this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2025
235 points (100.0% liked)

Space

1925 readers
201 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.


Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jaycifer@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

It’s been over a decade since I learned this, so my memory is fuzzy, but I recall that for at least the first several decades of space exploration propulsion technology was advancing at a fast enough rate that it was a real consideration to wait on a mission for better tech.

If a probe launched now would take five years to reach its destination, but propulsion speeds are on track to double in two years, it would make more sense to wait the two years, use more advanced sensor/communication/etc. tech that developed during that time, then still have the new probe arrive before the first would.

I haven’t paid a lot of attention, but I’m guessing the tech is no longer advancing that quickly, so the thought process may not hold as much water, but it’s rooted in practical thoughts. And couldn’t you say it’s rather defeatist to assume that better tech won’t develop, and optimistic to believe that it may?