Space, a robots frontier
In a 2016 article from Sky News, a
UK based media news center, an argument was made against the future of human
space travel. Titled "Stop Sending Humans Into Space-Top Astronomer"
the stance on the subject was fairly clear, arguing that the additional cost
required to send humans vs. robots into space is unnecessary
and economically irresponsible. "Martin Rees is a Fellow of
Trinity College and Emeritus Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the
University of Cambridge. He holds the honorary title of Astronomer Royal."
Lord Rees stated "I think the future of human spaceflight worldwide
is really only as an adventure and spectator sport." This is not to say
that human space travel should be discontinued all together, just that the
public should not be required to pay for it. Private organizations such as
Space X are welcome to do as they please, but as robots become more capable,
there is little reason to spend the additional funds necessary to cater to
human life requirements in space. The UK spent £70 million over the last 4
years on their human spaceflight program and with a budget the third the size
of NASA’s that money could be better used.
The
article also include the point of view from Astronaut Tim Peake, stating, "This
is about the UK becoming involved in human spaceflight hopefully for the
foreseeable future. Space is going to play an increasingly important role in
our lives and if the UK is not in the forefront of that we are missing out
quite simply." Peake has been conducting over 260 science experiments in
space while orbiting earth, all of which have been submitted by millions of
school children throughout the UK. Tim argues that this is attracting a new
generation into science which is a growing part of the UK’s Economy.
It
is my opinion that manned spaceflight/exploration should continue to be
pursued. While robots technology may continue to advance, and their
capabilities to conduct scientific experiments will increase. There is still
something to be said for the cause of human exploration. We have traveled
around the world, and several have even stepped foot on the moon. These were
important moments in our history. Reaching the moon was a massive technological
achievement and a significant matter of pride for the United States. It brought
the American people together as they all watched and listened. I believe we will
see a similar effect when humans land on the surface of Mars. It will inspire
the youth to pursue science and technology. It will bring unity to the nation
as its people watch and pray for the success and safe return of the astronauts.
I do not believe that robot exploration can invoke the same emotional reaction
on as large a scale as human exploration of space. Instilling the ideas that
perhaps my children or grandchildren may see a day that space travel is common.
My
argument for the continuance of human exploration is strictly an emotional one.
I do not discount a robots ability to conduct successful and meaningful scientific
experiments. It makes sense to drive cost down by removing all of the elements
required to sustain human life in space. This decrease the cost and weight of
the spacecraft enabling them to carry a greater payload. All of which makes
sense. A robots endurance far outweighs that of a human astronaut. I do however
believe that there is something extra driving the scientists and engineers,
when they know their math, or their structure is carrying a living breathing
human into space. It makes the work more meaningful, more real, and may as a
result, cause them to take it less seriously.
I
hope we continue to pursue manned spaceflight. I think it is a good thing. It
may not be the most effective means of conducting scientific experiments, or exploding
outside our world, but it adds meaning to the voyage. It highlights our
abilities as humans to go off into the unknown and return home.
http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~mjr/
Comments
Post a Comment