(from another tread)
>Do we really want to pat ourselves on the back for things >>like the space programme (come on, how has it bettered >life on Earth?
I am not talking about obvious ones like satellites (sputniks!) working for metheorology, navigation and Internet. As far as I know Pampers were first used by asronauts for work in the open space.
And believe me Pampers are very useful in some situations in life!
May be somebody knows some Good Things from Cosmos Programme?
Apart from (hah!) the ubiquitous non-stick pan, did not the rush to rocketry yield us kevlar, now widely used to achieve high strength-to-weight ratios in other vehicles?
(and I somehow just like that word, kevlar...)
O-rings.. much to our dismay.
as a child(aged 7) when they landed on the moon, what I was given was a sense of wonder, of vision, of people doing something for all... to explore, to continue to "reach for the stars", even though the nation was embroiled in a war that divided its citizens.
it's time to go back... and beyond...
the ubiquitous non-stick pan
You mean Teflon?
And we wonder why Reagan was so interested in StarWars . . .
yeah ~ why do I sense a sucker punch coming, Jazzo?
> it's time to go back... and beyond...
We should perhaps look a little further into ourselves before we worry about getting man beyond the moon. I'm all for unmanned exploration, but the ISS for example is a farce. As to the question of what space exploration has given us, I'd say 'Not enough to warrant a mention in Q&A!'. Now, language on ther other hand...
In reply to:
We should perhaps look a little further into ourselves before we worry about getting man beyond the moon.
well, maybe, but I think we need some external project to get our minds out of the rut. life can be different than it is, and while I'm the first in line for introspection, it's not the most useful thing for community building.
oh, and let's not forget "Tang"...
and Velcro, or so they say.
Our lives would be so much better now had our ancestors just learned to accept their lot in life.
k
> Our lives would be so much better now had our ancestors just learned to accept their lot in life.
LOL! Classic:-)
etaoin, I din't mean that we should let everything drop in space travel and fall into perpetual meditation. I'm just very sceptical of the use of manned space exploration at this point. It's very expensive and the return is low. Of all the space projects - all of the most scientifically astounding have been unmanned - e.g. the Hubble Telescope. No doubt the trip to the moon (if we truly have been there;-) was a great achievement, but they didn't really find out anything amazing about our little friend except that it's possible to land on it.
> enough to warrant a mention in Q&A!
such as maybe deluxe?
I would agree that the
material return is low, but it's more the societal return that I'm interested in. we
need vision in these troubled times(when aren't they troubled?
). something to believe in...
I also agree about the Hubble. let's put a bigger one on the Moon...
> all of the most scientifically astounding have been unmanned - e.g. the Hubble Telescope
yeahbut®
the Hubble would no longer be operational without the Shuttle AA van having effected roadside repairs...
...manned space exploration at this point. It's very expensive and the return is low.
Oh, but by., success isn't necessarily measured just by finding out about other celestial bodies. The whole point of space exploration is for us to, well, explore--with an eye towards expanding off our home planet. (Aside--seems to be a human trait, to want to spread out.) So we might as well find out along the way how, for ex., human bodies fare in space, and how to make them more comfortable while there. Besides that, there's the...psychological factor. It is SO much more attention-getting to say, "We landed a man on the moon!", than, "We sent a lunar probe". And besides THAT, my Dear, just think of the excitement, the romance, the adventure!
No doubt the trip to the moon was a great achievement, but they didn't really find out anything amazing about our little friend except that it's possible to land on it.
I would rather see a thousand frivolous manned moon landings than see the same amount of money needed to send them there spent on weapons of war and destruction. The joy of achievement over adversity is always preferable to sorrow caused by the cruelty of the human race.
psychological factor
Spot on, Jackie - personally I think that image of 'earthrise' seen from the moon was a formative experience for many millions now alive. To see our own planet dwarfed yet so beautiful, rising over another planetry horizon for the first time in mankind's experience... well, I doubt if the whole Gaia and Green movement would have had a chance without it.
And I completely agree with your sentiments Rubrick; indeed, I'd rather see $10 billion 'wasted' on such apparently futile projects than $100 spent on yet another nuclear dustbin on our coastlines here on earth.
personally I think that image of 'earthrise' seen from the moon was a formative experience for many millions now aliveI agree completely, mav.
And here's a link to that picture in "original" sideways-on angle:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/moon/earthrise.htmI've provided this link elsewhere, but hey - who cares??
did not the rush to rocketry yield us kevlarYeah, and Velcro?
And I strongly suspect (though am unsure about the facts here
and have been bitten a few times recently on that front [rueful smile]) that the development of miniaturised components and space-saving
devices must have been given a substantial fillip by the Space Program.
>>did not the rush to rocketry yield us kevlar
>[shona]Yeah, and Velcro?
Bean, I want to be the first to tell you that you're most emphatically not chopped liver.
Thanks, FB!
Shona: Hey! I said Velcro first! What am I, chopped liver?
If you google "space program" plus "products," you'll get lots of hits. Here's one, for example (I hope this won't be considered advertising. I'm just using it as an example):
Just ask companies that have benefited in space marketing efforts like X-1R® or TemperPedic®, two great examples of brands and products that have been built heavily depending on the value of the space seal for differentiation.
When NASA came to X-1R® to develop an environmentally friendly bio-degradable hydraulic fluid for the giant crawlers that transports the Space Shuttle, a new base product with new technology was born. Today, X-1R® has expanded products based on this technology from race car lubricants to basics for a child's bicycle or sportsman's fishing products. Using the Certification Seal as a point of differentiation from the industry, the marketing has paid off big. A small company has successfully taken on the giants!
TemperPedic® is another example of a firm with space technology; delivering a unique foam-based product for the comfort of the astronauts. The vast number of products resulting has clearly led their industry in new comfort - all because of space. The consumer has the assurance that the technology is genuine, and there is a real difference in the end product!
I'm all for practical applications, but the biggest benefit is that of expanded knowledge of space itself. Unquestionably awe-inspiring.
Welcome to the Chopped Liver Club. It's nice having company down here.
Welcome to the Chopped Liver Club. It's nice having company down hereBut fish
love chopped liver!
D'oh! My apologies, Bean. Hopefully, like early Velcro, this won't stick on me. Think I'm going to need to post a disclaimer/advance apology list somewhere and include a link in all my posts.
Oh, and apologies to the other lady whose posts I may have inadvertently overlooked - and whose name unfortunately escapes me at the moment..
Thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. I am glad to learn about X1-R (Wordwind)and other stuff but I am even more happy to hear that most of you (like me) suppose that it’s better to spend money on cosmos program than on military projects (Rubrick), that we = humans need something to believe in and an external project (etaoin).
Of course, I could have just google my question but I wanted to get people’s ideas and a live response. I think that this board is more about communication than simply about words and words only. I’ve tried to start a thread about words from Molecular Biology. 29 people had a look at it, which is good enough for a first attempt but started a discussion nobody even replied . And the theme about Things from Cosmos – obvious and obscure – got people interested.
Thanks again – spasibo esche raz.
I’ve tried to start a thread about words from Molecular Biology. 29 people had a look at it, which is good enough for a first attempt but started a discussion nobody even replied . And the theme about Things from Cosmos – obvious and obscure – got people interested.
That's the way it seems to work, here. I've seen (also started) threads that I thought would generate a fantastic response and went nowhere, and I've seen little, obscure things go into pages!
Er--what is is, exactly, that a molecular biologist does, please?
My daughter had to take two years of molecular biology in order to qualify for the International Baccalaureate diploma.
The text was hard as the dickens. She'd get very frustrated reading it, and sometimes I'd pick it up to take a look at whatever she was studying. I'll tell you one thing. That text didn't have any cool stories about animals and their habitats in it! Nothing warm and fuzzy or even scaly and diamond-patterned. It was all formulas. Formulas, formulas, formulas.
If you love chemistry, then molecular biology is probably a pretty cool area of study for your brain.
If you don't really give much of a hang about what's going on at molecular level and would rather read the stories on bioloy on a more superficial level that doesn't require a tremendous application of math, then regular biology would be better.
Talk about a dearth of pictures in that molecular biology text! Egad!
Bio regards,
WW
I would rather see a thousand frivolous manned moon landings than see the same amount of money needed to send them there spent on weapons of war and destruction. The joy of achievement over adversity is always preferable to sorrow caused by the cruelty of the human race.
WADR - those $$ spent on weapons of mass destruction are there to ensure that mass destruction does not occur. They are the 'checks and balances' that keep others from destroying the world, dontcha think? From what I've seen in the last year, there are plenty of kookies out there in our big world that think nothing of human life (except their own I surmise) that would slingshot a bomb or two in a heartbeat if they believed we had nothing to counter with (that in fact would end their being....see above exception).
Yes, the world would be all flowery and lovely if no one had weapons but it aint gonna happen.
> those $$ spent on weapons of mass destruction are there to ensure that mass destruction does not occur.
What sound logic.
Thanks for a good question that made me think of my work ? . I disagree that Molecular biology is about chemical formulas. Of course, we were studying them but once the course of biological chemistry was over I am not quite (and the majority of Mol.Biologists) forgot them but I have an idea about the building stones of a cell and this is enough for my work.
Mol. Biology to Classic Biology is something like being a User to being a Programmer. The former can like his little cute notebook but the latter knows the rules of its work . Well, there is nothing warm and fuzzy in the lab, only test tubes, liquids and powders in big and small bottles and plastic boxes. And a Molecular Biologist mixes liquids and powders and uses numerous clever machines to look at what is inside a living (not necessary) cell.
May it is better to give you some examples of application of MB. Identification of criminals using the smallest samples like a hair – DNA fingerprints, detection of heritable diseases in embryos, making genetically modified bacteria that produce human hormones or new antibiotics, making GM plants (not very popular at the moment) and animals (Dolly the sheep).
Molecular Biology is a wonderful thing, believe me! A bacteria and a man have DNA in their cell and some genes are similar despite of 2 billion years of evolution. My science is about most fundamental laws of life.
vika:
I got curious about the things that our space research has provided for us, so I did a bit of searching. The things that we use every day that resulted from space research are absolutely overwhelming, mind-boggling. Here's a web site
http://www.seds.org/technology/introduction.shtml.
I haven't had time to look at it verymuch, but in the intro it claims space credit for saran wrap and aluminum foil, as well as heart monitors and pacemakers.
Of course where would we be computer-wise if there hadn't been such a need for high-capacity low-weight computers. I'm certain we would be far behind where we are now.
One of the things I noticed when I was browsing through this site was a newer low-weight air-pack for firefighters. As a former firefighter, I can assure you that cutting the weight of the Scott Air-Pak is a blessing for every firefighter who has to enter a burning building, as well as a blessing for every person whose life was saved because the firefighter had more time and energy to conduct a search and rescue in a burning building.
Here;s another one:
next time you drink a glass of orange juice, consider that
Citrus growers have long used aerial photography to inventory the number of groves in production. A new development, aerial mapping of groves with color infrared (CIR) film, affords an important advance in grove management by detecting and locating unhealthy trees long before they could be detected by ground survey methods. Aerial CIR photography picks up light reflected from foliage -- light not visible to the human eye, and enables differentiation between healthy and "stressed" (diseased) trees of a Florida orange/grapefruit grove. Computer aided photo interpretation techniques permit grading diseased trees lightly, moderately or severely stressed, or dead. Method of grove mapping has offered advantage to growers in early disease warning and possible savings through water regulation and provision of a permanent record of grove growth patterns.
We hear people every day decry how Government takes and takes and takes and never gives anything back. That's plain poppycock. Had JFK not declared in 1961 that it was the goal of the US to land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth it would not have happened. Private enterprise wasn't about to spend $40 billion on such an enterprise because there wasn't an immediate return on investment.
There are some things that governments have to do because the profit motive prevents or deters private enterprise from taking on the project.
I'd be willing to bet that there's not an hour of your waking life that's not made better by the space program. And it appears that your sleeping life is better because of it also, judging from what I saw on line.
TEd
There are some things that governments have to do because the profit motive prevents or deters private enterprise from taking on the project.
Good point, TEd, although I'm unsure it's genuinely about a difference between public and private money. JFK was a visionary and believer; he was also very good at sharing the vision and generating enthusiasm for it. If JFK had been running one of the huge multinational companies that exist these days, I feel fairly certain he would have been able to win over everyone necessary and get that company to do a Moonshot [yeah OK, he'd no doubt need to get the Government involved as well, but for the sake of clarity..]
Conversely, there are plenty of Governments, indeed the vast majority these days, that never do anything in the least bit imaginative and visionary. Such ventures are risky, and someone needs to put their head on the block. And money is money, whether it comes from taxpayers or shareholders.
It's a nice idea that Governments should be doing long-term visionary stuff, but what if there's no visible benefit before the next round of elections? Do you think the majority of the electorate will vote for long-term benefits that may be impossible to guarantee? Sadly I think not.
In reply to:
Good point, TEd, although I'm unsure it's genuinely about a difference between public and private money. JFK was a visionary and believer; he was also very good at sharing the vision and generating enthusiasm for it.
and the Soviet Union had just put Sputnik up. there was the incentive...