almost ideal fiscal stimulus — contributing to the development of more advanced technology as well as the increased knowledge of mankind (thereby raising long-run productivity curves), yet doing almost nothing to (immediately) increase total productive capacity or to compete to consume large amounts of natural resources. the biggest problem with space exploration funding in a depression from an economic point of view is that it isn’t a large enough sector of the economy.
Isnt it better to let china do all the work and research and just sit back and import the knowledge and products? Imports are a benefit right? You confuse me warren. This article seems to be saying we should fund more NASA stuff so NASA boys can do all the work and research.
There aren’t enough math and science whizzes coming up through the ranks to do this work anyway – they’ve all left for wall street.
Seriously, an MIT B.S. education costs a quarter mil – meaning it takes $44 grand a year off the $60K a year salary one can make starting with a science/engineering degree. The numbers no longer work for a young person from the US to go into science and technology anymore.
“The World Wide Web was invented at the CERN lab to help particle physicists communicate across with each other across the world. If the laboratory wasn’t built or was closed, there would be no Fox News website.”
Does this person really believe that if the Europeans didn’t spend tens of billions of dollars building a supercollider that we wouldn’t have websites today?
Most educated elites complain that the unwashed masses (particularly conservatives) don’t trust science. But what they don’t trust are scientists, and I think people are right to be skeptical.
Oh he’ll, let’s just let the Chinese government do it. We don’t need this stuff. Better to buy another fleet of drones to blow shit up. That’s our thing. We have really, really smart people managing our money. I think.
A minor list of technology that was primarily advanced due to DIRECT GOVERNENT FUNDING – for you neoconservative and neoliberal “free market” proponents.
The airplane, radar, jet engine, helicopter, electronic computer, atomic energy, Global Positioning System (GPS), and Internet technologies.
The lack of basic understanding of what “free market” capitalism actually is constantly amazing me.
I think these types of people actually believe “free markets” mean no regulations as in “free” the entire modern banking system by definition is a regulated system created by government – would not exist nor would have existed in some wild west, no government, anarchist world.
Capitalism by definition is a government regulated system, would not and can not exist without regulation.
A true, “bridge to nowhere.” Spend money to build something halfway, then stop it abruptly on the idiotic belief that you have no more digits to finish the work. Idiots. And Fox is idiotic, too, and should take a lot of the blame for our current mess, for pushing their disgustingly misguided propaganda. That’s why I quit.
Obama (and every president) talks about the need for a commitment to math and science, yet they cut back on these programs. If government spending is the allocation of resources for the public benefit, I say spend those dollars to hire the bright math brains away from Wall St. You really can’t argue that 100 years from now the efforts of 1,000 mathematicians and scientists will have a more lasting effect than the efforts of 1,000 bankers and lawyers.
I believe some of the commentators have missed the point completely. The original American space program had nothing to do with researching the geology of the Moon, it was a response to the short-lived supremacy of the USSR in rocket technology in the late 1950s – early 1960s.
If you believe that in the globalised world China will pour state funds into research and American corporations will benefit from buying new products at a Chinese price – think about rare earth metals or solar panels. China is not ruled by corporations or “free markets”. Power gives money in China, not money gives power (like in the West). They plan decades not months or years ahead.
Is the space program all about “national pride”?…
Once the Chinese advance their dual-purpose technology enough – it’s better to convert American aircraft carriers into cruise ships before it’s to late. You can always invite some rich Communist Party members to have a party on a former American aircraft carrier obviously painted in red.
The Obama’s policy of reducing spending on advanced research is suicidal in the long run. It is not about glorification of state institutions such as NASA or DARPA because a lot of work was done by subcontracting private sector corporations. It is about the absolute failure of the educational system in America which has produced people so ignorant as the current political elite in Washington including the majority of the luminaries from the Democratic party. Not to mention the abysmal quality of mathematical and scientific education in the mainstream schools. People who are in power now not only don’t understand European history of the 1930s they are also ignorant in regards to the American history of the 1960s. It was not all about racial equality, experiments with LSD and anti-war movement. These events were totally irrelevant. It was all about winning the Cold War. If you lost the Cold War you could eat all the LSD you had.
It is not enough to advance pure military technology. It is the research onto broader science what gives the country the edge. Military technology secrets can easily be stolen – what happened with all the American inventions from fission bombs to stealth planes. It is the pace of scientific and technological progress what allows for military and political supremacy – since the late 18th century.
I dare to say that militarised Keynesianism of Mitt Romney (if true) may be better for America than enlightened ignorance of the current elite.
I don’t believe anything however the main stream views of space in this reality are skewed just like everything controlled by greedy men…….or whatever or whoever is changing the numbers in the spread sheets…..lol
Eppur Si Muove, Higgs Particle YOK
Regardless Of Whatever Whoever
Regardless Of Whatever Is Said By Whoever Says It -
Higgs Particle YOK.
S Hawking is simply wrong in accepting it. Obviously wrong.
Everyone who accepts the story of the Higgs particle is simply wrong.
Singularity and the Big Bang MUST have happened with the smallest base universe particles, the gravitons, that MUST be both energy and mass, even if they are inert mass just one smallest fraction of a second at singularity. All mass formats evolve from gravitons that convert into energy i.e. extricate from their gravitons clusters into mass formats in motion, energy. And they all end up again as mass in a repeat singularity.
Universe expansion and re-contraction proceed simultaneously..
Since the Big Bang galactic clusters loose mass at constant rate. Mass, gravitons, continue escaping at constant rate from their Big Bang fragments-clusters thus becoming energy, mass in motion, thus thrusting the clusters. Constant thrust and decreasing galactic clusters weight accelerate the separation of clusters from each other.
Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century) http://universe-life.com/
Natural Selection Is Built-In Hypocrisy In US Science Structure
In addition to the omnipotency of the AAAS trade-union-church with its science testament and gospels…:
Where the Nation Turns for Independent, Expert Advice
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
In the Executive Office of the President, the main body advising the president on science policy is the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Other advisory bodies exist within the Executive Office of the President, including the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and the National Science and Technology Council.
Further advice (on legislating science policy) is provided by extra-governmental organizations such as The National Academies, which was created and mostly funded by the federal government, and the RAND Corporation, as well as other non-profit organizations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Chemical Society among others.
Conflict of interest arises whenever the personal or professional interests of a board or committee member or of an expert adviser are potentially at odds with the best interests of the nonprofit…by the people for the people…