io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 6:21 PM
Mon Nov 30
21 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
06/19/09
The space programs relies on the help of all the countries. So that we all act as one planet to better understand our universe and our own planet. Yes this uses tax payer money because if we had a choice most people would rather stay tuned to latest news about John & Kate.
If you are upset about money being used for the space program the alternate, has no stronger definition of opposite. Tax payer money used to kill ourselves, to show who is "superior" in some twisted logic. War.
Comparing the amount of money used by NASA and the war is like comparing the price of a ice cream cone to OWNING your own 747. When you think about it (and educate yourself) it is ridiculous how much the space program is UNDER paid compared to money used for senseless wars.
Much like war, action speaks louder than words. I won't continue to ramble on. Such research is invaluable. If you're keeping up with the space news you know how much it will pay off in the long run. I look forward to this mission and I wish it great success.
06/19/09
I'm pretty sure the remark was meant light heartedly, but I do agree with you on the need for space exploration funding.
Lord knows we spend money on many far less noble causes.
06/19/09
06/19/09
Ok, some people are just idiots.
Staged? WTF.
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/19/09
06/05/09
Or has the Doctor Who hiatus finally twisted my brain?
06/05/09
I was also thinking - Did the X Prize say anything about size? Why not just send a little tiny rocket and a little tiny camera and little tiny vehicle. How much fuel could that take?
04/17/09
Great men, both in the ship and on the ground. We can find and develop men like that again, if we want to.
04/17/09
Recess wasn't as cheery as usual.
04/17/09
You the know what the sad thing is? Space infrastructure hasn't advanced to a point when the deaths of astronauts is as routine as deaths from traffic collisions.
I certainly don't want to diminish those harrowing and heroic days for the Apollo 13 crew and the engineers at ground control but I think it says a lot that spaceflight is still so infrequent that people hardly bat eye at deaths and injuries.
04/17/09
You mean when they come back alive? Any time there are major injuries or deaths in the space program, people start calling for NASA to be disbanded.
04/17/09
It's sad there've been no people on the moon in my lifetime, and I'm no spring chicken.
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
"Are you boys in the space program, too?"
04/17/09
Apollo 13 is one of my favorite films ever - while it's certainly not perfect, it's extremely well done.
04/16/09
What, they struck it with greater force? Having an impact on the surface is a meteor's job description.
04/16/09
04/16/09
04/16/09
03/03/09
I do however laugh at the suggestion that being able to dock with another craft "in space" is a vital step to Lunar Ambitions. Not if you are Going one Way...
Title: Colonizing the Moon
Description: The one way transfer of ten million colonists to the Moon over a two hundred year period. This requires the launch of single stage Vehicles that will also function as Landers and Habitats. These Launchers will have capacity of storage to provide the Colonists with Two Years of Food and the Hydroponic and Aquaculture Capacity to produce Food into the future not only sufficient to sustain the colony, but to cope with growth in Population.
CAPACITY OF LAUNCHER
10,000,000 colonists/200 years=50,000 colonists/year
50,000 colonists/365 days=137 colonists per day
137 colonists/24 Launch vehicles/day=6 Colonists/Launcher
• LAUNCHER COLONIST CAPACITY (6)
• ERRORLESS LAUNCH RATE (24 LAUNCH VEHICLES/DAY)
ALLOCATION OF LAUNCHERS
24 launchers/day x 365 days x 200 years=1,762,000 Launchers
10,000,000 colonists/6 colonists = 1,666,667 Launchers
1,762,000-1,666,667 = 95,333 Surplus Launchers
• PASSENGER CARRYING LAUNCHERS (1,666,667)
• RESUPPLY/SPECIALIST CARGO LAUNCHERS (95,333)
COST
$100,000,000,000/Launcher x 1,762,000 Launchers = $176.2x 10^15
• ANNUAL COST ($811 x 10^12)
• TOTAL COST ($176.2x 10^15)
03/04/09
We're unlikely to ever have to go one-way to the moon - not in the near future, anyway. Maybe at some point, but we don't have the facilities or experience to live long-term on the moon, and even then, I don't see people living there for a long time.
Colonization is an admirable step, but there's a lot to do inbetween here and there.
03/03/09
I'm watching you, China.
03/03/09
03/03/09
03/03/09
03/03/09
03/03/09
@Andrew Liptak:
O_o ok to get to the moon you need fuel to navigate and slow down and stuff. There is almost no friction in space, just gravity so sending something into the sun should take just as much fuel as sending something into the moon, we are not in any hurry here. The object is to destroy it and I think the moon is much less cooler to blow something up than anything else that could take this out on its way to the sun.
Please inform me if I'm wrong, I'm just a geek, not a nerd.
03/03/09
03/03/09
03/03/09