Would it not make more sense to create a new advanced Hubble Telescope to replace the failing one than to goto Mars?
2007-01-29 16:34:01 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Well, I think Mars would be a heck of a lot less habitable than Earth could ever be. If you can build a station on Mars, it could surely support life as easily if built on Earth. Mars doesn't even have an atmosphere.
2007-01-29 16:57:56 · answer #1 · answered by Bog-man 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If mankind doesn't wipe itself out first, the day will come when Earth will no longer be able to support our species (..over-population, a thoroughly polluted atmosphere and oceans, all natural resources depleted, etc.,.) We have two choices -- (1)stay here and become extinct; (2)move outward into the galaxy to find a second, third, etc., home
The Hubble Telescope provides a wealth of information about our universe, but does little towards attaining #2 above. On the other hand, developing the technology to travel to and from Mars does.
2007-01-30 00:54:49 · answer #2 · answered by Chug-a-Lug 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you ask why waste money on unimportant things then suggest wasting money on a project that would probably only result in more pretty pictures....strange.
in the long run, one day the sun will expand and life on this planet will end.
We do not know when that will occur, we think it will be a while, but who knows.
The odds of an asteroid impacting the planet with sufficient force to wipe out civilization as we know it increase daily since they happen about every 60000 years and we are way over due.
By keeping all our 'eggs in one basket' we ensure that one day we will be destroyed, sooner or later we will die as a species.
The only sensible course is to go to other bodies in the solar system, starting with the moon, mars and probably a large moon around Jupiter or Saturn, several iirc have magnetic fields.
2007-01-30 01:55:04 · answer #3 · answered by Malikail 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Hubble cost $2 billion when completed 17 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope
A conservative estimate for a new telescope would be on the order of $20 billion if completed 5 yrs from now.
That's substantial chunk of change that must be siphoned from other budgetary items.
2007-01-30 01:34:44 · answer #4 · answered by arbiter007 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. If we can go to Mars and eventually make it habitable for human life, it would be much more important. So what if we have fancier pictures, we can do that too, but Mars is a priority.
2007-01-30 00:42:49 · answer #5 · answered by csucdartgirl 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would also make more sense to take money from these social programs and give it to NASA. NASA has done more great things for this country than our social programs ever will.
2007-01-30 01:18:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋