NASA Ames Center may be closed; maybe NT Center, too
from the penny-wise… dept.
According to an article from the Gannett News Service (ìNASAís future in balance; closures seem imminentî, by Larry Wheeler, 26 December 2001), the Bush Administration is conducting a thorough review of the core needs and capabilities of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). According to the article, the review will include consideration of the possibility of closing down one of NASAís ten major regional centers. The report states that one of the centers that is considered vulnerable to closure or conversion to a private, non-government research park is the Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California, in the south San Francisco Bay area. NASA Ames is home to the Center for Nanotechnology. The impact that closure of the Ames Center, and any other cuts that might result from the review, would have on NASA nanotechnology efforts is unclear.
December 28th, 2001 at 11:15 AM
This could be good and bad.
What the Federal Government takes away with one hand it sometimes restores with the other. It is also possible that many of the scientists and engineers fired in these shutdowns may return to business, industry and academe thereby aiding nano research in those quarters.
December 28th, 2001 at 11:15 AM
An empire recedes?
NASA's withdrawal from nanotech research is just a side effect of a more historically significant development. We have to face the possibility that the U.S. may give up manned space travel for reasons of governmental "economy." If some other nation, like, say, China, doesn't take up the initiative, then humanity is likely to be stuck on this planet indefinitely.
A lot of Transhumanist scenarios assume some kind of breakthrough into the universe, but they don't take into account (a) the harshness of the environment beyond Earth's magnetic field (those pesky heavy atomic nuclei in cosmic rays — talk about free radical damage!); and (b) the fact that the overwhelming majority of people display values at odds with such bold colonization schemes. The fact is, only aberrational people display an interest in such ideas, and they for the most part don't have the resources and power to pull off projects of this sort.
December 28th, 2001 at 11:41 AM
Cover Up Story
To put it simply, it's all a deception. They're just shutting trying to fool the public into thinking that all projects will be put to an end, when in fact, they're in full force. The reason they're doing this, is most likely to keep things more secret and keep everything out of the public eye so that they can have more control of the technology once it matures. In other words, they're scared shitless and this is the way they intend to keep things under wraps…though, they're already destined to fail. What man makes…man can break.
December 28th, 2001 at 12:12 PM
Re:An empire recedes?
I don't know if it's safe to say that we'll be stuck on this planet indefinitely. It's really just a question of economy. Shipping live humans into outer space will always be very expensive in comparison to other methods of space exploration and colonization.
I believe that civilization will eventually reach the nearby stars but I strongly doubt that this will happen as Star Trek portrays it. I think it will always be true that robots and automatation will hugely outnumber human beings. I think it's very likely that we will have engineered ourselves into new forms and bodies to make survival in outer space cheap. Our culture will reach the nearby stars eventually but I strongly doubt that its chief representitives will look like us apes.
December 28th, 2001 at 3:43 PM
Re:An empire recedes?
We have to face the possibility that the U.S. may give up manned space travel for reasons of governmental "economy." If some other nation, like, say, China, doesn't take up the initiative, then humanity is likely to be stuck on this planet indefinitely
Someone will boot strap themselves into orbit . . . but they may not be English speaking. Chinese may be the language spoken in the moon in several hundred years, and they'll tolerate 'po' white trash' from North America on restricted immigration quotas.
That doesn't have to be. There are a small minority of business people in the US with the vision to see beyond the next quarter's forcast, if only the government would get off their backs. Beal Aerospace being a prime example.
December 29th, 2001 at 1:21 AM
Re:An empire recedes?
I don't think it is as simple as the frequent refrain of "privatizing the space industry."
500 years ago abstract scientific research could exist on the patronage of a few rich elites but now, abstract scientific research cannot exist without major government funding.
There is no direct profit in serendip, therefore the private sector's R&D will always be confined to engineering refinements where the profit potential is already plain.
Some space advocates have for years repeated that, suddenly, the profits in space exploration will magically appear. I don't think this is accurate.
In the decades that followed Columbus' voyage, which was from the very start a fact finding mission to remove the Arabic and Italian middlemen in Indian trade, the potential profits to be made in the new continents were immediately obvious any European autocrat.
Even then it took them a hundred years to achieve things like the British East India Company.
Space exploration, aside from robotic stuff, is nowhere near the bootstrap point. Maybe someday it will make sense to ship gigatonnes of asteroidal material to the Earth but that's still many decades away.
Nano (by aiding the development of space elevators, radical bio-engineering and automated replicating factories) will help greatly but even then I think it may take decades to tune and test the newly terraformed planets, moons and asteroids. It may take a few decades of testing to refine the anatomy and physiology of reshaped humans so they'll thrive in these vaguely earthlike environments.
Privatizing may help but it is only one piece of the puzzle. We get out there eventually but it will take many years.
December 29th, 2001 at 11:30 AM
Re:An empire recedes?
I don't think it is as simple as the frequent refrain of "privatizing the space industry."
Nor do I. But (as you noted in your last paragraph) it is a piece of the puzzle, in my opinion a rather large key piece, but it IS only a piece.
Even then it took them a hundred years to achieve things like the British East India Company.
IMHO, profit was not the only motivating force in the opening of the Americas. The Spanish has a genuine (if, from our POV twisted) motivation to bring more souls into Christendom. You can decry their methods, but you can't deny their effectivness on that point. The east coast of America was settled by (mostly) disgruntled Europeans who weren't concerned about making a profit for their Mother country, they wanted to be left alone.
December 31st, 2001 at 12:45 PM
Re:An empire recedes?
The problem with NASA, like the defense industry is that contractors are paid on a "cost-plus" basis for thier work. This cost-plus policy eliminates any incentive to control costs and, in turn, develop low-cost access to space. The only way that a competitive space industry will ever develop will be if we get rid of NASA, and provide tax or other economic incetives for private industry to pursue space development.
This is a position which we have had since the 1980's when we pushed the Launch Service Purchase Act through congress in 1990. All of non-NSS, non-NASA affiliated pro-space organizations have held this position for over 10 years. I suggest a look at the Space Access Society (www.space-access.org) as well as Jerry Pournelle's (www.jerrypournelle.com) website for more detailed information on this issue.
Large-scale space development will begin once there is effective, low-cost access to space. This can only come about as a result of competitive free-markets, not because of a government bureaucracy.
January 2nd, 2002 at 12:38 PM
Response from CNT at NASA Ames Research Center
Well, I checked into it with in NASA and have to forward a following comment as a response: ——————————————— NASA is planning a review of all programs, as is customery any time when a new administrator comes on board. There is no basis for any fears at NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, CA for closure of the center or jeopardy of the nanotechnology program. What comes to mind is the famous Mark Twain quote " the rumors about my death are greatly exaggerated " that he really had to issue in response to the rumors floating around. Meyya Meyyappan, Director, Center for Nanotechnology, NASA Ames Research Center ———————————————— Deepak