NASA admits it doesn’t have the funding to land humans on Mars

Post by skinnymuch » Sat, Jul 15, 2017, 8:14 PM UTC

indigo0086 wrote: post #159

skinnymuch wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When NASA funds private sector projects, the people aren't the funding, the money is. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point. I don't get what you're saying.

I quickly and poorly tried to make a point, so let me just state what I envision. NASA is one giant government entity bogged down by bureaucracy like any other govt org. The private sector can grow, and become competitive for the greatest minds, more efficient tech, and more networked understanding of what is needed to accomplish this mission. Each company will do what is in the best interest of their company and inv…

Wouldn't SpaceX most likely not be around, at least not close to where it is now, without NASA being such a big source of money?

Post by pier25 » Sat, Jul 15, 2017, 9:22 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #179

pier25 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would explain the Fermi paradox

The Fermi Paradox is different. It's really about interstellar colonization, not just travel. It's basic geometric growth: the Universe is old-enough and geometric growth is fast-enough that, if interstellar colonization is possible, aliens would have spread across every habitable planet in the galaxy, just as all life does. They would already be here. Therefore, there is some filter that prevents the vast majority o…

Well, first, to be able to colonize you must first be able to travel and if bureaucracy is preventing travel it is also preventing colonization.

And second, my previous comment was a joke.

Re: NASA admits it doesn’t have the funding to land humans on Mars

Re: NASA admits it doesn’t have the funding to land humans on Mars