New Mars Forums

As already mentioned earlier in this thread, the natural loss of H2 and He is caused by the molecules gaining energy from an external source, and therefore reaching escape velocity. The H2/He in a nanotube would not be exposed to this source of energy (ok it would gain a bit of energy from solar heating) but otherwise the molecules would just sit there. Loss of H2/He from the atmosphere is minimal, and so is not a good advert for the nanotube straw. Unless someone sets up a computer simulation (as someone mentioned earlier), or builds a working tube that proves the theory I just don't think the physics fit the theory.

Not only can it save payload space, if they did design in back up equipment on rovers that could be used again by manned missions it could prove lifesaving if the primary equipment carried with them failed. Would we wish to tell a crew that they could not touch any equipment that is on the surface as they may be required in the future for historical purposes - if that very same equipment meant the difference between completing a mission and getting back safely or becoming the first casualty of Mars? I'm all in favour of saving the first few rovers for historical exhibits, the technology on them would probably not be suitable to integrate with the items carried by a manned mission. But future rovers can be designed to have a useful function to a manned mission, we can not get too sentimental about everything we send up or we'll end up needing a Mars sized museum to display them all.
I have to agree with Rxke, use the future rovers again and take the geologist - I'd love to see their views of standing upon Mars.

The smokestack is a different situation, for one energy is supplied at the base of the stack (by whatever is creating the smoke). Also the height of smokestacks are tiny compared to the nano tube straw idea.
A marzipan hat would be fine :up:
Graeme

This is not an area I have studied recently, but surely the molecules that naturally escape from say the exosphere do so because they have enough kinetic energy to reach an escape velocity. The kinetic energy here would I presume come from either collision with other molecules, or the suns thermal influence upon them. Molecules within the tube at ground level would not have the same influences upon them, plus at lower levels the kinetic energy they'd require would be greater to counteract the amount of gravity acting upon them. I'm not sure the physics work out that the molecules would automatically fly upwards into space, my view would be that the upper segment of tube if filled with these two molecules alone would empty into space and a vacuum would form above the lower molecules and there they would stay with only a slight escape of the upper molecules.
As I say my knowledge of physics in this area is a little rusty (it's two years since I studied gravity, and four since I studied the interaction of any molecules.) If it does work I'll be quiet happy to say woops I got it wrong, pass me a edible hat

Gravity would have an effect on this process of 'pressure difference = flow'. As molecules will be acted upon by gravity, the force acting upon those molecules from the pressure difference would have to be greater than that of gravity.

Sending man to Mars is the only sensible way of getting real answers about what the planet is like, rovers can only do so much before you have to put a scientist onto the surface with a set of tools and say "get on with it". We only have to look at some of the discussions currently running on these boards to see that we need more interaction with the Martian landscape than rovers can give us. Instead of seeing pictures, however good, someone standing on the surface can pick up an interesting object, take it to the lab and tell us what it is, rather than guessing what the object looks similar to.
If we put off exploring other planets with manned missions until all Earths problems are sorted we'll never go anywhere, and don't forget that research into space exploration gives a spin off into the technology we see used on Earth. Its not as if the entire amount of investment into space goes entirely into space never to be seen again.
Money is always questionned when talking about sending manned space missions, but why? If whilst investigating another world we are able to solve problems on Earth does this not justify the expense (to be honest though, I just want to know whats out there).

How would it stand up to winds at different altitudes? When you think of the stresses of not only the winds, but the weight of that height of structure it would need to have some considerable wall strength and bracing just to stand up. Another question I have is how do you construct something that goes through our atmosphere and into space?

Yes, but you just know you're going to see them on the shopping channels soon  :;):
If the beads are around 3mm diameter they would not make much of a necklace, and we don't know yet if the beads would pose any health risk to humans.

Eating out can be a problem, but its starting to get better than it used to (frozen vegetable lasagne used to be the only thing on the menus).

I've never heard of making jelly out of flowers, though it sounds better than its normal ingredients. I can see the benefits of having flowers on a long term manned mission, though perhaps many won't. They could give you something to remind you of home whilst your their, they might also improve the habitat area acting as a natural air freshener, and if you could add them to you food even better. Multiple use items that can be carried up all the better, less cargo space on the journey, but plenty of uses once there.

So 0.338 cm in diameter (I just worked out the calculations from the previous post) this still does not affect the spherules being the result of a impact.

I don't think we can consider terraforming Mars until we have ruled out life at whatever level. The chance to study the development of a planet and its life should not be missed as we'll never get another chance. In my view Mars should be left as it is. I'm not saying don't go at all, or don't touch it, but lets get up there and find that bacteria-level microbe, study it, and watch it develop. It would be a harsh lesson to presume for instance that terraforming would not affect a certain life form only to discover when its too late that we were wrong.

Food for both travelling to and from Mars, and whilst on the surface could prove to be a stumbling block. It will depend upon the activities whilst they are there, and the amount of time they will spend there as to if they build structures for food growth/production or take pre-packed energy type foods.
If we consider the long term aspects of being on Mars, food production will have to be simple to start with, and certain to bring returns for the effort put in. It would not be much good taking animals and means of artificial insemination only for it not to work or your 'Adam & Eve' animals to die before they give birth to any offspring.
Its true I'm biased (who isn't in one way or another), I've been vegetarian for around 20 years now and have not missed the meat either in taste or as a form of energy providor. If I had to come up with foods I'd like to take to Mars with me, it would be quick growing (I'm sure they can come up with quick growing plants in any form now with a bit of genetic modification). Starting with greens, lettuce can grow quickly anyway, you can pick leaves off whilst its still growing, it can also be grown hydroponically in 30 days or so. Other hydroponic plants I would have would be tomatoes, sweet peppers, spinach, squash, cucumbers, broccoli, beans, and herbs. If you have a steady supply of tomatoes, they're good for either salad, or pulp it up into a sauce for cooking, spinach and broccoli have both been proven to be beneficial for you health. I don't know if mushrooms can be grown hydroponically, but if not they can be transported as spores, they take up no space in this form and can be grown in stages providing a steady crop.
Rice would be a good fill up food (if I'm eating rice its not often I feel like snacking afterwards). Someone has already mentioned powdered egg, i've not tried it but it should mix up ok for an omelette, scrambled eggs etc.
I would miss potatoes if they proved too difficult to grow on Mars, roast spuds would be essential for a sunday night after a long day scrambling amongst the rocks.