Big mistakes in sf.

[Marvolo]

Very true and quite sly of Herbert.

Most of the stories set near our time period and written before the Challenger tragedy were very optimistic about how far we'd make it by now. Also, NASA did have a fellow working for them, can't remember his name, who had a detailed plan of how we'd have an entire colony at a libration point by now, and a colony on the moon. But he wasn't taken too seriously (and I can sort of agree, for one thing the food problem isn't solved nor the affects of lower gravity on the astronauts) and eventually left and the public opinion of the program's importance was shattered after our first tragedy.

The real problem is that no one in any important position is stepping up and saying, "We have a calling to expand our nation to the only unsettled frontier left to us, space and beyond. We'll make this dream a reality and through diligence also make it bring another financial outlet to our economy. My engineers and scientist tell me that by X year we'll be at Y point, and later at Z year we'll have A, B, and C, completed. In this noble undertaking we'll continue our long history of excellence and devote the necessary resources."

No one is pumped about the space program. No one is setting big goals and getting nations excited about the prospect of meeting them. The best prospect in America right now is a private company that has almost made it to space. But our national space program just sucks.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Also, NASA did have a fellow working for them, can't remember his name, who had a detailed plan of how we'd have an entire colony at a libration point by now, and a colony on the moon.

Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven worked as NASA advisors. They had a committee and lobby group with Robert A Heinlein, Poul Anderson, some space industry executives and scientists, the retired general Daniel Graham, and the astronaut Buzz Aldrin. They called it the "Citizens’ Advisory Council on National Space Policy".

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Most of the stories set near our time period and written before the Challenger tragedy were very optimistic about how far we'd make it by now.

The fact that manned space exploration is dependent on political will was, I think, ignored or forgotten by those writers.

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Also, NASA did have a fellow working for them, can't remember his name, who had a detailed plan of how we'd have an entire colony at a libration point by now, and a colony on the moon. But he wasn't taken too seriously (and I can sort of agree, for one thing the food problem isn't solved nor the affects of lower gravity on the astronauts) and eventually left and the public opinion of the program's importance was shattered after our first tragedy.

Gerard K O'Neill? He wrote the standard text on human colonies in space, The High Frontier.

Originally Posted by Marvolo

The real problem is that no one in any important position is stepping up and saying, "We have a calling to expand our nation to the only unsettled frontier left to us, space and beyond. We'll make this dream a reality and through diligence also make it bring another financial outlet to our economy. My engineers and scientist tell me that by X year we'll be at Y point, and later at Z year we'll have A, B, and C, completed. In this noble undertaking we'll continue our long history of excellence and devote the necessary resources."

No one is pumped about the space program. No one is setting big goals and getting nations excited about the prospect of meeting them. The best prospect in America right now is a private company that has almost made it to space. But our national space program just sucks.

Bush has already said the US will return to the Moon by 2020, although whether that happens depends on his successor. But Nasa are already getting started on Project Constellation. The thing is, the standard justifications for manned space exploration don't bear scrutiny. Technological benefits? Well, Apollo gave us... velcro... and teflon. Scientific benefits? We know a lot more about the Moon than we did before. But we'velearnt as much, if not more, from robot explorers. And that's especially true of the rest of the Solar system. An astronaut on the spot is better than a robot? Well, yes - but way more expensive... We should do it because we can. Yes, the money could be better spent elsewhere - but everyone knows it won't be, it'd just be appropriated for something of even less benefit. Like an invasion :-)

[Marvolo]

Well, it would bear scrutiny if they did things in the right order. They need to make a case for the untapped resources, then they need to present to indepdent companies how they can make money. All that is left is to give heavy incentives to the companies that invest in space exploration and colonization/utilization.

But not a lot of people care really. Bush says that, but at this point he's scraping around for a legacy that doesn't involve huge mistakes made very often.

[Ursa major]

Velcro was a Swiss invention from the Forties. (I was told the inventor got the idea from burrs that were caught on clothing.)

While it's good that we get inventions (I'm sure there are some) from the space programme, space exploration should be done for its own reasons, not spin-offs. (I mean to say, we get spin-offs from war, but I wouldn't want to give those keen on starting wars another reason for going ahead! )

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Ursa major

Velcro was a Swiss invention from the Forties. (I was told the inventor got the idea from burrs that were caught on clothing.)

I knew that. I don't know why I said it was an invention from the Apollo programme. Doh.

I do know that the space pen story is a myth - that Nasa spent hundreds of thousands of dollars developing a pen that could write in zero gravity... The Soviets just used a pencil. The Fisher space pen didn't actually cost Nasa anything.

[Lith]

It's also worth bearing in mind that half the impetus behind the space program related to the cold war, and the shock people felt about Sputnik. Now that the USSR's gone, so's half our reason for pouring vast amounts of money into a space program. That and I think the newness of the idea has worn off in the general public's mind.

[Omphalos]

Originally Posted by Timewalker

Sorry, no. But I save all my PMs so I'll find it and do some searching.

Hi Hypatia. I found that page archived at web archive. Here is the link

Star Wars Origins - Frank Herbert's Dune

[colmywaykurtz]

In addition to the metabolic byproducts of sandworms, Dune also has the sandplankton.

Tattooine, by the way, has the worm-looking thing that almost ate Lando, remember? Jabba's little hover-barge party that went terribly askew?

[Jimcalagon]

Originally Posted by iansales

[...]The thing is, the standard justifications for manned space exploration don't bear scrutiny. Technological benefits? Well, Apollo gave us... velcro... and teflon. [...]

OK, this is a common misconception - neither velcro or teflon were products of the Apollo missions.

However the following are spinoffs from the manned space programmes:-

• Improved Kidney Dialysis machines
• Cat Scanners
• Design and manufacture of sports shoes
• Water purification technology
• Cordless power tools
• Self righting life rafts
• Barcoding
• Ionising Smoke detectors
• Improved Cardiac Pacemakers
• Scratch resistant glasses
• Freeze-dried foods
• Enriched Baby food
• Infrared ear thermometers
• Quartz Clocks

Back to big mistakes in SF... In the first edition of Ringworld, Larry Niven had the Earth rotating the wrong way, with Louis Wu travelling from west to east to prolong his 200th Birthday. This was corrected in later editions, making the first edition extremely collectible.

[lin robinson]

Correct about teflon/goretex/velcro.

In addition to those you list are a slew of plastics like lexan (used in the helmets), high tech foams and adhesives...and of course Tang.

I used to have a subscription to a big book of all the new technology NASA developed, making it available for civilian use. It was as thick as a manhattan phone book and came out twice a year packed with everything from metalurgy to microfiber insulation.

[Jimcalagon]

Originally Posted by lin robinson

Correct about teflon/goretex/velcro.

In addition to those you list are a slew of plastics like lexan (used in the helmets), high tech foams and adhesives...and of course Tang.

Tang was developed before the space program but they had good PR guys.