Will China Help the U.S. Promote Better Science Education?

Will China Help the U.S. Promote Better Science  Education?

This is part II of China's launching the second rocket that will result in their building a brand spanking new space station.

In the 1950's Russia sent up their first man made rocket to land on the moon beating the U.S. to be the first in  a race to colonize and control the moon.  At that time little was known, but much supposed about the physics possibilities of colonizing space with animals and plants from earth.  The moon, looked like a great place to start.  When Russia managed to do what the U.S. had not, land something on the moon, underlying fear was that the first to colonize the moon would control the earth.  Looked as if the Russians might just do that.

In 1969, the U.S. saved face and landed the first man on the moon who bounced around in a very different gravitational environment.  Lots didn't happen.  We or no other country decided to inhabit the moon.  Instead we partnered with the Russian's to create an International Space Station.  Now we are in the process of abandoning it.

And, guess what?  China has now decided to build a brand spanking new space station using all the technology and knowledge we have been gathering for years.  It is better to be second than to be the first.  You can build and the first hand knowledge and experiences from others, almost always coming out with a better project.

But lots of things did happen as a result of the U.S. creating a national emergency millions and millions of dollars were added to the annual budget of the then  tiny little agency the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was founded,  the Internet was fostered so no one could blow up our communication, and absolutely millions of dollars were spend to create a pipeline to create more scientists, engineers and technology. 

So, is this going to happen again as China settles into its new space station and has the ability to crash satellites together from their living rooms? 

Join our discussion.  Big thinkers are needed for this discussion.

Why We are Not in Space or When Gravity is Our Enemy

Why We Are Not in Space or When Gravity is Our Enemy

November 5th at 2 a.m. SLT and November 6 at 11:30 a.m. SLT  at The Science Circle Auditorium

China just launched the second rocket that will be the start of their new space station.  This has caused a great deal of stir among scientists but also the international military.  In 1961 Russia accomplished  the first manned space flight which ignited the cold war between Russia and the US in the race for space.  This also sparked providing pocketfuls of money for education to foster more scientists and innovative thinking.  The emphasis was on physicists and engineers.

Flying poop, runaway liquids, numb legs, and confused plants have turned the race to space into a biological challenge.  The fight against gravity.  Most life on earth has evolved using gravity as a tool to make most of our biological processes work - our blood, heart, muscles, bones, reproductive system, all rely on gravity to go.

Today's discussion is going to focus on the biolgy and physiology of space travel and what we have to understand in order to live in space longer than the time it takes to change us back into an amoeba. 

Reading:

Books
Packing for Mars http://www.amazon.com/Packing-Mars-Curious-Science-Life/dp/0393068471

Articles:

Heart Rate and Oxygen in Space
http://www.nsbri.org/humanphysspace/focus2/spaceflight-exercise.html
Mechanical Blood Pump
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/informal/features/F_Blood_Pump.html

NASA Biology Plan
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/541222main_10-05-17%20FSB%20Sci%20Plan-Signed_508.pdf

Chinese Space Station
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15112760

Environmentally Friendly or Deadly?

Ecotourism has long been touted as an environmentally friendly way to travel.  However is it killing the very thing we are trying to preserve?

In this session, Environmentally Friendly or Deadly, we will look at popular ways in which we encourage people to become one with nature that motivates them to become the champions of the environment.  However, we risk exposing fragile environments to naive tourists and snake oil salesman taking tourists where they should not be.  

Last year over 150,000people descended on the Galapagos Islands.  That is a lot of people for thirteen islands that are only 4,897 square miles of land in a 20,000 square mile area. This generates a lot of tourism dollars.  Unfortunately only an estimated 15% of the tourism dollars find their way to the local economy.   However small, this money is the main source of funding for the Galapagos Islands National Park for preservation of species and environments as well as the local business economy.

The tourism endangers the very thing it is designed to protect.  Tourists leave an imprint in garbage, human waste, energy consumption, undocumented immigration, and even corruption at national and local politics.  Yet every tourist leaves with the appreciation for the environment and deeply committed to preservation.  

Those of us that promote environmental concerns know the power of a person having an emotional and physical connection to a plant, an animal or a pristine view.  But at what sacrifice? 

The Galapagos Islands are not the only controversial ecotourism spot.  This discussion will give examples of the good, bad and ugly of ecotourism and discuss solutions or compromises to keep people connected to the earth and committed to saving it.  

Join us on The Science Circle in Second Life on Saturday, October 22, at 2 a.m. SLT (PDT) and Sunday, October 23, at 11 a.m. SLT (PDT) for a lively discussion.