Exploring the Sky: The Funding of NASA
From time immemorial, mankind has always looked to the stars as a source of inspiration, awe, and wonder. The night sky has served navigators and explorers for thousands of years, because the stars are always there to light the way home, as well as the way into the unknown. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA] has been on the forefront of space exploration since its founding in 1958, when it replaced the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, which had been in place since 1915. In 1969, decades of research culminated in one of the greatest human achievements in the history of mankind: the Apollo 11 moon landing. Since that moment, detractors of NASA have declared that its mission is over, that space exploration is too expensive for too little material gain, and that private companies could have the same success without federal funds. The question is often asked, “Is NASA worth funding?”
One very prominent school of thought is that humans must eventually emigrate beyond Earth, which would be literally impossible without space exploration. Humanity’s population exploded over the 20th century, and the world is becoming increasingly urbanized. In light of these facts, it is not too much of a stretch to imagine a severe disaster eradicating a large portion of the human race. Following this train of thought, a large number of proponents of off-world colonization have emerged in the scientific community. The Editors of Big Think recall an interview with famed astrophysicist Stephen Hawking, “‘I believe that the long-term future of the human race must be in space,’ Hawking tells Big Think. ‘It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load’" (Para. 2).
In addition to preventing a global catastrophe because of various disasters, NASA is doing a large part in preventing local and personal catastrophes by researching medicine. While on the surface there seems to be a tenuous connection between space and medicine, that connection becomes obvious once it is realized that space exploration and travel has a heavy toll on the human body, and medicine can help overcome these obstacles. In an article for How Stuff Works, Linda C. Brinson explains that “Over the years, NASA can claim at least partial credit for a wide variety of medical innovations, from ear thermometers and automatic insulin pumps to implantable heart defibrillators and improvements in digital mammography technology” (Para. 6). These innovations also include foldable walkers, radiation therapy, and light emitting diodes, which are used in wound healing in brain cancer surgery.
Continuing along this theme, NASA has developed much, much more than medicine. Damon Sims states in The Plain Dealer, “So you're sitting in front of your flat-screen satellite TV, texting your BFF and waiting for the microwave popcorn to beep, and you wonder what has the space program ever done for you? Everything in the paragraph above -- except the chair -- is a space spinoff. All of it.” (para. 1). NASA has developed a huge quantity of what they call spinoffs: technologies directly developed from their research. In Forbes Magazine, TJ McCue states that “There are hundreds of technologies that got their start at NASA. You can search through the database for different categories from consumer to medical to transportation. It is a fascinating collection and the Spinoff effort is essentially an annual report of cool stuff that gets transferred into commercial reality.” (para. 5). On that list are things like memory foam mattresses, remote controlled tractors, and the adjustable smoke detector.
Despite the huge number of advances in technology, medicine, science and our knowledge of the universe, funding NASA is comparatively cheap. During his testimony before congress, famed astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson opines, “The 2008 bank bailout of $750 billion was greater than all the money NASA had received in its half-century history; two years’ U.S. military spending exceeds it as well. Right now, NASA’s annual budget is half a penny on your tax dollar. For twice that–a penny on a dollar–we can transform the country from a sullen, dispirited nation, weary of economic struggle, to one where it has reclaimed its 20th century birthright to dream of tomorrow.” (para. 12). In spite of the comparatively low cost of funding, there is a loud dissenting voice that NASA’s funding should be spent elsewhere, such as defense. However, in an article for the Independent Voter Network, Jason Brown notes, “Fortunately, the government contractor, Lockheed Martin, will have no such worries come January’s fiscal crisis, because their scheduled production of F-35s [fighter jets] next year has already been paid in advance, even though recent reports from government officials indicate continuing delays in their production until 2019.” (para.
. About 3,000 of these fighter jets are to be built, and with a price tag of $65 Million apiece, the total cost of these planes alone runs to $195 Billion, and they will return none of the research on medicine, technology, or energy that we as a species so desperately need.
In spite of the limited budget of NASA, space exploration has come a long way in a very short time. In 1969, when the Apollo 11 rocket landed on the moon, travelling to other stars was a laughable idea, fit only for science fiction writers. However, In an article in Gizmodo, Jesus Diaz states, “According to Dr. [Harold] White [Advanced Propulsion Theme Lead for the NASA Engineering Directorate], ‘by harnessing the physics of cosmic inflation, future spaceships crafted to satisfy the laws of these mathematical equations may actually be able to get somewhere unthinkably fast—and without adverse effects.’" (para. 7). Furthermore, Dr. Harold White and his associates note in a research paper that “Within the shell thickness of the warp bubble region, the spacecraft never locally breaks the speed of light and the net effect as seen by earth/ship observers is analogous to watching a film in fast forward. Consider the following to help illustrate the point – assume the spacecraft heads out towards Alpha Centauri and has a conventional propulsion system capable of reaching 0.1c. The spacecraft initiates a boost field with a value of 100 which acts on the initial velocity resulting in an apparent speed of 10c. The spacecraft will make it to Alpha Centauri in 0.43 years as measured by an earth observer and an observer in the flat space-time volume encapsulated by the warp bubble.” What this means in actual English is that NASA is currently developing a “warp drive” like the ones seen in science fiction. By grabbing a piece of “empty” space and pulling it as if it were the band of a slingshot, this engine will propel a bubble of space which houses a spaceship at enormous speeds; fast enough to get to the moon in under an hour, and to our nearest cosmological neighbor [Alpha Centauri, 4.37 light years away] in about 5 ½ months. As it sits, our current propulsion technology would get us there in just over 100 years.
If humanity could collectively turn its eyes to the sky, it would find myriad new and exciting things to learn and ways to improve our lives, potentially billions of new homes, and a much cheaper pastime than war. The continued funding of space exploration, and NASA in particular, is essential to ensure that we, as humans, are capable of leaving home when we have to, and that we are able to explore the vast untold reaches of space. As we continue to grow as a species, our needs will outstrip our home planet, and we will be forced to leave it at some point or another. Clearly, continuing to research space exploration will allow for further development in all areas of technology, especially medicine and propulsion, and despite the low cost, creates an incredible amount of value for all of humankind.
Works Cited
Big Think Editors. “#5: Stephen Hawking's Warning: Abandon Earth—Or Face Extinction.” Big Think. 6 Aug. 2010. Web. 20 Feb. 2013.
Brinson, Linda C. “What Breakthroughs in Medicine Came From NASA?” HowStuffWorks.
Brown, Jason. “The Paradox of NASA Budget Cuts.” Independent Voter Network. The Foundation for Independent Voter Education. 25 Nov. 2012. Web. 4 Feb. 2013.
Diaz, Jesus. “NASA Starts Work on Real Life Warp Drive.” Gizmodo.com. 17 Sep 2012. Web. 4 Feb. 2013.
McCue, TJ. “10 NASA Spinoff Technology Products And The Optimus Prime Contest.” Forbes. 26 Nov 2011. Web. 6 Feb. 2013.
Sims, Damon. “How We Have Benefitted From NASA’s 50 Years.” Cleveland.com. The Plain Dealer. 20 Oct. 2008. Web. 6 Feb. 2013.
Tyson, Neil deGrasse. “Past, Present and Future of NASA – U.S. Senate Testimony.” Hayden Planetarium. 7 Mar 2012. Web. 20 Feb. 2013.
White, Harold, Paul March, Nehemiah Williams, and William O’Neil. “Eagleworks Laboratories: Advanced Propulsion Physics Research.” The National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA Johnson Space Center. 5 Dec. 2011. Web. 4 Feb. 2013.
Author
Topic: ___/The Writer's Apprenticeship\___ (Read 314292 times)