PCWorld Forums: Thank You, Space! How Nasa Tech Makes Life Better On Earth - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for Thank You, Space! How NASA Tech Makes Life Better on Earth here

We should not only be supporting nasa. But other R&D initiatives as well. There's tons of stuff out there that could have enormous benefit to society and we should be using our resources to discover it. If we gave these resources 1/10th of what we give the defense industry we could fund a lot of beneficial efforts and create a lot of high tech jobs/new industries along the way.

I think the research priorities should be reducing dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear energy, as well as feeding the soon to be 10 billion world population. Creating odour eating underpants and non scratch USB keys seem rather weak in comparison.

chriscork, on 08 May 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

Those are spinoffs, not projects directly created by NASA. NASA's research is what allows such technology to come about.

Wireless
Microprocessors
Lasers
LEDs
Water purification
Oxygen recycling
Solar Energy
Geological and Weather research
Solar Energy
Fusion Energy research
Alternative fuel research
Plasma rockets
Insulation
Medical Equipment
Robotics

How do none of these fit the criteria of what you are asking for? Present day knowledge of fusion wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for discoveries made regarding how stars work. Many alternative energy sources, such as solar power, were revolutionized by NASA.

Also using the term "nuclear energy" to solely describe fission energy is a bit of a misnomer. Nuclear fission is a ecological disaster waiting to happen. Nuclear FUSION is the most powerful, and environmentally safe, form of energy you could possible have. Water goes in, helium comes out. Fusion energy is the future.

NASA is completely worth the half-a-penny spent on it.

This post has been edited by user6qgu: 08 May 2012 - 12:14 PM

I'd like NASA better if they had a way to get to space.

And let's not forget Tang!

Yargs, on 08 May 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

Indeed! Thank you General Foods! http://en.wikipedia....iki/Tang_(drink)

hfdgaas, on 08 May 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

They do -- They're just in a transitional period ... just as they were between project Apollo and the Space Shuttle from 1975-1981 (and also due to the failure of Congress).

While you'r at it, check out Boeing, Lockheed Martin, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada Corp., Orbital Sciences Corp, XCOR Aerospace, Armadillo Space Systems and others to name just a few. They're all working on commercial space vehicles and launch systems that NASA will purchase the services of to get into space.

chriscork, on 08 May 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

NASA is vital to national defense and provided information that saved American lives many times over.

Closer to earth we have quiet and efficient engines, fly-by wire systems, thermo-electric anti-icing for wings, wind shear warning devices, lighting protection and automated Air Traffic controls.

chriscork, on 08 May 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

Please consider that NASA pays for itself every single time a weather satellite spots a hurricane or typhoon in time to give people advanced warning. Also, the humanitarian benefits of a space program extend far beyond this (as previously mentioned).

NASA used to inspire. The "steely-eyed missile men" who put a men on the moon and always succeeded in what they were doing against all odds.

The massive tech innovation back in the glory days of space flight was done by private corporations, not by the government agency. The government paid for it, the corporations R&D-ed.

Today NASA is a willing tool of corrupt politicians. They no longer inspire. The entire space program is dead. Sure, they hype their Orion now, but the US can't finance it either way.

If you watch NASA backwards, it's about a space agency that has no spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on moon.

Actually, 'space tech' is often given credit for teflon, but it was invented in 1938, and it was used for uranium enrichment for the 'Manhattan Project' in their gaseous diffusion plant.

Edohiguma, on 10 May 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:

Actually, it makes no difference which way you watch NASA. Either way, the progression is:

1) No spaceflight capability
2) Low Earth orbits
3) Land on Moon
4) Low Earth orbits
5) No spaceflight capability

So, did you miss all of that SpaceX stuff that happened a couple of weeks ago?

Launch, dock, return. All successful.