[ad_1]
If we can visit the Moon about half a century ago, why not go now? Why has NASA's greatest success over the past 20 years in the last few years, despite growing technology and growing investments?
Perhaps you believe in the conspiracy that the United States and NASA have deceived human beings. Your strongest argument for this may well have been the moon for 45 years. According to some, we are far behind our expectations, according to some at the beginning of the space age. There are many questions that must be answered by saying that we are scientifically and technologically advanced in our era of space.
The Apollo 11 mission of July 20, 1960 was a case. A series of experiments were performed on the moon of the Earth. After that, everyone went home. It was impossible because of the conditions we had to make a permanent presence on the moon. We are discussing going into Mars right now, but we have not been back on the moon for 45 years.
The last inhabited campaign against the Moon was the Apollo 17 mission in December 1972. It is therefore more than 45 years old. The first stop of the person who wants to colonize Mars will be Moon again. The space bases, departure stations and centers that will be built there will be the key role of the whole process. We are going to build space telescopes on the moon, and even the busiest area of space tourism will still be the moon. Always the same question: why have not you been online for 45 years?
recently in Turkey in the next retired astronaut Chris Hadfield, told Business Insider recently, "Months in the establishment of a permanent research station, is the next logical step. We can not kill someone to be mistaken. Without reaching deeper
The real problem is not the technical processes, but as can be expected, it is extremely expensive. It is said that Trump will get NASA's state budget of $ 5.5 billion this year, $ 19.9 billion in 2019. James Webb Space Teleskobu, building new launch systems (such as SLS), Jupiter remote tasks with unmanned vehicles, Mars vehicles, various probes to go to the asteroid belt, the discovery tool to be sent to the Kupier belt, Another probe for get closer to … all in the same period.
Economically, NASA is very small compared to the past. Trump is giving this budget to the Moon for setting up a station and for the March launch, but launch systems like SLS are extremely expensive. So more is needed.
A 2005 NASA report suggested that a trip to the moon cost $ 104 billion. With the current economy, this figure rises to $ 133 billion. Where Trump's $ 19.9 billion, where to get $ 133 billion …
Let's talk about political reasons and nausea:
The immediate goal of the Trump administration is to send astronauts to the moon in 2023. This, in the case of Trump's reelection coincides with the end of the second presidency.
With regard to astronauts, the process of designing, engineering and testing a spacecraft capable of transporting people to another world is not a matter of time for a two-term president. With each new president, cabinet and management, the functioning of space is almost nil. So, in this respect, NASA is not an isolated institution of American politics.
Hundreds of important names like astronauts Scott Kelly, Jim Lovell, Buzz Aldrin (the second person who set foot on the moon), have always had the same problems to send
. So the problem you will understand is not the technological development, the ambition or the work. There are millions of young people who are able to work on this subject. These young people also exist in our country. The real problem is the meaning of politics in the period when space and knowledge are whips. It's disgusting scientists all over the world. They have not been able to go to the moon for 45 years because they have just disturbed them. Maybe hundreds of additional discoveries should be made for these situations.
