17
   

The meaning of getting to Mars? Your view?

 
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 11:00 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
I think we talked about many of these options.(I recall Set and Rosborne and EB ).
As species we do need biological diversity so ultimately, WHEN we need to colonize we can have model individuals nd packets of instant diversity with which to clone descendants.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 11:01 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
In just 1 billion years ahead the Sun will be enough hotter to cook Earth to death


So lets look busy.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 11:02 am
@hightor,
I never thought Id be more of an optimist than you.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 11:04 am
@hightor,
Quote:
Why should a tribe of squabbling apes merit such a glorious outcome?


Because we can.

Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 11:34 am
@farmerman,
...you should get the rights to the Star Trek franchise...I hope you are right.
I would be far less depressed if you were right. Engage!
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 12:51 pm
@farmerman,
I realize, farmerman, that you are indulging in a form of speculation which assumes that future human society will have advanced to a point where this is all possible and maybe even a good idea. I'm basing my view on what I see around me — which leads me to doubt that that the social cohesion necessary to undergird such a project is alien to human nature! Wink

Gregory Paul wrote:
Here we are, half a century after the first moon landing, and not much new has happened regarding humans in deep space. Yet with SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, and talk of deep space tourism, moon bases, mining asteroids, and Mars colonization, it might look like Homo sapiens is about to become a space species.

Ain’t happening, folks. It never will be practical in terms of cost and safety.

What does work are airliners, one of which I happened to be flying in the day of the Apollo 11 landing. Nearly all airliners last a couple of decades, over which they make thousands of flights with quick turnarounds. You are far safer flying a given distance than driving it. And flying is cheap. Economy fare from Buffalo to Tokyo and back is just one or two thousand bucks. That’s because only a fifth of the takeoff weight of an airliner consists of fuel, allowing it to carry hundreds of passengers who split the modest fuel costs; at a few hundred gallons per person and a few bucks per gallon, that’s affordable.

The endless problems with people in space starts with just getting there, via what (due to the physics of the universe) will always be the only means of getting into low orbit: the space booster. Yes, there is prattle about space elevators, but they will never be feasible for numerous reasons, including fantastic cost (due in part to all the space launches needed to build one), the lack of a means to assemble such a vast structure, the lack of materials to resist the incredible tensile stresses, and on and on. Rocketing into orbit means going from ground speed to 18,000 mph in a few minutes. That demands burning massive amounts of fuel that make up 85 percent of the mass of a space rocket. That in turn limits the payload, such as people, to a wee fraction of the weight of the booster, so the cost per passenger for fuel alone is ridiculous. And it is hyper-dangerous. Because they are largely a load of fuel that is burned at fantastic rates that threaten to destroy the machine, boosters are essentially flying bombs, always on the edge of disaster—which is why they do, and always will, self-destruct at a horrific rate of about one in a hundred launches. No airline would last more than a week with a rate of loss like that. There is no way around this! Making space rockets into winged vehicles that take off horizontally does not solve the safety or fuel consumption problems. If anything, the wings add drag, weight, and cost.

Because space boosters must have such incredible performance, they are extremely expensive. And the forces of each launch beat the hell out of them, so even reusable boosters such as those being developed by SpaceX are projected to last only a hundred flights—if they don’t blow up. So, getting a given person into orbit will always cost millions, precluding all but the wealthy or those involved in some form of paid exploration or extraterrestrial business getting above the atmosphere. And anyone who goes into orbit will be doing so at a lethal risk factor that makes being a deep-sea fisherman—that “most dangerous job”—look safe. Newt Gingrich’s notions of orbiting resorts for the masses is sheer free-market fantasy.

Then matters get a lot worse. What few seem able to comprehend is that the galaxy we live in is a ruthless people killer. All of deep space is chock-full of cosmic rays that will in a few months fry the human brain into permanent dementia and pepper the body with cancers. Never forget, we evolved here on planet Earth, whose magnetic field protects us from said radiation. There is no practical way to shield people in space vehicles that must be lightly constructed. Living on the moon or Mars will require living underground. But watch out for moon and Mars dust; it’s pretty toxic stuff comparable to, say, asbestos.

We Homo sapiens evolved to live in the tropics. Therefore most folks still live at low latitudes. Progressing toward the poles, the population drops way off—to the degree that Antarctica has just a few winter researchers who dwell there at great governmental cost. Yet even the South Pole has something space—as atheist Bill Maher pointed out in one of his best New Rules rants—lacks. Air! Being in space means every moment being on the verge of death if something goes wrong with the damn oxygen supply. And every minute of every day, a spacefarer is living inside a space cocoon, whether it be ship, habitat, or suit. No human being would be able to walk outside for a breath of fresh air under a blue sky filled with nice fluffy clouds. Aside from the absolute physical risk, being in space is a recipe for psychological disaster.

Nor is there a major, viable business model for people in space. Anything done way up there will be vastly too expensive to make money by bringing it back to Earth, more so because that requires the dicey and dangerous proposition of flaming reentry. As for colonization to save the species, that is an escapist elitist fantasy in which somehow the relatively few folks who make it to Mars are somehow going to establish a viable population on a radiation-saturated airless desert planet that makes Tatooine look nice. Just how is the initial stage of the colony with maybe a dozen or two people supposed to work? What if people go insane? How will they be dealt with? What if one or more is murdered or raped? How will the investigation, arrest, imprisonment, and trial work? The remote colony would be perpetually vulnerable to political strife and autocracy. Even in the incredible event that the fantastic funds needed to conduct the hyper-risky effort to terraform the planet actually worked out, Mars would be a rump human habitat that would do little to save the species if our homeworld goes belly-up.

Space as the salutary future for humanity is barely more practical than the second coming of Christ, and efforts to make the first so divert attention from dealing with the one spaceship we already have—our planet. If we can’t make it here on earth, we can’t make it anywhere. If conscious minds do make it into space, it will not be in the form of big-brained primates. It will be artificial minds that don’t need oxygen, and that, because they are the spacecraft, can get to space cheaply and safely and be resistant to the radiation.

Maybe they will make it to the stars—if they find a reason to.

Gregory S. Paul is an independent researcher, analyst, and author. His latest book is The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 01:15 pm
@hightor,
1 - You don't need to put Humanity in orbit. A few are enough.
2 - So far no humans are needed to build stuff in low orbit, you can shoot materials to space with ballistics with good enough computer calculated precision to slow down and use rocket fuel just to avoid falling back down to Earth.
3 - Self-replicating bots mining the Moon are tangible in a not so far future. A huge base for launching Capital ships can be build this way.
4 - Discovery of new materials as graphene can make an impact on space elevators.
5 - Vacuum negative energy can potentially be an endless source of energy for long-distance traveling.
6 - You can send frozen embryos instead of people to other star systems and raising them with an artificial uterus upon arrival tutored by AI.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 02:43 pm
Life establishes itself in any place it can on Earth. I think moving into space is another facet of the same impulse.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 03:06 pm
@farmerman,
Dident understand molten cores and mag shields.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 06:00 pm
@hightor,
I am in awe of Greg's talent as an artist. As a futurist, not so much. Saying that we wont ever hqve something,about the form of which we have no idea , is a bit like the cavemen saying "we aint ever gonna have TV"
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 06:05 pm
@RABEL222,
the molten core is one of the needs that , combined with a planets rotation on an axis, generates a magneic field. PS , ours has decayed by about 0.01% in the last several hundred years. Mars has no molten core, its vulnerable to bombarding by solar radiation.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 06:10 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Exactly, imagine now, that we had some really top minds who were displaying those plus countless other aspects of ways to assist life off the planet.

I do not accept that we will give up unless we find a totally valid means to tranfer consciouness into AI. Even then, like gas and oil, I believe it will be a "bridge" to something else .

Life will find a way. right now we are the "Homo sapiens habilis II"
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:16 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
It would take a long time to make Mars habitable by trees from earth. The "soil" is intensely salty--unlike earth, there is not sufficient free oxygen to bond with metallic rocks. On Earth, cyanobacteria giving off O2 lead to the first great extinction event, about two an a half billion years ago.

It's not just the lack of dirt suitable for organic interaction, either. The atmospheric pressure runs about 10 to 12 millibars at mean surface level. To put that in perspective, the atmospheric pressure on the Earth at mean sea level runs about 1013 millibars. There is a down and dirty way to pump up atmospheric pressure, wich would be to park a carbonaceous chondrite in a polar orbit, and put a primitive robot on it so that it drops carbon dust on the south pole of Mars whenever it passes over. It could be refined by waiting for southern hemisphere summer on Mars to dump the carbon dust. That would melt the southern polar ice cap, which is about 99% dry ice, CO2 ice. Then you could plant all manner of tress on the surface, on patches of soil created by robtos. Most of the trees would die off, but eventually, they prosper. It would also be useful to spread halophyte plants on the surface.

Then, we'd only have to wait about 30,000 years (and a Martian year is bout 22 months, by our calendar) for the trees to scrub enough CO2 out of the atmosphere for terrestrial animals to be able to live there. Easy-peasy . . .
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:21 pm
Just as is the case with our planet, the gravitational profile of Mars is not "carved in stone" (all puns intentional). The martian gravity is roughly .38 of our gravity. If we could get trees growing there, they'd be giants. There's an atmosphere there, but the stellar wind is stripping it away. There is no magnetosphere at all.

On the plus side, though, there are no capitalist, bankers or political parties, either.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:28 pm
@Setanta,
e adapt to MArs, I think terraforming is kind of a time waster when we know we are just using the place as a stepping stone.

edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:53 pm
@farmerman,
We send up marijuana farmers to grow the plants.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:57 pm
@edgarblythe,
The one I saw about a Mars colony was calld "Suburbia", (It was play on planning lingo) and was a totally underground city constructed by battery operated machinery
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 08:59 pm
@farmerman,
Underground or in the sides of mountains is how I envisioned it. I wouldn't want a little house on the prairie.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 09:00 pm
@farmerman,
With careful planning, and no drastic corporate moves, we could make it into a planetary Siberia or Canada. Doing the CO2 thing, though, would assure that animals cannot live on the surface for tens of thousands of years. Another very expensive route could yield a breathable atmosphere in a few centuries.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2020 09:28 pm
@Setanta,
we mine and smelt iron oxide and aluminum oxide and use energy from several sources available. the only product we need to import is cryolite to break down the Aluminum oxide. Weve got a manageable amount of water and it can be recycled infinitely.

how bout living IN GALE CRATER?
Ill bet if we sit down and really think it out we could problem solve the mission from here.

My whole thing is that we must become intergalactic within a few million years or go totally xtinct along with all life.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.15 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 10:17:01