Why aren't young people interested in Apollo 11?

[chris_leyson]

I think most of what VK3DRB said in the first post. I don't think it's just young people either, most of the engineers I work with don't seem to give a damn about space related subjects or seemingly any other engineering subjects, I think they just switch off at 5 o'clock and go home, that's assuming they were "switched on" in the first place.
The Indian Space Research Organisation's (ISRO) Chandrayaan-2 moon mission is hopefuly going to lauch on Monday 22nd July after a weeks delay. Chandrayaan-2 is made up of three vehicles: an orbiter, a lander called Vikram and a small rover called Pragyan, moon landing scheduled for 8th Septmber. Best of luck ISRO 

[tooki]

My wife mentioned at her work that I had just booked two seats for us to visit the Melbourne IMAX theatre to see the acclaimed Apollo 11 documentary. She works at a major robotics/sensors/controls/power company. Her colleagues, many of them younger engineers and technicians, thought nothing of it and one asked why would anyone bother seeing a documentary on Apollo 11? My wife was somewhat taken back by lack of excitement for man's greatest technical achievement, and possibly the greatest adventure in the history of the human race. She was somewhat surprised and even disappointed, as I was to hear it.

Why the lack of interest? Or have you have found young people are just as enthusiastic in his historic anniversary on Apollo 11?

First of all, I don’t think it’s even realistic to expect the same kind of enthusiasm, since a lot of technology now is a lot more advanced. It’s not reasonable to expect the same kind of wonderment about technology you’ve known about your entire life.

Like... the telephone would have been magical to someone who’d never seen it before. If you grew up with it, it’s just a normal thing.

And how do you know they hadn’t already seen other documentaries about Apollo 11? Yet another one isn’t that amazing.

Maybe a lack of interest is due to:
1. The WOW! factor is gone in many young people because they have been desensitised by the plethora of great innovations in their lifetime.
2. Fewer engineers today have genuine deep interest in technology, over just having a job to pay the bills.
3. They were not alive at the time man landed on the moon, so they do not understand how incredible the achievement was to go to the moon in light of relatively primitive technology. They would not understand what is it like to not have a calculator, let alone a computer.
4. They have never worked with vintage computers and have no experience regarding the difficulty of optimising algorthims and cutting code to fit in tiny program storage.
5. They are more interested in Facebook, Twitter, mobile phones, reality TV and cooking shows.

1. See above. That’s absolutely normal.
2. Complete nonsense. If anything, young people are LESS driven by money. Cf. all the stereotypes about whiny millennials who only want “meaningful” work and don’t understand the value of a hard days work for an honest dollar.
3. Most documentaries don’t emphasize this, thanks to history (as a discipline) being dominated by people who focus on the social and political aspects of things, with technological history getting lip service at best.
4. Never worked with vintage computers? Sure. But neither did most of us. But small program storage? There’s plenty of that in the embedded space, and modern space hardware is obsolete and tiny by mainstream standards. Those aren’t getting coded in C# and Java...
5. Older adults are often just as glued to their screens and mindless drivel as younger ones. (And why single out cooking shows? They’ve existed since the 1950s, so it’s hardly a millennial thing. If anything, millennials and younger probably watch more cooking stuff on YouTube than on actual cooking shows, since the youtube ones tend to be much more authentic.)

In closing, your entire argument is based on unfounded stereotypes and assumptions, not on anything resembling objective fact.

[nctnico]

I watched the Moon landing live at primary school in grade 7, it was awesome and the vibe was electric.

But that was in 1969 and perhaps it's ancient history to kids born after that, something they take for granted ?

I don't remember being excited about Columbus and the new world discoveries, they were ancient history to me as a kid perhaps it's the same for every generation?

Perhaps a better question may be are kids nowadays excited about SpaceX, about a manned Moon or Mars colony ?

I agree with this. While the Apollo moonlanding was a technological marvel at the time nowadays space travel is pretty much common and safe. IIRC the last dissaster with fatalities was in 1986 and that is already over 30 years ago. Even during the Apollo program the public lost interest after the moon landing.

[SiliconWizard]

I watched the Moon landing live at primary school in grade 7, it was awesome and the vibe was electric.

But that was in 1969 and perhaps it's ancient history to kids born after that, something they take for granted ?

I don't remember being excited about Columbus and the new world discoveries, they were ancient history to me as a kid perhaps it's the same for every generation?

Perhaps a better question may be are kids nowadays excited about SpaceX, about a manned Moon or Mars colony ?

I agree with this. While the Apollo moonlanding was a technological marvel at the time nowadays space travel is pretty much common and safe. IIRC the last dissaster with fatalities was in 1986 and that is already over 30 years ago. Even during the Apollo program the public lost interest after the moon landing.

I also agree with this, but will add something that may be too obvious to even be mentioned?

Young people aren't really any more interested in any other space program IMO, even much more recent ones. When was the last time youngsters got excited with the ISS or even with the missions to Mars? That's not just limited to Apollo, so no need to excessively obsess over it either as all media seem to be doing lately due to a sudden renewed interest in Moon programs. Back in the day, of course that was so impressive, and in a very different context, that it got pretty much everyone excited, but this time has long gone, and even back then, the public excitment only really lasted a couple years...

That's not just the young people either as I see it. Most people don't care that much about space exploration. Maybe because that's hugely expensive, doesn't bring them any direct benefit, and means nothing to their daily life. Maybe that's also a consequence of many people not believing in the grandeur of humanity's achievements much anymore... as opposed to the mindset people had in the 60's and 70's. Just a thought.

[coppice]

While the Apollo moonlanding was a technological marvel at the time nowadays space travel is pretty much common and safe. IIRC the last dissaster with fatalities was in 1986 and that is already over 30 years ago. Even during the Apollo program the public lost interest after the moon landing.

The last disaster was the second space shuttle failure in 2003. The world is currently down to just one well proven manned flight platform, and struggling to get new ones safe enough to carry people - see this week's incident during ground testing at SpaceX.

Your second point is valid. Every Apollo flight after 11 saw falling audiences, apart from 13 where the potential for disaster perked the public's interest.

[NiHaoMike]

That's not just the young people either as I see it. Most people don't care that much about space exploration. Maybe because that's hugely expensive, doesn't bring them any direct benefit, and means nothing to their daily life.

Until they find out just how much of the technology everyone takes for granted rely on satellites. Deep space, however, is a different matter...

[SiliconWizard]

That's not just the young people either as I see it. Most people don't care that much about space exploration. Maybe because that's hugely expensive, doesn't bring them any direct benefit, and means nothing to their daily life.

Until they find out just how much of the technology everyone takes for granted rely on satellites. Deep space, however, is a different matter...

Yes, but do not hold your breath on the "until". Most people are not grateful and do not necessarily understand how all this technology has been brought to them either. Just how it is. Especially younger people who have ALWAYS been exposed to this technology. It's all great for sure, but we've long passed the stage when it was new and exciting. It's now taken for granted as you said, and not just that, people even gradually have no choice but using it. At this point, it's unfortunately obvious that direct interest for technology will vanish.

To get people really interested in a new space mission, I think it would have to have characteristics that would definitely promise to change some things for the better for humanity. That was the spirit at the beginning of Apollo missions IMO. And again, given the current mindset of humanity (as I see it, you may see it differently of course), which has dramatically lost faith in our future IMO, it's going to take a lot to get people interested again.

[magic]

Every older generation believes the younger generations are no good and have lost values. The baby boomers, of which I am one, were pot-smoking hippies which were going to destroy western civilization. And, in some ways they did but it wasn't all bad.

Some things degrade and may self-correct later. If they don't then that culture goes to shit and other cultures take over. No big deal in the grand scheme of things.

Not only that, people of today, young and old alike, will judge past generations with a certainty that only ignorance can breed.  Explorers are condemned as greedy and oppressors. Nobody tries to understand the mentality and conditions of the times. One thing I really dislike about present day politicians and leaders, especially in Spain, is the need to compare themselves with previous generations and show how much better they are. And to do that they have to lie about history. It is pathetic.

You are one bizarre guy. But at least you see plebocracy for what it is, I can respect you for that.

I have realized that science and technology advance a lot but socially we are still apes and have not advanced a bit since Roman times. Every generation is starting from scratch.

Yeah, growing up as a millennial I thought, like probably everyone else, that the future will be boring. I certainly don't think so anymore.
And I think here's where you are wrong: there is no "advancing", we are apes. No matter how you slice it, this century is gonna be as fun as any other before.

[SiliconWizard]

The Romans were actually pretty advanced. But no, not every generation starts from scratch. It that were true, you would probably not even be able to feed yourself. But anyway.

Switching the cynical mode on.

I guess if the NASA launched a space reality TV show, that could definitely spark a new interest and significant audience for new space programs.

Maybe I should patent the concept of "space reality TV" now.

[richnormand]

With the visit of an Australian friend and his wife we celebrated by playing "The Dish".
Both had no idea of the role Australia had played during the moon landing.

My kids are well aware but both seemed more attuned on the status of earth and what will their own kids will have to deal with.
Quite different from the hopeful attitude from what I remember feeling at the time.

[SiliconWizard]

My kids are well aware but both seemed more attuned on the status of earth and what will their own kids will have to deal with.
Quite different from the hopeful attitude from what I remember feeling at the time.

That confirms what I was expressing above...

[Kjelt]

Maybe young people ask the right questions:
Why spent giga billions of $ into space programs which results in 0 ROI. That when we really need a revolutionary new energy source, machines that will collect the nanoplasticks investing our bodies and killing us prematurely and CO2 harvesters.
Why don't we focus our energy on the catastrophies that are emerging and try our damn best to counter them ?

[Nusa]

As a baby boomer, I'm not that motivated to see that movie either. I absorbed the entire Apollo program as it happened, and my memory is excellent. I recognize not everyone remembers so clearly, however.

space programs which results in 0 ROI.

There are all sorts of technological advances that are tied, directly and indirectly, to development caused by space programs. Just because people take them for granted now that they exist doesn't change reality. GPS. Satellite TV. Tiny camera technology. Scratch-resistant plastics. CAT scans. Foil blankets. Memory foam. Water purifiers. Freeze dried food. The list goes on.

I wouldn't call that zero return on investment.

[james_s]

And while people were getting stoned Bill Gates and his buddies and a few other nerds were developing the next generation of computers. The pot-smoking hippies laughed at the nerds but in the end the nerds were the most influential.

I think you're making some incorrect assumptions there. I spent most of the first decade of my career working at MS and I can tell you it was not unusual in the least to catch a whiff of the distinctive smell of pot wafting through the parking garages. The tech industry as a whole tends to be very pot friendly and I have never worked anywhere that actually drug tested people. This was even more true of video game companies, lots of stories out there about the early days of Atari when they were flying high, literally. A friend of mine worked at Commodore back in the 80s and had similar tales.

Lots of very bright, creative and highly paid people use the stuff in moderation, there are of course plenty of stereotypical lazy stoners out there just like there are millions of hardcore alcoholics drinking their life away. There are also plenty of people who enjoy a glass of wine at dinner or have a beer with their lunch without abusing it. Pot and alcohol are very similar, except alcohol is the most commonly abused and deadly recreational drug by a very, very wide margin.

[james_s]

I suspect it's like anything else, how many kids are fascinated by things that happened decades before they were born? They have no connection to it, they weren't there, it doesn't resonate with them at all, and why would it? A few people are fascinated by history, I'm one of them, I collect 70s-80s video games, I tinker with vacuum tubes, I like old cars and old airplanes but most people are just not that interested in the past.

Personally I think the Apollo program was interesting but even for me it all happened before I was born so it's not something that has fascinated me to any great degree. It's a cool historical artifact, it's a neat accomplishment but for me there was no time before men had been to the moon just like for kids these days the internet and mobile phones have always been a thing. For any young person today there's nothing novel about being able to call someone anywhere in the world from a device in their pocket. I still remember the first time I ever used a car phone to call somebody and it seemed amazing but I wouldn't expect anyone much younger than me to understand that at all or care about it.

[daqq]

Why spent giga billions of $ into space programs which results in 0 ROI.

You're probably using a load of technology that was originally developed for the space industry or developed as a consequence of space industry. If you want to talk about return on investment for one specific thing, well, imagine for a moment the cost savings that GPS enabled.

That when we really need a revolutionary new energy source, machines that will collect the nanoplasticks investing our bodies and killing us prematurely and CO2 harvesters.

Yes, all of those things are very useful and desirable. But knowledge is complementary and cumulative. Advances in one science lead to advances in other sciences. There's a whole lot of advances in solar technology thanks to space exploration. Miniaturization techniques that were developed for the space program enabled lower overall size and power consumption.

Why don't we focus our energy on the catastrophies that are emerging and try our damn best to counter them ?

I'm not sure what you're proposing? Kill ALL research not pertaining to, say, fusion?

[soldar]

I think you're making some incorrect assumptions there. I spent most of the first decade of my career working at MS and I can tell you it was not unusual in the least to catch a whiff of the distinctive smell of pot wafting through the parking garages. The tech industry as a whole tends to be very pot friendly and I have never worked anywhere that actually drug tested people. This was even more true of video game companies, lots of stories out there about the early days of Atari when they were flying high, literally. A friend of mine worked at Commodore back in the 80s and had similar tales.

Lots of very bright, creative and highly paid people use the stuff in moderation, there are of course plenty of stereotypical lazy stoners out there just like there are millions of hardcore alcoholics drinking their life away. There are also plenty of people who enjoy a glass of wine at dinner or have a beer with their lunch without abusing it. Pot and alcohol are very similar, except alcohol is the most commonly abused and deadly recreational drug by a very, very wide margin.

Oh, I know what you mean and I agree. I was just trying to paint the dichotomy between hippies, who spent all their time stoned, protesting the war and practicing "free love", and "nerds" who were focused on nerdy things.

The older generations thought the hippies were the downfall of western civilization. And in certain ways, they were.

[tszaboo]

Why the lack of interest? Or have you have found young people are just as enthusiastic in his historic anniversary on Apollo 11?

For one, I'm not really enthusiastic, because it reminds me that the last, manned moon landing happened before I was born, and due to the idiots the baby boomers elected as politicians, nobody got to moon in more than 40 years. I have to watch sci-fi if I want to see something remotely similar. And the baby boomers were busy ruining the planet meanwhile. I watched the MIR falling from the sky, huge budget cuts to the ISS, the Kenedy space center turned into Disneyland, the Bajkonur to rust. Europeans spend 30 times more money on alcohol than on the ESA.

It makes me sad, thats why I'm not celebrating.

[Kjelt]

There are all sorts of technological advances that are tied, directly and indirectly, to development caused by space programs. Just because people take them for granted now that they exist doesn't change reality. GPS. Satellite TV. Tiny camera technology. Scratch-resistant plastics. CAT scans. Foil blankets. Memory foam. Water purifiers. Freeze dried food. The list goes on.
I wouldn't call that zero return on investment.

Yes all from the past, what about the last ten years?
I am not talking about fourty years ago I know what it brought and at that time it brought greatbenefits and unfortunately also better weapons.
But what about now? Why put extreme large amounts of money into space programms? To put a man on mars, really? What would that accomplish? Another man on the moon? Colonize the moon?

We as species have prooven unworthy of occupying any new planet before we can proof to ourselves we can make a succes of living on one planet and not destroying the environment and ourselves. Lets start with that first.

[daqq]

Yes all from the past, what about the last ten years?

Well, there's a host of weather and environmental satellites monitoring the Earth, greatly advancing the understanding of the atmosphere. There are commercial applications.

Why put extreme large amounts of money into space programms?

I'm not sure that you've got your numbers in perspective to other things. NASA* has a budget of ~20G*** USD. In 2017 pet owners in the US alone spent 70G USD on pet products (food, toys etc.). Global box office revenue was ~40G USD in 2018. A film about blue cat people got ~3G USD. If you want to start slashing budgets or reassigning resources, you may want to start of somewhere else and gain a little perspective. NASA and similar organizations do a lot of vital research, enable awesome technologies and who knows what kind of tech we can miss if it doesn't get funded.

* - I'll be using NASA, though similar ratios/things apply to other similar organizations. 
** - sources mostly a quick google search, the numbers might be off somewhat.
*** - G notation = giga = billion

[Kjelt]

I'm not sure that you've got your numbers in perspective to other things. NASA* has a budget of ~20G*** USD.

Yes I know but they are not putting a man on mars with that. The discussion as I thought it was , is why not do some huge programm as in the 60s so fifty fold that budget.
Not my country not my choice but except for the cool factor I think better things can be done for a trillion dollar then putting a man on mars. But hey the us already spending 700 billion a year on the army while your biggest opponents are "only" spending 60 billion, wouldn't you as a nation be better off to lower your countries debt and rebuild and increase infrastructure, education and health system ? 
And no I am no communist or lefty, just a rational engineer that keeps on thinking we have the wrong agendas.

[techman-001]

Maybe young people ask the right questions:
Why spent giga billions of $ into space programs which results in 0 ROI. That when we really need a revolutionary new energy source, machines that will collect the nanoplasticks investing our bodies and killing us prematurely and CO2 harvesters.
Why don't we focus our energy on the catastrophies that are emerging and try our damn best to counter them ?

I respectfully disagree. I think young people by and large are ignorant and brimming with their own self importance. They are convinced they are smarter and know better, just because ...

I'm hoping they will grow out of it like I did.

They also don't realise that most of the tech they enjoy today came about as a result of WAR, the deaths of millions of our best and brightest and the hurriedly rushed budget less government driven programs to develop new devastating weapons for their nations survival.

Look at the years of 'mostly' peace since WW2, what major new inventions equal those wartime developments, or those developed ONLY because of the subsequent  "cold war' space race ?

Sitting under a coconut tree, having a nice Facebook session with your ten thousand 'friends' doesn't build Fusion Reactors or Faster Than Light communications or anything that's game changing.

That friendly, eco compatible Fusion Generator the youth are waiting for  will probably only come as a weapon of WAR, and they will have to die in the millions before they can have it.

After the WAR, there will be peace mainly because so many are dead and the survivors are exhausted. They and their kids will live in a world of plenty just as I did, and their kids will be known as the Second Baby Boomer Generation.

Those dumbasses who think that Baby Boomers are *the problem* obviously are ignorant of the real cause leading to their creation. This ignorance will surely guarantee the Second Baby Boomer Generation.

The only thing that worries me is that the terrible Atomic Bomb invention used at the end of WW2 on the Japanese has proliferated wildly, so perhaps the survivors will have two heads, glow in the dark and dream of legends of small holy devices which people once used to communicate over great distances that were made by Gods called  'set-a-lights' which live in the sky and can be witnessed at night as they fly overhead.

[Electro Detective]

Young people can watch Apollo and Capricorn One anytime they like on Youtube, it's no biggie for them/Meh City 

nor do they have to group around a ricketty tube filled black and white TV to see the show and cigarette commercials.

They realise that there's nothing up there to keep their short phone addiction attention span, so why bother getting educated to stuff about with an obvious career FAIL? 

They don't need to share baby boomers (aka old young people) interest in dead lifeless space with no resources to exploit,
therefore no future and or no financing from the corporats.

They are phone junkies, and never exposed to the bare bones 'enough to get a job' education and media influence that battling young people had in the 50s and 60s,
BTW whose parents were the real heroes, with little or no education, having to leave their war ravaged homes and working mundane dead end jobs in a foreign land,
where the welcoming locals    were already doing it tough themselves.

Young people are best served using technology and information handballing  to learn to live off the land and support themselves, as their predecessors did,
in readiness for the times when the corporats and politicians fail them, as they do every few decades. 

[VK3DRB]

Slight divergence. Armstrong is about to walk on the moon in about 10 minutes, 50 years ago exactly.

https://apolloinrealtime.org/11/, click on NOW button.

Whoa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@rt]

Born several years after here.

I’m very interested in vintage computing, and particularly, the core memories, but as for the rest, couldn’t care less about it.
That includes rockets & space travel.
I do find Neil & Buzz interviews/personalities interesting, and would probably watch the Neil Armstrong movie.

I’m also quite interested in GPS, geostationary sats that provide TV, etc... and imagery and weather sats etc.
Basically all of the stuff in the sky I see the practical daily use of.

I’m not interested enough to know that it actually happened, just happen to be convinced.