What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
40 Comments
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/20/2009, -1/+8The race to the moon was a Cold War battle, but that doesn't make it any less of an achievement and doesn't erase the technology that came from it.
- kingmanic, on 07/20/2009, -0/+7We're not that much further than we were in 1969. Consumer grade goods like computers have come along way but massive engineering feats like the booster rockets used in the apollo missions and many of the little undocumented technological fixes have been lost and needs to be remade/re-engineered/re-discovered.
- doctechnical, on 07/20/2009, -0/+6Not really, he's exactly right, the entire Space Race, from Sputnik to Apollo was bascially a Cold War program. Think about this: any nation that had the scientists, engineers, resources and huge convoy of trucks required just to carry the budget money around, just to put a couple clowns on the moon to drink Tang and bring back some rocks is simply not a nation to be trifled with. Having your nation's flag on the moon? Priceless.
- AmnesiacJack, on 07/21/2009, -0/+6Ugh it makes me sick how we treat our space program now. 15billion a year for NASA? It's sick.
We gave trillions to the banks for being completely worthless and bringing the American economy to the edge of disaster but can't even seem to give a ***** about one of our greatest agencies ever. - Mujokan, on 07/20/2009, -2/+7This guy Casey Kazan sure is onto a great thing!
(1) Copy and paste someone else's work
(2) Get it to the front page of Digg using power diggers
(3) Maybe add a bit of inane commentary???
(4) Ad revenue
This happens over and over again. - marmotjmarmot, on 07/20/2009, -0/+5Know what makes these rockets go up? Funding.
- jamesrl, on 07/20/2009, -2/+6Calling Stephen Hawking, "our century's Einstein" is completely idiotic. This is akin to calling Tom Wolfe, our centuries Shakespeare. The only similarity to Einstein is that Hawking is a theoretical physicist, but Hawking is solely known since he is a popularizer of science (and a poor one at that ... compare aBHoT to Greene's an Elegant Universe) that is remembered due to his ALS.
Einstein created the foundations of modern physics, revolutionized the way we think about both the nature of space and time and made many important discoveries towards our understanding of quantum mechanics and gravity (photoelectric effect, Brownian motion, special relativity, general relativity, etc).
Hawking's principle field of black hole thermodynamics has many pioneers of equal importance during the 1970s (Kip Thorne, Jimmy York, Roger Penrose, etc), and his principle claim to fame Hawking radiation has never been observed (and he didn't develop the idea by himself either). It is more accurately called Bekenstein-Hawking radiation, and Soviet scientists (Alexander Starobinsky and Yakov Zeldovich) had an understanding of the process before Hawking did.
There are 100s of physicists more suited to be called "our centuries Einstein", (for starters just look at any Nobel prize winner), though in reality we probably only get a scientist of the caliber and breadth of work of a Newton or Einstein (who revolutionize multiple fields) every 400 years or so. But the fact of the matter is, Hawking is in my opinion not even near the rank of Fermi, Maxwell, Faraday, Pauli, Bohr, Feynman, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, etc. - Marsin2010, on 07/20/2009, -0/+4Utter pathetic nonsense. Anyone who is foolish enough to think that 400,000 Americans would work on a program that wasn't real for eleven years and no one would blow the cover of the conspiracy is pretty sad. Every aspect of the supposed hoax has been debunked over and over and over. One of the best sites to do so is www.clavius.org
- kingmanic, on 07/20/2009, -0/+4Computers are a special case. Most technology does not advance that way. Look at the car engine or medicine. slow plodding progress with occasional spurts in the pattern for most technologies.
- skews13, on 07/20/2009, -1/+5The computer you're using right now is because of that program. Every person in a skilled trade that uses a battery powered drill is because of that program. The progression of modern day communications is because of that program. And that's just a few examples of how the right stuff has impacted your life. Glad we didn't see it the otherway.
- Marsin2010, on 07/20/2009, -0/+4I failed to mention the other embarrassing little detail that knocks the stuffing out of the hoax nonsense is that the recently launched Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is presently imaging the 6 Apollo landing sites. The lunar module descent stages are clearly seen (resolution will become even better when LRO is lowered to it's 30 mile high mapping orbit) at each site. The ALSEP instrument package location is seen in the image of the Apollo 14 site because of near perfect shadow conditions. The ALSEP and lunar rovers will undoubtedly be visible at the other sites when the LRO orbit is finalized.
- jgopp, on 07/20/2009, -2/+5Yeah it's sad we didn't go to mars when we had the Apollo program but we probably saved ourselves from having failures much larger than Apollo 13 such as actually having Americans perish in space. Going to mars is a much larger undertaking which probably now can be achieved with much less risk because of a lot better technology (lightyears ahead of the Apollo program stuff). It will happen, but the excessive cost during the late 60's and into the 70's would have been outrageous. The Apollo program cost the USA what today would be considered an insane amount of money and manpower. The new stuff NASA is rolling out is more cost effective and is considerably safer anyway.
- gimmeslack12, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3I could imagine the huge costs of space exploration could be only temporary. Within 50 years we could do away with Rockets. Look where we started with computers? And nowadays people don't realize that even the most basic cell phone is more powerful than the computers of the 80's.
- Dauntless1, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3I've said it on another thread, but I'll say it again. We as americans hate anything that doesn't put money in our pockets or a car in the driveway. We're not mature enough to care about anyone but ourselves. All the proof anyone wants can be found on any given healthcare discussion.
- madrigaelic, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3Agreed. Buried for that reason.
- memper, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3That's likely true, but I doubt your calculator's commitment to function at 6k mph on top of 7.5 million pounds of thrust in the first 15 seconds of the mission.
- Dauntless1, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3We need a way to show to investors just how much money could be made off of space exploration. That's the only way anyone will fund this in a reasonable manner, instead of the joke budget they currently have.
- cosworth99, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3I've seen that computer at the Smithsonian. It was wire wrapped. I'll take that calculator chip any day.
- gimmeslack12, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2Generally the Space Elevator is very plausible. The problem is getting people to believe in it because it really sounds far fetched. The biggest cost for getting to space isn't the technology to live up there but rather *getting* there. Getting rid of rockets would dramatically reduce this cost.
- sproket, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2Please go sterilize yourself.
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2What makes computers a special case is they get better as they get smaller. If you want to do more in space, everything has to get much bigger. It's all comes down to some relatively simple physics equations about how much mass you can accelerate.
- sproket, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2Moron
- EarlOfLade, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2But Marsin2010, the new images are also a hoax (in the mind of the moon lunatic fringe). They are just of a better quality than the 1960's version....
You can never convince a conspiracy theorist that he is wrong, there is always some little detail that he or she thinks debunks the whole program. Of course, the conspiracy theorist rarely have even a high school diploma but they are experts at unveiling these hoaxes. It's mindbogglingly dumb. - doctechnical, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2Keep in mind that all the *easy*, cheap advances in technology tend to happen very quickly - your cell phone analogy is bang on. Rockets, on the other hand, have been around for a while (even if we're confining ourselves to liquid-fueled beasts). All the cheap, easy improvements have pretty much already been made.
- bnyoung11, on 07/20/2009, -3/+5Well isnt Wolfe just the negative nancy
- cosworth99, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2"No bucks, no Buck Rogers."
I'd still hit Wilma Deering though. - CyclonusRIP, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2The only way the analogy works is you could claim that they are both the most well known scientists of their day from the perspective of a general audience. The difference is everyone knows Hawking because he's the dude in the wheelchair with the robot voice compared to Einstein which people know because he made one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs of all time. All in all it's an insult to all the other scientists who made larger contributions than Hawking but don't get the notoriety since no one cares about what scientists actually do.
- Dauntless1, on 07/20/2009, -3/+4Lolz. And we will always accomplish more working together than against each other. That's built into REALITY.
- EddiePotato, on 07/20/2009, -1/+2Possible replacement for rocketry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
- geoffg, on 07/20/2009, -2/+3Consider the constant delays and downsizing of plans for the ISS as proof of my point.
- gvlax50, on 07/20/2009, -2/+3How "The Right Stuff" Went Wrong: New Kids on the Block on E! True Hollywood Story
- CyclonusRIP, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1Competition is great when it's done in the name of progress. Competition ***** everyone over when it's done for the sake of unrestrained greed. There's a huge difference between two research teams racing to make a new scientific breakthrough and two groups of MBAs trying to figure out the best way to shake every last penny out of everyone. The first case the competition leads to a breakthrough for the benefit of everyone. In the second people are just climbing to the top by stepping on the shoulders of everyone else.
- aurorous, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1Most of the advanced materials we make cars (and everything else) out of today were originally researched for use in the space program. The guidance computers on those rockets were the first application of microcomputers that weren't being used on a weapon of war, before that nobody needed a tiny computer except to blow up people, think about that next time you boot up your netbook.
The moon has no oil, no wind, no molten core if we had followed up Apollo with a permanent moon base we would need reliable and efficient power generation. How much money would NASA have sunk into solar research? how many breakthroughs that we are just now making could have been made back in 1990's? And Mars has all the same problems plus it gets only half the sunlight so efficiency becomes even more critical. A solid investment in the space program 20 years would probably have helped us solve today's problems. - Dauntless1, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1The long view. Nobody has it anymore. Day traders, get rich quick schemes, the lottery, pick your poison but no-one thinks about the long view anymore. It's all about instant gratification, "me NOW, ***** everyone else", any one of a dozen cliches.
- Dauntless1, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1@geoffg
Consider the fact that you can't build a pyramid by yourself in your lifetime proof of my point, if that's the way you want to play it. Name one major item you can build faster by yourself. Bridge? Apartment Complex? Skyscraper? Oh wait only competing will get us anywhere while working together is always wrong. - geoffg, on 07/20/2009, -4/+4Competition is built into the essence of all living things...it's why we went to the moon and it's why free market systems work while all others fail.
- B1665r, on 07/20/2009, -1/+1I will try this one again because it worked so well yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQp5l4-sfFA - B1665r, on 07/20/2009, -1/+1Well it also spends all the spare money and talent on those types of activities and prevents those same countries from making orbiting space bombs.
- Dauntless1, on 07/20/2009, -2/+1Yeah, but mostly that's not because those technologies couldn't advance, but were intentionally held back. It makes more money for oil companies if your car only gets 5 miles to the gallon, and doctors will always make more money treating the symptoms and avoiding the cause.
- UV0001, on 07/20/2009, -15/+1The moon landings never happened. These videos give undeniable evidence they were faked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBtpyeLxVkI
/s
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is