NASA Ponders an Asteroid Shot

In this article, NASA considers taking humans to an asteroid instead of the moon. The distance to the asteroid could end up being much larger in comparison to the moon which will allow NASA to gain experiance in further space travels. Scientists and engineers feel that it would be good practice to tavel to mars because it would allow them to test the same new systems that would be going to mars over a far distance. Also, they want to test the make up of an asteroid incase of future collisions with earth. Scientists feel that if they know more about asteroids they can better predict how to save earth from one. This expedition wouldnt occur for about the next 20 years, but scientists are looking into different asteroids. I find this article interesting as it is a step in the right direction to being able to have people travel to mars and test their equipment. If scientists continue to make these advancements in space travel it is very possible that one day in the future astronauts would be able to travel very large distances to other planets as well.

Yes, if taking humans to an asteroid will lead to more discoveries , then I won't be against it, but if NASA is doing this for entertainment purposes only then I will not agree to their plans. Let's say NASA is doing this for the better, then I will support them. As everyone can see, NASA/space explorations has made our lives so much better, they not only allow us to have the technology we now use/have, they are also encouraging students like us to have an interest in doing these kinds of things, just look at the students in university, why do they bother with their studies and work so hard to achieve what they desire? they simply want to become like those who work for NASA, to discover things, to help the world to become a better place. If we don't support NASA, wouldn't that also be an economic crisis? people not getting a job with what they know/ what they are interested in?. So NASA cannot be ignored, I mean many peoples dream is to work and discover new things, if there is no science, then what will they do? wouldn't their whole life just be a waste for all the things they spent time to understand? I think so.

Our economic is honestly not so good at the moment, but think about it this way.. if we allow NASA to do their discoveries, in the end, we will be the ones benefiting. If NASA is able to provide new ideas/technology, it will help us, I am not saying it will stop the worlds economic problems but it could be a source to stop or at least help economic problems.

Also, space explorations is not as expensive as you think, I once thought it was a waste, but after understanding what NASA is trying to do and how much it gets to do its missions, I finally came to understand that NASA does not get a lot of fund from the government, and yet they are able to offer so many good technology to us. We as humans are so greedy, we want more and better technology and we are never satisfied. NASA is trying to help us to meet our wants. Although there is no guarantee that there will always be a good discovery, but there is also no guarantee that we can't get anything out of it either. So its a 50-50 thing, to support space explorations or not.

Every time I think about all the technological advances that's available today, I can't bring myself to not support NASA/space explorations, but still the question of shouldn't we save our resources for the unexpected unfortunates? and why should we spend money on NASA where there are so many problems here on Earth? are still questions I can not agree or disagree to.

NASA seems to be hitting two birds with one stone in this situation. It makes sense to travel a furthur distance to an asteroid which could provide, as the article stated, valuble information towards the prevention of a collision between the earth and an asteroid. Along with this, we will be traveling distances that have never been travelled before. Both of these together could provide huge advancements in space travel along with security from protential apocalyptic collisions with asteroids. I fully agree with choosing to travel to an asteroid rather than the moon. Considering the outcomes, it makes logical sense.

that's the perfect way to put it two birds with one stone! but the thing is longer space travel for humans gets dangerous as the days go by and complications within the human body can occur i think that they should just leave it to the robots or make better advancements on the robots so we are not risking lives of our fellow NASA teammates!

This is a really interesting idea and it's amazing how far space travel has actually come. At first I thought that this would probably be a waste of money. Because if you really think about it the expenses would not just stop once the mission has taken place. There would be numerous after effects, such as the cost to do the research, repair and future missions. And if that money is coming from taxes especially in a time when the economy is not at its greatest, than I wouldn't be surprised to hear that there is a lack of support for it. On the other hand, I think this project would be more like an investment. Our resources on earth will not last forever, and they are already trying to look for alternatives. I think it's really important that NASA does gain more experience for space travel as sooner than later we will need to go to places once considered too dangerous to reach to gain the needs of our technological and industrial life. Another side of it is actually looking at the outcome and dangers of human beings going to missions such as these. Is it worth putting lives in danger for a project that may cause more harm than help?

I agree, it does cost a lot of money and NASA is risking peoples lives but it is for the benefit of science so I fully support it. If scientists stopped research every time they hit a road block or put someone in danger we wouldn't have all the technologies that we have today. Although I do see the loss of natural resources on earth a huge problem, I don't think that that is NASA's responsibility. Their funds shouldn't have to go to those kinds of issues. The universe is a big place and i feel exploration is important.

landing on an asteroid would be cool and all, but i think nasa should figure out how to do the things they already know better. After the failed launch this march and with the amount of tax dollars that the program bleeds, nasa needs to get their priorities in order.

I totally agree that NASA should keep looking into sending humans to an asteroid. Even if the cost of the trip is hugely expensive and it is risky to send people that far into space, it would definitely be advantageous to try something so different. Since we've never been that far into space before, it'd give our scientists some huge projects and work on and eventually give us new and different technologies. Also, the fact that the investigation of the composition of the asteroids would definitely help us to better understand how to avoid their collisions with earth. Not to mention how sweet it would to eventually get people to land on mars!

It's not very realistic to send robots or something of that kind to asteroids, since the tax payers dollars could put to much better use finding new technologies to get the astronauts out to a asteroid so far away, and to keep them safe while traveling those great distances.

Ya I agree that they shouldnt put a robot on a asteroid, but collecting data from it could be very interesting to see what they find. As far as tax dollars, it is expensive but if i was an american paying taxes i wouldnt mind my tax dollars going to NASA. Yeah maybe an asteroid isn's as fascinating as going to mars, but there at least taking steps in the right direction.

How vital would landing on an asteroid really be? It sounds to me like something the soviets would have done way back to piss off the americans. To me it seems like a waste of money, not only because there's no reason to land on an asteroid but also because its a waste of resources from a country that is clearly in an economic hole.

Quote :

i think that they should just leave it to the robots or make better advancements on the robots so we are not risking lives of our fellow NASA teammates!

couldnt agree more. It seems ridiculous that we wouldnt just sent out robots to do the dangerous work for us. If it means waiting a couple years in order to design a robot able to manuver on an asteroid and gather the desired test materials, then we should wait. Why risk an astranauts life on a new mission like this; I think ensuring it is possible by risking a robots life is a safer practice, and it makes more sense when taking into consideration the extreme danger which this mission brings. If the astranaut is willing to risk his life like that, however, then he may as well. I just think keeping one's life through this situation would be a very challenging task

thats exactly what i was thinking like let the robots do there thing and maybe just maybe if they gather enough information then they should send humans but only if there sure its okay i know in any space trip there's a risk but if they use the robots the robots can gather enough information to minimize that risk and with this information eventually the live astronauts will be sent to observe and report allowing a greater advancement in our knowledge of space!

I think that if NASA could send humans to asteroids to inquire about them that it would be a great advancement for humans and would be very beneficial to be able to learn things about asteroids and other parts of space that we didn’t know about before. Even though this will not occur for another 20 years the excitement of what discoveries can be made brings about much anticipation towards this type of project. If this can potentially save earth from asteroid collisions it is a great project that should be finalized and actually happen.