Moon & Mankind

"That's one small step for {a} man, one giant leap for mankind"
Every one quotes this, but I doubt if it is well worth quoting!

Neil Armstrong Said this on the moon on july 20,1969.

What did he mean by a giant leap for mankind ???

31 years after this, I still see nothing useful to mankind
from the mission to the moon.

If the Money was well spent in research in human health and
medicine and other fields we would have a complete cure for
AIDS by now. If that money was spent in someway that helps
mankind then it would have been a giant leap for mankind.

How many of us seriously belive that the mission to the moon
was indeed a giant leap to the mankind ?? If I had a chance
to meet Mr.Neil I would certainly raise this question.

Directly: Microprocessors
InDirectly: A sense of wondrous expansion.

And yes, Matilda, Microprocessors DID get the biggest
initial push from the NASA.

Not to mention graphite for golf clubs (it didn't work as a building metal) and ceramics as strong as steel and as light as balsa.

[Edited by DerFarm on 01-02-2001 at 01:35 PM]

They sent a mission to the moon...and DIDN'T send scientists? :confused:

Surely for something like that they should go rather than pilots?

No...Im not talking about NASA.

I'm Just talking about the mission to the moon.
You can always develop a new microprocessor without planning
for the moon. What this Supposedly Giant Leap for Mankind achieve ?? did it do any good for you or the man living next door ?

I believe it was definitely a giant leap for mankind, it will just be a while before we really find out what good it will do for mankind. I'm sure the same thing was said about computers when they built the monsters earlier in the last century. I think the major thing we stand to benefit from the mission to the moon is eventually colonization of other planets, even though today it is hard to imagine the need to do this, one day our ancestors will have no choice. Well either colonization or selective destruction of life.

I doubt that the total destruction of humanity will be particularly selective :(

Well I'm inclined to agree with YoungBuck on this, I think the main problem we will face/are facing as a species is overpopulation, and it is something our decendants (not ancestors ;)) will have to deal with. This planet can only support so much human life.

Anyway, I'd say that the leap from Earth to the Moon was pretty giant, compared to how far I can leap at least.

Yes, you CAN invent and improve microprocessors without a moon mission. But would you?

500 years of Peace and Freedom: Switzerland invents cuckoo clocks

500 years of war and continuous subjugation: Italy

Michelangelo
Da Vinci
Gallileo

Hmmmm....

OK..

Now....With Your hand on your heart, tell me
if not for the Moon Mission, will we not have
Microprocessor on our desktops today ???

We definitely wouldn't have solar cells.

Actually.....Yeah. I think that without the moon mission
there would be far fewer, far slower, and far more
expensive PC's on our desk today.

Not on my desk there wouldn't, I'm a poor student.

Me too. Oh...wait...scratch the "student" bit - they study... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HarryW
Not on my desk there wouldn't, I'm a poor student.

---

I've a 286 that you can have if you want. Nearly 100 kiloflops of action and tens of thousands of transistors. Try matching that on your desktop with discrete components.

Yeah and that fire stuff and those dumb wheel things that "URG von Braun" in the next cave came up with were a waste of ammonites too . . . .

When I hear certain statements, I feel like throwing up my lunch, especially on people who make the statements.

Quote:

---

If they can put a man on the moon, why can't they cure cancer, or eliminate poverty, or ...

---

Duh, dummy!! Putting a man on the moon was a well defined task, which Goddard showed us how to do in the twenties. All it required was the willingness to spend the money. There were people in the 19th century who knew how to do it in principle, although the technology was not up to the task. .

Curing cancer or solving various economic problems might have well defined goals, but we do not have a clue about how to do those jobs. The complexities of biological systems and economic systems boggle the mind, if you have a mind that really knows how to think critically.

Most people consider mathematics, physics, and the "hard sciences" far more difficult than biology, sociology, political science, economics, other "soft sciences." That opinion is dead wrong. The Hard sciences are easier. Many people do not spend much time on the hard sciences and only think they know a lot about the soft sciences, which nobody really understands yet.

In the soft sciences, you can have a completely erroneous opinion, but nobody can prove you are wrong. That is what has kept economists in business for generations. In the hard sciences, you cannot get away with nonsense, and the person who does not know how to use his mind gets proven wrong time after time. Soon, he says "Wow, mathematics is too tuff for me! I will stick to history, poly-sci, economics, where they cannot prove that my opinion is wrong. The reason you cannot prove anybody wrong in these fields it that nobody understands them well enough to know what is right.

I think the moon-trip was a big achievement to humanity in a very wide perspective.

Today there isn´t much that really unites every single man on earth, today all is about money, power, differences between races and religions and so on.
A race that kills about 150 millions of themselves in a hundered years Isn´t very good at working together.

Such thing as visiting another planet (moon) is indeed something that unites all of us. (Even though that wasn´t the purpose with it)
We realize, if only for a moment, how similar we are and how much we actually have in common.

Ok, too much fairytale maybe. But I do think the trip to the moon gave mankind more than materialistic achievments.

We all need to see things with a wider prespective sometimes.
Yes, us programmers too...