China has a long memory and would like to regain the position they lost in the 14th Century. They also have an absolute need for growth expansion to survive. Still they are only in the first stages of exploration (ETE) that require vast input of resources from the government and may not have the free enterprise structure to move to the developmental stage. As of now they can not put up their explorers or even a weather satellite with out outside assistance.

The United States puts resources in to basic research (ETE) but has already gone the next step in creating a free market system (EPE) for development. With our free enterprise system (EPE), space is ours. We can only lose if we mistakenly allow it to happen.

The rest of the world falls some where in between.

One last point, Science indicates a possibility of other intelligent life. Each day Science closes that statistical likelihood. Some day we may well meet ET. The first contact will be most important because ET “will call home”.

I started out as an astronomy major, and you would not believe the number of people who confuse astronomical and astrological.

esr1951 on June 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Where would I fall if I said “you have a future in space exploration”

Case in point: over the weekend I bought a new prepaid phone from T-Mobile. A year or two ago, it would have been all made in China. Now the SIM chip, the charger (!), and the owner’s manual were all stamped “Proudly Made in USA,” the phone itself was “finished in Cambodia with parts made in Japan and Taiwan,” and only the battery was “finished in China with materials from Japan.”

They know their old model of mass labor at cheap prices is going away.

Freeze Dried Dog anyone?

What I don’t get is the idea of going to the moon. It’s been done, and every reason I hear for going back always rings rather hollow. But hey… it’s their money.

The only problem with the Chinese going to the moon… an hour later, they’ll want to go back again.

Ba-dump-tish!

I’ll be in the area all weekend folks. Don’t forget to tip your waitress.

I just hope that the Chinese make rockets much better than a majority of stuff the sell here in the US… because if not, this is gonna fall apart right after the warranty is up!

watertown on June 18, 2012 at 5:49 AM

They did outpace the US in successful space launches (by one) last year. Credit where due.

Also, I’m much more sanguine about the asteroids for commercial development anyway.

JellyToast on June 17, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Put not your faith in the princes of government (ours or the ChiComs). We’re still going, with or without them.

When we finally do figure out fusion, He3 may be the key, or it may be a false lead like embryonic stem cells.

I am more interested in the water that is on the moon. That could be used by current technology to fuel mining ships to the asteroids.

No nation will be able to claim all the riches of the moon. The real key to space exploration will be when private enterprise sees a profit in going into space…space exploitation.

It’s been done, and every reason I hear for going back always rings rather hollow.

I’m guessing you don’t read much science fiction. There are thousands of reasons for returning (and staying) on the moon. The first private company that can set up a permanent settlement on the moon will become fabulously wealthy.

DarthBrooks on June 17, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Excellent summary!

A contrary viewpoint.

Is exploitation of helium-3 practicable? I don’t know. But if it is, and another nation establishes a foothold on the moon to extract it, we are screwed. The risks of not establishing a colony on the moon to mine the material for research are far greater than in going.

Explain again how we “don’t have a space program” anymore?

Sorry, but I don’t get it.

Reggie1971 on June 17, 2012 at 10:36 PM

It should be easy enough.

Rather than some geek on the internet explaining it, I’ll let a geek that writes about this stuff explain it:

Could He3 from the moon truly be a feasible solution to our power needs on Earth? Practical nuclear fusion is nowadays projected to be five decades off–the same prediction that was made at the 1958 Atoms for Peace conference in Brussels. If fusion power’s arrival date has remained constantly 50 years away since 1958, why would helium-3 suddenly make fusion power more feasible?

But a serious critic has charged that in reality, He3-based fusion isn’t even a feasible option. In the August issue of Physics World, theoretical physicist Frank Close, at Oxford in the UK, has published an article called “Fears Over Factoids” in which, among other things, he summarizes some claims of the “helium aficionados,” then dismisses those claims as essentially fantasy.

Entire article

Everybody whoops occasionally.

Whoops, I meant to quote your comment, not to cross it out. Sorry.

cozmo on June 17, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Sorry, but I don’t get it. Simply because embryonic stem cells didn’t pan out as some people thought, doesn’t mean that helium3 would be a bust.