New Mars Forums

one more question for you:
does the benefit gained from the explosion more than compensate for the roughy 30% loss of energy from slanting the beams at 45 deg.  Or could the beams be less slanted and if so how would that effect the (for lack of a better term) force concetration that goes into pushing the craft?

Well, theoretically you could probably get away with 2 of the 3.  For example, if one was very Machiavellian (spelled correctly?) then the excess use of guns could be substituted for lawyers.  The "cosmic dust" that clark mentioned doesn't  require cooperation, just destruction.  But that is an extreme example that hopefully we won't ever see.

I don't believe there is much worry about the lack of guns.  The fact that Mars will be a very hostile environment and will be until exstensive terraforming in achieved could possibly result in Mars itself being a weapon.

That is why we have the concept of checks and balances.  The President (theoretically) doesn't have the ability to declare war.  It takes an act of Congress.  Of course in practicality the Preeesident can deploy troops for a limited time without Congressional approval.  (I heard a rumor that last year it was changed to an indefinite, but limited basis.  If that is true then it is very scary indeed).  If the President ever abused this power, that is what impeachment is for (i.e. not over lying about an affair).  Also, if the President, lets say, calls for nuking the rest of the world, then it is understood that the troops are supposed to disobey any order that they see as immoral.

In short, there are a lot of ways that are supposed to stop such a figure, if they work or not *shrugs* hopefully we will never find out.

great idea, just don't forget the sugar cane (or equipment to make whatever substitute that will be used).  Need plenty of it for sweet tea 

Scott: 
Just a few questions so I can understand your reasoning better.  Who is the Mars Society (not that I am against it in any way) to set up the constitution for Mars?  Under your plan (if I understand it correctly) you are looking for fairly even representation from all the cultures of Earth.  Yet how many Uzbecks attend the annual meeting? 

Mundaka:
I wish you well with you company.  Do you have a name yet (that way I can cheer if I see them on the road)?  Also, what's wrong with church socials?  Get some good fried chicken, green beans, mashed potatoes and gravy, sweet tea (if you are in the south) and no gossip for an hour  .

dicktice:

Maybe you could clarify for me, but what is the mechanism for momentum exchange between two tethered objects?

edit:  Nevermind, I found a good explanation at tethers.com

It would have to be some form of currency.  Straight barter only occurs when you have at least two parties needing something.  What if Farmer A needs to be more solar panels but the owner of the factory/latest supply of solar panels has all the nitrogen he needs?  Currency facilitates the bartering process because the value of currency is that it has no value (if you had a million dollars but no food, your stuck) and so is readily traded for things we need.  Of course it would have to be a currency everyone recognized or else it would fall apart.

Then I have a new suggestion:  Only robots can colonize mars.  But then that leads to another problem.  "Battle Bots on Mars" would be a hit TV show, I'm sure.

How did other colonists (i.e. America, Australia, etc.) face this problem? 

And Bill, in finishing that ryhme:
"My bonny lies over the ocean, oh bring back my bonny to me"

Do you think it matters who is doing the traveling?

Scott,

1)  To be honest, I am not sure of how many people should be in each neighborhood.  It would probably be best to let them form naturally and stay a little fluid.  The problem as I see it is that if we make them very large, then we might see social problems such as crime, but if we make them very small, we start limiting the creativity of the group as a whole.

2)  My point is that those legislators make comprimises not unilateral decisions.  By default those involved get their way in some points but not in others.  There is a danger when a system is geared towards the group more than the individual.  As for the society shameing its members into following the rules, mores, etc. an example would be China.  You see a society where people go to great lengths to hide their mistakes and where a majority would like a new government, they are to afraid to speak out.  "A tree cannot change the wind."

3)  Well, I am taking it from your remarks that we went to schools during different times.  Not after elementary school did we say the pledge everyday, I applied for the draft on my own (since I was applying for a military academy, dream of being an astronaut), there was no Vietnam war (it was over before I was born), and with the whole Drug War the message was say NO to peer pressure.

These are my questions for those of you who have been discussing these topics longer than I have:

Who will control the means of production on the new Mars?  And how can we prevent governments or companies turning any settlements into "coaltowns"?  What I mean by "coaltowns" is a system where the populace work for the controlling body for a paycheck just to spend at the company store and on company housing.

You make some very interesting points Mundaka.  But you are forgetting one thing as pertains to this thread.  Inside a company (especially one the size required for such a undertaking) you already have a hierarchy.  That will effect the form of society and government later on Mars.  But it does give you the benefit of the people who are actually going there planning the trip and not the politicans who are probably alot more interested in staying here.

As for your idea (which might be in want of its own thread) it could work.  You might even be able to find some investors to help with seed money.  As for other industries, it will probably entail agriculture, computers, etc.  Things that will be needed on Mars that would be to hard to rely on Earth for.  Also, as for the employees' pay and benefits.  The low pay would probably be fine (what use would it be on Mars) plus one would have to consider the community.  Since during the trip and on Mars quarters would be tight, back on Earth company housing might not only be an idea, but might be preferred. 

To keep from rambling to much, I will leave it at that.  Just some food for tought.

I agree that the discussion about government on Mars might be premature at this stage and might be better left until the actual settlers on Mars can form an agreement.  It seems the discussion might be better focused on how we can limit the influence and duration of Earth governments and buisnessess in the lives of the settlers on Mars.  Whatever plans made here thought if shaped right could also give a good foundation for Mars to then write there own constitution. 

With the fact that developing life on mars will have to be an interconnected affair (at least at first), it just seems natural that a government for the whole planet will arise.  Also, since the voyage of the Mayflower, we have devloped other governing institutions that better adapt to the wishes of the citizenry.