You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
That is an interesting thought, but the size of the balloons would be enormous. Not to mention that the blast from the launch would surely pop a few of the balloons on the platform.
I want to learn more about the space elevator idea.
I saw an idea about a rotating device in geo-synchronous orbit that would lift a payload off the planet and throw it towards the moon. I know the material strength would be several magnitudes greater than we currently have and that the length of the device and it's counterbalance would be incredible, but how feasible it that?
Please post it, I am interested in what you have to say!
Would you personally live on Mars?
YES!
A Bell or a Zube? How much is that? 20 Z's, 10 Bells. Bells sound more like a nautical timekeeping thing. I like Z's, Zube's or even Zubrins. Sounds exotic.
I like the face of Mars idea as being the 1st face on the face of Mars currency. What backs it though? Gold, possibly. I guess we better go there and find out!
How about several, thousand square kilometer, mirrors pointing at the poles?
Does the low gravity on Mars have anything to do with the reason why it lost much of it's atmosphere?
I don't think we were lucky with the moon. The same technology could transport us to Mars. But, technology has advanced many fold. It would be easier now. The reason we don't go is a lack of guts and political hoohaw! I just wish someone, or group, would get off their lazy a$$es and just do it! If it meant a 50/50 chance at survival, I'd do it! I'd bet there would be many more who would say the same thing! Profit is proportional to risk, sometimes more so.
I disagree MarsDog, if we can get people to Mars, they can utilize the resources there allowing more people to travel there. The people there can build even greater facilities to accomodate asteriod mining. A chunk of iron the size of a city would be valuable on Earth as well as Mars. Cutting off chuncks and sending them to Earth or Mars would not be a big problem.
Practice on the moon is pointless. It has no resources. Large space stations are nice, but who will pay for them. If there is value found in going to Mars, people will go. The rest will follow. The only way to know is to go. I just hope the first mission discovers the Martian Sutter's Mill.
Crap! I got it off of OhioLink. It is a college service.
Wow! It must be really important to keep out the hands of the general public. The pdf won't allow me to copy the relevant text. Just as well, I suppose, someone in the AIP may decide that the info is enough to sue over. It simply discussed research that scientists have done in gravity research. Some of it seems impossible, like reducing mass with electromagnetism. The paper is called "Implications of Outside-the-Box Technologies on Future Space Exploration and Colonization" by Theodore C. Loder III. He is at: The Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space; University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824. 603-862-3151.
If you know a student in college, you may ask them if they have a resource like OhioLink. It allows one to read just about any scientific journal or paper published. If you have something like that in your state, it may be worth it just to take a class to get access. There is more info there than anyone could read. I just happened across the paper I cited. I suppose you could also join the AIP to see the paper. I wouldn't suggest doing that for that reason only. The paper does not go into great detail.
C'mon! Doesn't anyone like to read anymore?
In order to get over inertia, why not use a maglev launcher to accelerate a spaceship before launch. Using India and Tibet as a launch platform could bring down the costs, after the initial installation of the 1,000 km or so long launch platform.
I really don't think even Bill Gates has the money to pull off a Mars mission from scratch.
You are correct, but the current technology wouldn't require it.
"By the way, are you aware of the lunar monastery project we've been working on?"
The moon has almost no resources and would be costly to maintain. Mars has many resources.
A mission to Mars that included the ability to grow their own food via a greenhouse could stay there a very long time. More people and resources could extend the stay indefinately.
A second home for humanity could save humanity in the case of a planetary cataclysim, like a major volcanic eruption, an asteriod impact or even global nuclear war. Or even something we have not considered.
This second branch of humanity would evolve differently than Earthbound humanity. There would eventually be a second species of humanity. The difference in gravity could result in much larger humans, as an example.
I think it would be fun to find out, assuming there is reincarnation or I would have the ability to see what was going on 10,000 years in the future.
I had a class that required a research paper. I decided that mine would be on why we should go to Mars. Thats the reason I am here. I wrote the paper and I still think it needs more work. I got a "B" in the course. I hope you did well on yours. I had always wondered why we, the US, had not gone to Mars after the Apollo project. I think I know why now, politics and presumed public opinion. I still think someone, or group of people, should go. I really don't care if it is government sponsered or not. It would probably be better if it were not. There is too much bureaucratic overspending that takes place even in the tiniest of projects. A private group would take safety seriously, to ensure the success of the mission, and would keep costs down by using conventional technology.
Again, I hope your paper turned out well.
WANTED:
Multi-dimensional pseudo faster than light (AKA hyperspace) transport capable of transporting 100,000 metric tons a minimum of 10,000,000 km in less than 10 seconds. G-wave communications a must. Ultra-violet disc sound system a plus. :band:
[http://scitation.aip.org/vsearch/servle … &chapter=0]American Institute of Physics 2003 Conference Proceedings Vol. 654
I thought this was interesting. Download or view the pdf and take a look at page 1200.
Government agencies tend to overspend, NASA included. When an opportunity to recieve more money presents itself, they milk it for all its worth, often at the expense of their mission. If a serious need presents itself, like saving face for not being the first nation in space, they will go all out to succeed. The caveat is that Russia was our enemy at the time.
A mission to Mars will only be accomplished by the US if there is a serious enemy contender that could achieve that goal first.
Half of the congress of the US believes that the government knows best and can decide what is best for all. The other half wouldn't mind having a Mars mission, if it was affordable.
If a private group were to commit the funding necessary to send humans to Mars and begin production, both groups in congress would agree. If capitalism could be proven to outwit governmentalism, half of congress would appropriate the necessary funding to NASA, results dependant. The other half would go along because the funding wouldn't go to every wished for program NASA could think up.
I know this is politically simplistic, but if the right propaganda were to be released at the right time while this was occuring, it could alter opinion and cause the desired result.
If the propaganda and the threat to governmentalism does not have the desired result of a mission to Mars, then the international reporting would cause increased donations to the project. In that case, begin the project.
Bill Gates could fund a mission to Mars. I think that enough people interested in it could do the same. The Mars Society is a 501c3 organization. Americans could deduct donatons from taxes.
It may take a while to get the money together. A group such as the Mars Society would need to set up a fund with a sole purpose of a mission to Mars. There may already be one, I don't know. All I know is that we should have been there 20 years ago.
In my personal opinion, I think that the first group of people should consider staying on Mars, with the option of returning. The same with subsequent missions, until a trade economy can be established.
This is my first post here. I can accept criticism.
Pages: 1