot and logic is now poking you in the eye, but you'd rather be blind than admit you were wrong. That's cool by me. Doesn't change anything so Im not going to ask for an apology or run with my tail tucked away. I came for a discussion, I made my point and the opposition has nothing but semantics and circle jerking to help support their argument.

Go play on the other side of a very large mountain called "IDIOTS". It's where you no researching explorers need to be.
 12-04-2010, 10:05 AM         #180
Metalzoa 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Ni2 said:
lol ill entertain you with one more post. lets go back to page 4 and you were asked if the process should be halted entirely and you said 'precisely', now on page 9 you are agreeing with the process. so there is no discussion anymore if you folded.

tell me where i said no research, then it'll mean something when i said 'nobody is disagreeing with research' then youll have something. tell me when i said launch NOW, and you can say that was my argument.
Dont entertain me. Either you're discussing forreal or you're out. Make your decision and stop flip flopping.

You did not address your posts making contradictory statements, but you're quick to point fingers.

You must be an idiot if you can not read in context and think my stance changed because of that statement.
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 46
Image(s) inside Ugly niggas watch ya step
77 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 44
Video inside Who is she!!
21 comments
23 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 43
Video inside Throwback: Teen Gangbangers On Jenny Jones Show
59 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 23
Article inside Salma Hayek claims Harvey Weinstein threatened 'I will kill you, don'..
150 comments
21 hours ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 22
Image(s) inside The Backshots would be crazy
25 comments
23 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 21
Image(s) inside Learn the difference between a DR. Wife and a "Boxden Simp Thot"!
201 comments
24 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 16
NFL Robert Griffin III, sets the record straight.
86 comments
1 day ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 14
Video inside T-Mobile about to save us from Comcast, Time Warner & AT&T
47 comments
1 day ago
@tech
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy