Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

launiusr.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 171 posts

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#41

Post by ColinDabritz »

vecinu wrote: post #19
dmlorenzetti wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Bill Gates' wife began pushing him to work on issues of third-world health, this was more or less his argument against it. She dug up the statistics to show that this idea, while intuitive, is not supported by fact. As health improves-- and in particular as child mortality goes down-- birth rates fall accordingly. As we all know, Gates got on board, and now funds a lot of health research and on-the-ground initia…

I'm weary of these statistics as one can manipulate data to suit one's purpose. Source please?

Play with the raw data as you like at Gapminder.org.

For example, here is a graph I created of infant mortality vs children per woman: http://www.bit.ly/QTPNBk (starts at 1900, press play to see changes to current)

Note that each axis has a small 'various sources' button under it that will cite specific sources.

You may also enjoy Hans Rosling's TED Talk on global population growth, as he gets into the details pretty thoroughly. https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_...

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#42

Post by pooriaazimi »

jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

I'm on the same boat. Which is why I believe anyone who (in an ideal world) is seriously seeking to change the state of life in those poor countries should spend their money on creating jobs and "factories". By factory I don't mean silicon factories, but basic needs of those people, be it hospitals or modern agricultural facilities. But, sadly, in reality that can't happen. If you want to create jobs, you first need to have a powerful (and obviously not corrupt) central government. Without that, nothing significant can be done.

So, what should be done? I don't know. Education, a benevolent government, jobs, no drugs, secular & democratic laws... You can't have any of them without having others already in place. But, any progress is better than nothing. And in the long term, maybe

Afghanistan might be a good example. 30 years ago, a war between Soviets and US ruined the country and its (modestly functional) government. For the next 20 years they were "governed" by former US ally, the Taliban. Religious zealots who would kill girls if they wanted to go to school. Then US (thankfully) attacked the Taliban and for the last 5-6 years they've had some sort of a central government. It's (to some degree) corrupt, it's not efficient, it lacks technical knowledge, but still, it's a form of government and has some power and the desire to change the country. And they're making progress. 10 years ago Afghanistan was a forth-world country. A country from another century. But now, they've headed to the right direction. In 10 years (if the continue their progress), Afghanistan might very well become a country that people "might" consider living in (in the large cities at least - if they had the choice). It wouldn't become Norway, but it would be an average country instead of the hell it was 10 years ago.

Edit: I found a nice (read: sickeningly sad) article about Taliban and U.S. from 2001: http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/23860 The rest of the site is garbage, but this article is not.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#43

Post by RandallBrown »

joering2 wrote: post #33

Ok, so the story with microscope was a good one. I was initially shortsighted. But coming back to the recent Mars mission, anyone has any ideas, more or less accurate/detailed, of how this particular mission will/could benefit our civilization? This is a serious question.

Unlike other mars rovers, Curiousity isn't solar powered. It's nuclear powered. RTGs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen...) are not new, but I have no doubt that plenty of refinements went into the process to make this one better and more efficient.

Now what if this is the next fuel source for cars? We could dramatically cut down on our use of fossil fuels. That's pretty world changing.

The automated landing represented a huge engineering challenge as well. Lots of lessons learned can likely be transferred to earthly pursuits. Imagine a rescue helicopter that can automatically fly into dangerous situations and save people. Imagine robots that are faster and more efficient at producing or harvesting food.

Then of course, every time we land on a planet, we get better at it. The earth has a finite surface area. Barring major catastrophes, we'll probably fill it up eventually. If the experiments of today can provide a place for the people of the future to move, I think that will be the biggest contribution.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#44

Post by sliverstorm »

dmlorenzetti wrote: post #18
jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

When Bill Gates' wife began pushing him to work on issues of third-world health, this was more or less his argument against it. She dug up the statistics to show that this idea, while intuitive, is not supported by fact. As health improves-- and in particular as child mortality goes down-- birth rates fall accordingly. As we all know, Gates got on board, and now funds a lot of health research and on-the-ground initia…

As I understand it, Gates funds health related research, e.g. clean drinking water or malaria. Your parent was discussing the simple provision of free food.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#45

Post by Spooky23 »

vecinu wrote: post #19
dmlorenzetti wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Bill Gates' wife began pushing him to work on issues of third-world health, this was more or less his argument against it. She dug up the statistics to show that this idea, while intuitive, is not supported by fact. As health improves-- and in particular as child mortality goes down-- birth rates fall accordingly. As we all know, Gates got on board, and now funds a lot of health research and on-the-ground initia…

I'm weary of these statistics as one can manipulate data to suit one's purpose. Source please?

Do some Googling. My grandparents were all born in Ireland from 1905-1920. My father's father was one of 6 children, my mother's mother 1 of 13. All families lost at least two children each that I'm aware of -- stillbirths were often kept secret.

The point is, when you have incredibly poor country, excessive influence of religion, poor health and a high child mortality rate, you have more children, both planned and unplanned.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#46

Post by vacri »

jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

It doesn't make you cruel, but it does show you're taking a cheap cop-out. There are plenty of charities that work towards improving the local economies, which include some really interesting things like microloans. The 'starving children' is just an appeal to the heartstrings because sick children win more money than anything else.

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#47

Post by wsc981 »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #42
jxcole wrote: post #9

I don't know if this makes me cruel, but whenever people talk about donating money to starving children in Africa, I always imagine the following: If I were to donate some amount of money to starving children in an impoverished nation every year I could, theoretically, bring some of them out of starvation. However, these children would then grow into adults, and then these adults would have children of their own. The…

I'm on the same boat. Which is why I believe anyone who (in an ideal world) is seriously seeking to change the state of life in those poor countries should spend their money on creating jobs and "factories". By factory I don't mean silicon factories, but basic needs of those people, be it hospitals or modern agricultural facilities. But, sadly, in reality that can't happen. If you want to create jobs, you first need…

Projects like Kiva aim to develop industry in poor countries:

http://www.kiva.org

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#48

Post by slowpoke »

I did not know the SU actually turned off all radio transmissions and sent out ships to assist in the recovery of Apollo 13. That is an impressive display of human compassion, even inmidst the Cold War (though the cynic in me assumes there were ulterior motives, as well).

Re: Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa.

#49

Post by joering2 »

RandallBrown wrote: post #43
joering2 wrote: post #33

Ok, so the story with microscope was a good one. I was initially shortsighted. But coming back to the recent Mars mission, anyone has any ideas, more or less accurate/detailed, of how this particular mission will/could benefit our civilization? This is a serious question.

Unlike other mars rovers, Curiousity isn't solar powered. It's nuclear powered. RTGs ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_gen... ) are not new, but I have no doubt that plenty of refinements went into the process to make this one better and more efficient. Now what if this is the next fuel source for cars? We could dramatically cut down on our use of fossil fuels. That's pretty world changing. T…

Great read, thanks Randall! [+1].

Interesting points, but I don't believe in next 100 years we will be able to live on Mars, or there will be enough justification to move there and spend trillion to pursue that vision (of course this mission only gets us closer). Not only its still extremely expensive to fly there, further the only way to live there is under the shelter, which would cost hundreds of times more than building something similar on Earth.

One could only hope that down within the further explorations, there will be possibilities to either mine or produce something that Mars' atmosphere is perfect for, and something that would cost much more to accomplish here on Earth. Eventually, possible monetary gains would create entire new industry with trillion poured in. Wonder what Mars atmosphere is suitable to produce.

Post reply on HN