isn't it about time to go back to the moon again?

Answer 1

Interesting set of answers so far. I'll try and address them as well as your question.

The current plan is to go back to the moon with the new Constellation program under progress at NASA. The new spacecraft being designed is called Orion and the rockets to carry it are being called Ares I and Ares V. The plan is to try and get back there by 2018.

In regards to what can be learned...NASA generates a great deal of science touching on every industry here on Earth. Our government currently spends $45 billion on Welfare compared to NASA which receives $16 billion. And NASA provides the support for weather satellites, agricultural planning, city planning, improved water usage...etc... (This is actually a very long list) that all make it cheaper and more accessible for all poor people to receive the benefits. But don't get confused, NASA is not a corporation...it's goals are to produce science from exploration. It does not need to generate a profit. It just so happens that by doing this research, we see a return in our Gross National Product. The current return on investment is reported as 1:3. For every $1 spent, $3 are generated as profit. This ratio has been as high as 1:9.

In regards to why Apollo was cancelled, it wasn't because they couldn't justify the science. If you read "The Last Man on the Moon" by Gene Cernon, you'll see that Apollo 17 (the last mission) was doing far more science than previous missions (they actually brought the first scientist). Unfortunately the public wasn't as excited and the "race" with the soviets had been won. Apollo was expensive, 4% of the GNP, compared to NASA today being 0.0167% of the GNP. And NASA is producing far more science then it did back then.

The thing to be really excited about are missions to Mars. Those missions will cause a shift in technology that will drastically effect our society, because it will most likely depend on quantum technology for a portion of the mission. Quantum entanglement will do as much for the human race as electricity has in the last 100 years. It will help revolutionize medicine, communication and energy in ways that are hard to fathom....but I'll be happy to explain them if you want to send me an email.

Thanks for asking a great question!

Answer 2

I'm sure there's still plenty to learn from exploring the moon further, including if nothing else the prospect of commercial gains. But I don't see the point in sending people there, at least not right now, as it costs a whole lot of money to get them up there. Whereas we can send robotic probes that work very well (the Mars' rovers for example) out there for only a fraction of the cost of sending a person. Until we can find a more cost effective way of transporting a human into space (the biggest challenge of course is keeping them alive en route) I say we stick with the unmanned probes.

Answer 3

on condition that NASA or another area company manages to position in a Superconducting Ring (power of two.5 to 4 Tesla) into the moon to create a magnetic container which deflects cosmic, x-ray and gamma radiation. Then we can start up the job of creating an wonderful, wealthy and thick ecosystem by skill of laying down some grass, planting some acorn trees and stating a group of squirrels, hamsters, etc All creatures which breathe aerobically (take up oxygen) supply off water vapor, CO2 and methane. Their waste products also decompose into nitrogen. This organic procedure will take about 100 years although. ultimately, farms animals and human beings can bypass up. Write on your area company.

Answer 4

I don't think we ever should have stopped. The problem is NASA's funding is based on elected officials' interpretations of the general public's opinion, which sucks for NASA. Unfortunately, there's no way effective to get rid of people's short-sitedness, so it looks like we'll continue to be stuck on Earth for a while longer.

Answer 5

After a few trips. it was hard for NASA to even pretend that the astronauts were doing anything more than play in the sand. They had to go back to using their funding for research. Of course they could send someone there again, if somebody pays for it.

Answer 6

Here is what you do, stand backwards in front of a wall mirror, pull your pants down, look between your legs, there you will find the moon you are looking for.

Answer 7

HMMM....Why don't we not waste the money on the space and use some of it to help find a cure for an illness on earth....Sound like fun??? i say stop spending money on the outerspace and focus on Earth and the people on it...

Answer 8

Wouldn't than be nice? I sure wish we could find a cheaper way to do it. Maybe we will in another few years.

Answer 9

I propose that we send our current presidential administration to the moon so they can look for WMD there ;)

Answer 10

Not after Ralph Kramden died, and can no longer send you there.