What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
What gets me is the inability to repeat this. Not that they actually went there, but why we haven't successfully gone back with more advanced tech available to us as there is today? The original crew of travelers had a Radio Shack parts bin thrown together and wrapped it up in a layer of tin foil and they made it there.
Cost-prohibitive today? More capital available to us than ever. Motivation? More people today than ever would love to see a successful human re-visitation of a celestial body -- not just an unmanned probe or vehicle. Priorities? Wouldn't you as a nation love to demonstrate your grasp on the cosmos by going there again?
I guess Artemis is attempting a manned re-visitation of the moon's surface, but it's just staggering to me how it took this long to repeat something that came out of an exponentially more rudimentary period of time. Something doesn't add up. I'm the most curious what sort of tech is being hidden from us, tbh.
Great point, LordK.
More than HALF A CENTURY after the 1969 moon landing, we haven't been back and even the rare UNMANNED landings on the moon sometimes have problems.
Fifty-five years of scientific and tech progress have taken us from primitive computers the size of a small room to wristwatches with far more computing power and memory (not to mention graphics capability) than could be bought for any price in 1969. We've gone from bulky low-res CRTs to "retina" resolution LCDs and other flatscreens; from smog-belching cars to gasoline vehicles whose exhaust is often cleaner than the surrounding air.
But we just can't seem to put humans on the moon again.
Something is off here.
I can tell by your updoots that you’re not alone in your beliefs.