本帖最后由 lilyma06 于 2012-1-10 09:36 编辑
【原文标题】China’s Going to the Moon — And That’s Good for Everyone 【中文标题】中国登陆月球——对大家都有好处 【登载媒体】 时代周刊
【来源地址】http://ideas.time.com/2012/01/04/chinas-going-to-the-moon-and-thats-good-for-everyone/#ixzz1iYvAuByH
【译 者】 yasmina 【翻译方式】 人工
【声 明】 欢迎转载，请务必注明译者和出处 bbs.m4.cn。
【译 文】
美国的阿波罗时代的魔力不在，情况更糟的是中国的航天业也许将到达美国不曾去过的太空。
2011年11月，火箭搭载着神州8号宇宙飞船在酒泉卫星发射中心升空。
克鲁杰的新书《同族效应》：该书向我们解释了兄弟姐妹间的关联。
没有人会偶然到达月球。如果你是火箭专家并且知道你在做什么，地球的小妹妹应该不是这样一个具有挑战性的目标。她很大----直径2155 mi（3,468公里）。 她并不遥远，距地上的发射台仅239,000 mi(385,000 公里)。如果你选择最远的路线，3天你也可以到达那里。那是步行去7-11，在宇宙是用光年来计算。 去月球旅行，现在还是少数国家通过机器人船才能完成的，并且目前只有一个国家能实现载人旅行。去火星或者地球之外？你可以去-----不载人的探测器----虽然此举需要很多努力并且花费高昂，目前只有美国能够做到。
最近，美国一直在思考有关载人太空旅行。今年将是阿波罗号的40年纪念日-----这将是令人激动的----航天飞机，一个短途的宇宙车，它唯一的工作是低地球轨道运行。现在连航天飞机也走了，离开美国，如果想要到达宇宙空间，去俄罗斯的搭乘“联盟”号飞船。虽然美国宇航局和华盛顿的承诺，美国宇航员将很快返回空间，目标和目标日期只依稀定义 - 比“某处”多“的某个时候，”，在空间的游戏，通常转成“零”和“从来没有。” 美国和俄罗斯的载人计划不会是唯一的。还有中国。
上周，中国政府发布了一个白皮书，详细说明在未来数年的太空计划 –表达了中国对探索外太空的野心，令人印象深刻。2003年，中国把他们的第一个宇航员送入轨道。在2008年，载人三人的行的任务，包括太空行走，随后，两个航天器在地球轨道上无人对接。
今年，北京计划载人对接。与此同时，两个无人飞船已绕月球进行勘察，勘察计划是2016年的一个无人着陆器表面 - 载人飞行任务后一段时间。你的反应是，“那又怎样？美国做这一切的东西之前，尼克松甚至到了中国。美国不能做到的，中国可以。
载人太空旅行是一个独特的项目，是非常困难和非常昂贵的。但自20世纪初以来，业内的基本技术 - - 一直不在中国。有一些关于1962年肯尼迪总统的讲话中，他承诺美国载人登月计划。肯尼迪没有说，我们是注定要前往月球，他甚至没有说这是必要的我们去。 “我们选择去，”他说 ，我们选择一个主菜，我们选择了一条领带，我们选择发送到另一个世界的人类，并将他们平平安安带回家，带回外星岩石和土壤。就这么简单。
后续，当然，是一个比选择更难，近年来，美国表现得可怜。我们选择去火星！首任总统布什宣布在1989年，直到他的预算团队嘎吱嘎吱的数字，并把可能的价格标签在500亿美元，届时盛大的想法是悄悄搁置。我们选择去重返月球！第二任总统布什宣布在2004年 - 直到计划超过预算和超过截止日期，这是真正的几乎所有成功的空间计划，甚至尝试过跑，但超过奥巴马政府有足够的理由取消计划。
美国宇航局已成为善于启停项目的代表。更多的参考资料，有计划的飞船“会”做或“可能”做出的发现，不太可能会得到过去的梦想的舞台。这确实超过破坏美国国家航空航天局的公信力和损害机构的士气，还花钱。超过90亿美元用于发展的助推器最近报废的登月计划 - 90亿美元的，我们从来没有取回。它不是像我们追一些冷核聚变彩虹。我们正在建设一个火箭 - 我们非常，非常擅长做的东西。无论是花的现金，完成任务或没有得到开始摆在首位。
政治风向的转变，导致这一切的支持和forthing是所有参与的民主所面临的 -像中国这样的一党的系统。今天者的政治老板们仍将在电力的许多明天因此，共产主义制度 - 五年计划 - 提供了一个时间的地平线，是非常适合的长期承诺太空计划需要。
美国每年两次的选举动摇，何况当前的学前班在华盛顿的气氛，没有提供这样的的可预见性。然而，在同一个系统是在阿波罗时代的地方。从人造地球卫星，于1957年，到最后登月，于1972年，美国有四位总统和8个不同的代表大会，而在空间预算的争斗可能定的目标 - 到月球 - 仍然不可动摇。这两党的坚定是缺席的，在现今的政治环境下。
这绝不是说，这将是值得的交易一个一党专政的宪政民主。它是说，直到我们得到我们的阿波罗时代的魔力，我们可以做的比中国好，我们不会差。如果未来在月球或火星上的第一个标志原来是伟大的美国。但是，前景并不看好。有人的了进行航天智人更高的目标 - 这是一个更广泛的类别和比国家更原始的隶属关系。我们一旦选择了。现在，我们选择不。所以，呃，走中国 - 我们按照你的领导。
克鲁格是一个在时代资深编辑。本文仅代表他自己所表达的 观点。 China’s Going to the Moon — And That’s Good for Everyone
Until the U.S. gets its Apollo-era mojo back, it could do worse than rooting for China to go the places the U.S. won’t
http://ideas.time.com/2012/01/04/chinas-going-to-the-moon-and-thats-good-for-everyone/?xid=gonewsedit
A rocket carrying the Shenzhou-8 spacecraft lifts off at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center, November 2011.
Kluger's latest book is The Sibling Effect: What the Bonds Among Brothers and Sisters Reveal About Us.
Nobody gets to the moon by accident. If you’re a rocket scientist and know what you’re doing, Earth’s little sister ought not be such a challenging target. It’s huge — a whopping 2,155 mi. (3,468 km) across. It’s close — a mere 239,000 mi. (385,000 km) from Earthly launch pads. And if you take an as-the-crow-flies route, you can get there in just three days. That’s a walk to the 7-11 in a cosmos in which distances are measured in billions of light years.
And yet a trip to the moon is one that only a small handful of countries have made with robot ships and only one country has made with astronauts. As for Mars and the worlds beyond? You can get there alright — at least with unmanned probes — although it takes a lot of effort and a mountain of money and the United States is the only country which has had any success.
( PHOTOS: The Best Space Pictures of 2011)
But the U.S. has not been thinking much about manned space travel lately. This year will mark the 40th anniversary of the final Apollo mission, which was followed — far less thrillingly — by the space shuttle, a short-haul cosmic truck whose sole job was to make milk runs to low Earth orbit. Now even the shuttle is gone, leaving the U.S. is to hitch rides aboard Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft if it wants to get to space at all. While NASA and Washington promise American astronauts will return to space soon, the destination and the target date are being only vaguely defined — little more than “somewhere” and “sometime,” which, in the space game, typically turns into “nowhere” and “never.”
And yet the sad and spent U.S. and Russian manned programs are not the only ones out there. There’s China too.
Just last week, the Chinese government released a white paper detailing its plans for space in the years ahead — plans that were impressive for their candor, specificity and ambition. It was only in 2003 that the Chinese put their first astronaut in orbit. They followed in 2008 with a three-person mission that included a spacewalk, and followed that with an unmanned docking of two spacecraft in Earth orbit. This year, Beijing plans a manned docking. Meantime, two unmanned Chinese spacecraft have already orbited the moon, reconnoitering the surface for an unmanned lander that is planned for 2016 — and for manned missions sometime after that. And in case your response is, “So what? The U.S. did all this stuff before Nixon even went to China,” here’s what: The U.S. can’t rouse itself to do a lot of it anymore and, like it or not, China can.
( PHOTOS: 10 Strange Objects Launched into Space)
Manned space travel is a uniquely elective business. It’s very hard and very expensive, yes, but since the beginning of the 20th century, the basic tools have always been within — or just outside — our technical grasp. There was something exquisitely understated about President Kennedy’s 1962 speech in which he committed the U.S. to a manned lunar program. Kennedy didn’t say that we were destined to go to the moon; he didn’t even say it was essential we go. “We choose to go,” was all he said — a formulation that was at once both prosaic and powerful. We choose an entrée; we choose a tie; we choose to send human beings to another world, set them down on the surface and bring them home safely bearing extraterrestrial rocks and soil. Simple as that.
The follow-through, of course, is a wee bit harder than the choice, and in recent years, that’s where the U.S. has performed abysmally. We choose to go to Mars! the first President Bush declared in 1989, until his budget team crunched the numbers and put the likely price tag at $500 billion, whereupon the grand idea was quietly shelved. We choose to go back to the moon! the second President Bush announced in 2004 — until the plan ran over budget and over deadline, which is true of virtually any successful space program that’s even been attempted, but was more than enough justification for the Obama administration to cancel the plan.
NASA has become so adept at start-stop projects that savvy readers of space agency press releases can even handicap the odds of something actually getting off the ground simply by counting the conditionals used in the phrasing. The more references to what a planned spacecraft “would” do or the discoveries it “could” make, the less likely it’ll get past the dream stage. This does more than destroy NASA’s credibility and damage agency morale; it also costs money. More than $9 billion was spent developing the booster for the recently scrapped moon program — $9 billion we’re never getting back. And it’s not like we were chasing some cold fusion rainbow here. We were building a rocket — something we’re very, very good at doing. Either spend the cash and finish the job or don’t get started in the first place.
( MORE: Kluger: Why Apple Products Are Irresistible)
The shift in political winds that leads to all this backing and forthing is one that all participatory democracies face — and one a locked-down, one-party system like China’s doesn’t. The political bosses who make policy today will still be in power many tomorrows hence, and that old stalwart of the communist system — the five-year plan — offers a time horizon that’s well-suited to the long-term commitment a space program requires.
America’s bi-annual electoral shake-ups — not to mention the current pre-K atmosphere in Washington — provides no such predictability. And yet the same system was in place in the Apollo era. From Sputnik, in 1957, to the last moon landing, in 1972, the U.S. had four presidents and eight different Congresses, and while the battles over the space budget could be pitched, the goal — going to the moon — remained unshakable. That bipartisan constancy is absent in the present-day political sandbox.
None of this is to say it would be worth trading a Constitutional democracy for a one-party dictatorship. It is to say that until we get our Apollo-era mojo back, we could do worse than rooting for China to go the places we won’t. If the next flag on the moon or the first one on Mars turns out to be American, great. But the odds of that are not good. Someone’s got to carry the even higher banner of spacefaring homo sapiens — which is a broader category and a more primal affiliation than nation. We once chose to carry it for the world. Now we choose not to. So, er, go China — and here’s hoping we follow your lead.
Kluger is a senior editor at TIME and the author The Sibling Effect. The views expressed are solely his own.
| 
狗仔卡
发表于 2012-1-7 16:13
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2012-1-11 10:20
当然
