Space Travel

[HerbertSu]

What type of (deadly) radiation would we encounter in space if we were to fly around aimlessly? Either than that, what's really stopping us from getting the hell off of this rock?

[mrorville1]

Well if we had limitless money at scientists disposal . We could find a way. 

[ACG52]

Gravity.

 

 

[Sato]

Space expeditions are expensive and people have ties to those who'd rather remain on earth.

[D H]

What type of (deadly) radiation would we encounter in space if we were to fly around aimlessly? Either than that, what's really stopping us from getting the hell off of this rock?

Money.

Getting into space is somewhat expensive. NASA's budget is 17 billion dollars per year. SpaceX just sent an automated spacecraft to the Space Station. To date, SpaceX has received (and spent) about a billion dollars to develop their launchers and their Dragon vehicle.

 

Lack of money.

Getting into space isn't that expensive. Americans annually spend about twice NASA's annual budget just on pizza.

 

Lack of money worldwide.

NASA accounts more than 1/2 of the world's total spending on civilian space endeavors.

 

No air, no food, no water.

Everything needed to sustain life has to be brought up from Earth. That's expensive and constraining.

 

The ideal rocket equation.

Physics limits how much mass we can realistically send up into space, how fast we can realistically go.

 

Zero-g.

The rocket equation means that astronauts/cosmonauts spend almost all of their time in space in a zero-g environment. This is bad for our bones, our musculature, our organs, and perhaps even our brains.

 

Radiation.

There's no atmosphere, and further out, there's no magnetosphere to protect people from harmful radiation.

 

 

Why should we?

I work in the industry; I am very pro-space. I'm also a realist. Until we can find a very compelling reason to spend more on space exploration, we are going to continue to be hamstrung by budgets that are half the US pizza budget.