what are the problems in space exploration?
83781
No oxygen in space. Need to bring or make your own.\nNo gravity or very weak affects the human body in many ways, one big is it weakens ones bones(and muscles).
283078
Isuues to be dealt with:\n#1 Leaving too soon will leave a power vacuum that will be filled with those who we will be fighting in the future.\n#2 The United States is easy to blame for every poor man's woes and those that would have power over others use it to their advantage.\n#3 There are significant cultural differences between MiddleEastern and Western nations that are/will be very very hard to resolve.\n#4 Isreal.\n\nThe answer?  Pour as much money as possible into space development, exploration, and colonization so we can escape this ever-shrinking planet and have the vacuum of space as a bufferzone like the oceans used to be.
60047
From your own hard work and effort. Noone here will do anyone's homework for them.\n\nMy suggestion - if it is a project on astronomy, quote a famous astronomer, like Percivel Lowell. If it is a project on the large nature of the universe, find a catchy quote by Einstein or Stephen Hawking. And if the project concerns the space program, you'll find wise words from any astronaut who has been up there and made awestruck comments about what it is like.
1119919
Looking at your question I would say that there are a number of ways to colonise the solar system.\n\n1.) The first step is to get a reliable transport method that would get humans and materials off the earth and into space - preferably into earth orbit. It would also have to work the other way.\nThe space shuttle is an engineering disaster - it's ridiculous that the heat resistant tiles have to be applied by hand. The chinese are using oak as an ablative sheild  \nPossible replacements for the space shuttle are: \na.) A dual launch system like Space Ship one. Where a carrier plane carries the space pod into the upper atmosphere and launches it there. The space pod will then head for space.\nThe technology exists for the atmospheric ram jet the pod rocket engines need to be advanced to get to orbital height.\nb.) A ground based laser array burning the chemical fuel on a space pod.  Technology still required laser development and fuel development.\nc.) A magnetic rail track accelerating a space pod and launching it from a high mountain - feasible with current technology. Or shooting pods from a giant cannon - the idea was first mooted in Jules Verne's the first men to the moon - very feasible.\nd.) The ideal would be a beanstalk between the earth's surface and a geo-stationary asteroid. Though materials with the necesary tensile strength have been found, they are fractions of a millimeter long, the technology needs to be developed to create 36 000 kilometer long strands. \n\nThese earth to space craft (except for the beanstalk) would have to be aerodynamic to get through the atmosphere. They may have wings or fins.\n\n2.) The space station to tranship cargo and people between space and the earth. The technology is available. The best design would probably be a donut ring or a cylinder that could be spun to create gravity. To work better than the existing space station, better solar cells need to be developed and ecological engineering would be a must, otherwise all air and water would have to be imported.\n\n3.) From the space station to the planet and asteroids and back space ships will be required. We have the technology to build rocket motors such as used on Voyager and Discovery. For cargo deliveries it might be more economical to build solar sails that would use sunlight to power the craft. Solar sails require  development of polymer sheeting. These craft would be creatures of space - they don't have to be aerodynamic. These craft could land on airless asteroids and if their rockets are powerful enough they could land and take off from airless planets and moons.  On the moon is a large supply of Helium 3 which is the perfect fusion fuel - for more efficient craft the development of helium 3 motors and power sources would be required.  \n\n\n4.) Moon and Planetry landers and launchers. These would be craft carried by the spaceships to their destinations. The design would depend on whether their target has an atmosphere and what kind of fuel is available. We have the technology to build this type of craft. Once a colony is established on a planet, it would need some kind of launching system to efficiently lift stuff out of the planet's gravity well.  The earth launchers are a possibility.\n\nMining of Cruithane would not be hard using current technology. Explosives (even nuclear bombs) could be used to break up the asteroid. Solar mirrors can be built, to refine the ore on site or melt the asteroid. If rocket motors are attached to the chunks of nickel iron - the material can be moved to where it is required. If the ore is required on earth at this stage the only delivery method is to attach parachutes to it and drop it - which could be a bit disasterous.     \n\nI don't think the frozen planets, like Sedna, Pluto & Neptune are colonisable. Their surfaces are deep frozen gases. Even a small bit of heat may cause disasterous sublimation. The tundra pipeline technology is an attempt to build a structure
21990
You can get some of the best blogs or websites about space exploration at Google Directory. Please visit http://directory.google.com/Top/Science/Technology/Space/Personal_Pages/
99358
I think it is incredibly wise to spend money on space exploration for several reasons. The first reason is jobs. Thousands are employeed by NASA. These include scientists and engineers who design and conceptualize new means of travel, down to the workers who manufacture these new ships. Then the space program encourages those who study science and engineering. One element to judge a great society it the emphisis it places on technology. The Roman Empire was noted on its advancements in civil engineering and its growth of technology. Next examine the things we take for granted that developed from the space program. Think of the things we use everyday that were developed by Nasa engineers. Velcro and Microwaves come directly to mind and the personal computer was built on the foundations of NASA research. Then finally the most obvious reason is discovery. How do you put a pricetag on knowledge? The more we understand about the cosmos the more we understand about our own world.
164026
As above, the water, atmostpheric pressure, and temperature aren't concducive to human life. But there's another issue: response time. Right now, we have the technology to build a station on Mars. But if something went wrong, it would take us two or three years to get a repairman there!\n\nBecause it takes so long to get there, any settlement on Mars would have to be COMPLETELY self-sustaining, and that's what's really holding us up. (We couldn't even keep the International Space Station going as long as it should have).
490797
I got only one for you. The risk of entry is burning up in\nthe atmosphere. To steep and it Will burn up. To shallow and they skip off the atmosphere back into space.
269628
Did you visit www.nasa.gov?\nThere are billions of constalation, but we can't know for sure cause some are just too far...
261940
Probably the biggest problem facing us right now is solar radiation.  In earth orbit you are fine, the magenetic field of the earth protects us.  Going to the Moon is a bit riskier, as you are outside the field for a bit of time.  If the sun is a bit crany while you going to the moon, well you are dead.\n\nThat pales into comparison to really going places.  If you want to go to Mars you will definately need to solve this problem.  The Moon missions were short enough that the odds were good for nothing happening, the Mars trips are so long that the sun will definately send some high eneregy radiation your way.
1086298
Space exploration is the physical exploration of outer space. The politics, science, and engineering behind space flight all fall under the auspices of space exploration. There are many rationales behind space exploration; among the most common are ones focusing on scientific research or the future survival of humanity. This endeavour has been to some degree a dream and goal of humanity for the past several centuries, but it was not until the development of large liquid-fueled rocket engines during the early 20th century that it really began to be seriously developed.\n\nThe first major milestone of this endeavour was the launch of the USSR's Sputnik 1 on October 5, 1957, the first man-made object to orbit the Earth. After this event, the USA declared itself to be in a space race with the Soviet Union. Major achievements of the first era of space exploration (which lasted until 1969) were putting the first man in space, (Yuri Gagarin aboard Vostok 1) on April 12, 1961 (again by the USSR), the first spacewalk (by Alexei Leonov, also a Soviet cosmonaut) in 1965, and the first Moon landing by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin aboard Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969 (by the USA). The next notable achivement in space was the launch of first space station, Salyut 1, from the USSR. After the first 20 years of exploration, focus began shifting from one-off flights to renewable hardware, such as the Space Shuttle, and from competition to cooperation as on the International Space Station. Recently, private interests have begun pushing space tourism, while larger government programs have been advocating a return to the Moon and possibly missions to Mars in the near future.
256081
I understand your concern.  However, I think that the space program is a relatively small expenditure in terms of the U.S. budget.  It's about expanding possibilities for the future, but I think that it would be good to give more aid to those who really need it also.
1018668
Try Encarta on MSN.COM and type "space exploration... it gives a good definition\n\nheres the link:\n\nhttp://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761556756
1013886
space exploration is being slowed down, but not for reasons of the deficit.  the amount that is spent per year as a percentage of the amount spent the previous year on space exploration has been less than 100% for over a decade.\n\nthe biggest amount of deficit spending is done on the military.  hundreds of billions for the military compared to a few billion (if that) for space exploration -- and that includes ground based, satellite, probes and manned.  if you want to turn off the deficit, you have to turn off the biggest leak.  space exploration is not it.
868933
NASA experiment a lot on this issue, maybe by login onto their site you'll find the info you're lookig for, luck..☺
1067317
Many things are in space...the are compounts of gases, metals, rock and ice...Elements you can find on earth too
157489
1. It's too expensive to set them up in outer space.\n\n2. I'm not sure I want a bunch of bad people at the top of a gravity well. All they have to do is learn how to aim some big rocks at Earth and we'd be in big trouble.