The simple answer: Gravity. It takes a lot of energy, and therefore it's very expensive, to send up a rocket that can escape Earth's gravitational pull.
2007-05-25 02:09:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Nature Boy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well mercury is out of the question because its too hot on one side and too cold on the other Getting there will be pretty HOT. Venus is too hot period. Lead will melt on the surface and the pressure in enormous. Currently, moon is the only thing accessible because it orbits the earth and is the closest.
Mars is the only place possible to go and live and build a colony but not anytime soon because of technology, politics and the amount of money involved. The problem is also communication time: when Mars is at it furthest distance from Earth it take radio waves 22 minutes to get there. So when you say hello, it takes 22 minutes to get there than you have to wait 22 minutes for a reply. In addition, mars also has 24 hour days and when you are on the other side of mars you can't communicate unless you put a satellite in mars orbit to relay the signal another costly thing!
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune are gas giants so don't even bother to go there. Their moons are a possibility but a long long time in the future.
So for now lets just take care of Earth and live here in peace.
2007-05-25 02:47:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Basically, the reason it is taking so long to explore other planets or have habitations, is that every country has handed their space program over to its ineffecient government.
Like our government, they think that space is just there, and that they must fix the problems at home first.
It's sad that the problems will never be fixed.
However, if we want to explore space, we should start letting corporations compete in the space race. Already this is happening with Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, Bigelow Aerospace, and Virgin Airlines.
I figure that once corporations get involved with space, we'll get some momentum going and be in space.
2007-05-25 03:29:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by josephwiess 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
All the futuristic dreams went away into the unrealistic dream land from which they came. I am so sad about it too. Back in the 1960s I was really looking forward to the amazing things I was going to get to see and experience in the far distant future year 2000. How disappointing it is now that I am here in the future. The future isn't what it used to be. Sigh...
2007-05-25 02:29:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Anything wrong with planet earth? is there a better one out there where we can sell real estate. Who would live on mars or pluto? of course location is important in real estate.
Futhermore it would be dificult to show the land for sale on mars due to inadequate funds provided for travel cost the gas etc. its not all income tax deductible.It is also very time consuming and the client may not consumate my sale.
So it appears that we are not really that anxious to travel so many years to go to another planet only to find that there is no place like earth.
2007-05-25 02:29:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by goring 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Money. It costs big bucks and there has been no financial reason to go back, until now. Now with the race to return to the moon to harvest the Helium 3 there (for fusion technology), we will see at least 3 countries there in the next 20 years, living there too, not just visiting. At hundreds of billions of dollars a ton, Helium 3 was just the excuse we needed.
2007-05-25 02:11:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by cinemave 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Money - lack thereof. Desire - see Money.
It is not cheap or easy to get to space, nor is it cheap or easy to set up a permanent colony elsewhere. Apollo cost $40 billion in the 60's! And, after 11, 12, and 13, the national will to continue - along with the desire to siphon money from NASA to other programs (war in Vietnam?) - was simply not there.
We can go back. We will go back. We MUST go back. But I would much rather see - and believe it will be done by - private industry as a pay-as-you-go, for-profit venture.
The Earth is far too small and fragile a basket for the human race to put all its eggs in. - Robert Heinlein
2007-05-25 02:59:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Adam G 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Greetings.
Personally, I think they should be using the money to fix and save the "Planet Earth" first.
Maybe their waiting for a Motivation. Like "ARMAGEDON"(not the movie) to give them a reason to spend Trillions of dollars.
Politically, morally Govts. citizens of every country need to unite, become "Citizens of the World" etc. To work together instead of feeling safe, secure or not whichever the case, behind their borders. Oblivious to others. In this way there maybe hope to accomplish anything we all put our minds, money too . Instead of squandering the money on Religious and Political sqabbling. All that goes with it that's counter productive.
My Opinion only I'm not forcing it on anyone. Ciao. Lynda
2007-05-25 02:25:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hmm you would like to live in pressurized homes? On the moon? ok...compared to when you were at school this is the future enjoy it, there is nothing glamorous about living in space where there is no oxygen and ....no outdoors, no fresh air and no sunlight. You l ive a sheltered life my friend if you call these dreams...Get out of the house and enjoy the little time we have on earth..geeeez. GET NEW DREAMS......and dont start with the "what about the green house effect etc..."
2007-05-25 02:14:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by briz_ee 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Cutbacks in space science funding over the last 38 years and tons of money wasted on the International Space Station because Russia was unable to fulfill their financial obligations to the project.
2007-05-25 16:18:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by kwilfort 7
·
0⤊
0⤋