Government decides we need a space agency (1 Viewer)

[Trefoil]

And to be honest, I agree with them. The reasons are compelling: creates jobs, advances science, bolsters economy, expands our manufacturing industry, increases political potency, improves communications sector.

That, and we're the only one of the world's top 20 economies (15th) without one.

http://news.slashdot.org/news/08/11/18/023224.shtml

 

[jb_nc]

Can't they just give every1 like $1 500. that would rule.

 

[eddie101]

Can't they just give every1 like $1 500. that would rule.

LOL


I agree with this decision. Its a pretty good idea extra jobs, possibly cheaper than hiring satellites etc, and what Trefoil said. However still a bit concerned with this comment at the end:

"While this report is welcome, lethargic Government action in a climate of competing concerns is not expected to stem the flow of Space Science brain drain out of Australia any time soon."

That would be a major reason surely - keep our brightest minds here - in Aus - instead of letting them bail overseas

 

[Trefoil]

Don't read too much into it: Slashdot is a news aggregation service built on user submissions. If you'll notice, that specific quote comes from a user, so it's his own opinion on the matter.

He's assuming that the government won't act on this any time soon, hence the brain drain will continue (only for space; the 'general' science brain drain in Australia is a highly debatable phenonemon).

The sad thing is he might be right. Just because the senate commissioned a report on the matter doesn't mean we'll see it bear fruit any time in the next few years. It's a very promising step, however.

Perhaps the most promising thing about the report is the large and detailed scope, as well as the apparent unanimous government backing for the general concept. E.g.: see Appendix 3 - Decadal Plan for Australian Space Science.

 

[Kwayera]

Perhaps coupled with this?

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24662622-5014239,00.html

 

[Trefoil]

The most promising design I've seen for a space elevator is the particle accelerator elevator. It's basically un upright LHC that continuously fires particles around a loop that extends into the sky and the back into the ground. The particles are balanced by a load (e.g. humans or cargo).

It sure beats trying to build what is effectively a long piece of string that extends from the ground to space without snapping.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_fountain

 

[Kwayera]

You just need something strong enough (150 times the strength of steel) and flexible enough.

Like.. carbon nanofibre!

EDIT: I do prefer the space fountain idea though. Read Clarke's novel on the subject?

 

[Trefoil]

I dunno. I just have this gut feeling that people think nanotechnology will solve everything (it's got immense potential, to be sure, but I think it's more like the Internet: you don't plan what works and what doesn't, things just pop up along the way). At least the fountain design is based on already well understood physical principles, and we have the technology to build one right now (but perhaps not the will).

If they ever build a tethered space elevator I'll jump for joy, though.

 

[Trefoil]

Perhaps coupled with this?

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24662622-5014239,00.html

Apparently yes, actually:

Among other possible projects highlighted by the committee was the building of a space elevator, essentially an extremely strong cable stretching from the surface up into space, off the coast of Western Australia.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24642847-661,00.html

 

[Captin gay]

hope they do , by then ill be able to electrical engineer things for them

 

[zstar]

I can't see an Australian space agency do much.

Considering the budget limitations this country might be able to launch a few satellites with foreign assistance.

Personally Australia needs a true heavy industry first.

 

[Trefoil]

I can't see an Australian space agency do much.

Considering the budget limitations this country might be able to launch a few satellites with foreign assistance.

Personally Australia needs a true heavy industry first.

Well there's no point building heavy industry if you don't have a use for it. Here's your use.

And didn't the report conclude that an agency would cost as much as we currently spend on sattelites and such from overseas? So it'd effectively be budget neutral in the long run.

 

[Iron]

The challenge: coal fired space shuttle

 

[Trefoil]

Space Elevator makes the nerd drool.

Make it happen Rudd and I'll forgive y'all what with the internet censordom if you leave it alone. Maybe.

Liberal isn't happy with the filter, Greens ain't happy with the filter, DEAD IN THE ARSE.

ELEVATORS TO SPACESHIPS IS SOMETHING WE CAN ALL GET BEHIND THOUGH.

 

[Trefoil]

News flash: All government spending/tax cuts create jobs.

If they spent the money on hospitals it would increase jobs, increased the skilled workforce and "bolster" the economy just as much. Except better hospitals provide a direct benefit to the taxpayers.

If we must insist on expanding manufacturing (care to explain why?), the why not just give manufacturers a tax cut?

a) Rudd already cut taxes earlier this year.
b) We already fund hospitals with taxpayer dollars. We could do more on average (although with diminishing returns), but it's irrelevant - a budget isn't designed to only fund a single thing at once.
c) A space agency is a great source of scientific and technological innovation, as well as the things already mentioned in previous posts.
d) A space agency and associated infrastructure would cost about as much to maintain as we already spend on renting and using communications satellites and such from overseas. There's no long-term budget drain.

 

[jb_nc]

Hmm, a budget of say, $1 trillion should be adequate for this agency methinks.

 

[Trefoil]

c)Why not just directly invest the money into the scientific and technological innovations we want to develop?

Directly invest the money into science and technology? Oh, you mean like fund communications and physics research under a space agency, perhaps?

Have a look at what NASA does if you want to know what space agencies work on. Here's a hint, though: most of it doesn't actually involve being in space at all (networks research, particle physics, robotics, vision, telecommunications, materials science, biotechnology, etc).

d) That doesn't make any sense. Sources or stfu.

So did you read the fucking government report I linked to at the start of this thread or are you just talking out your arse? 'Cause it mentions it there.