New Mars Forums

Hey...good idea on paper.  But I wouldn't be so hasty to adopt a "gold standard" for Mars.  Here's why:  Mars, having been untouched by humans as opposed to the Earth being scoured for gold and other rare metals for the past 10,000 years, probably has copious amounts of the yellow metal just lying around for the taking.  Now, if a Martian currency was established with the expectation that gold fetches, lets say $10 a gram, and the price of gold falls to $1 a gram due to the huge increase in supply that's been made available to humanity due to Martian mining efforts...then your gold-backed currency has just lost 90% of its value.

I once had an idea that money be based on hours of human labor, but as someone kindly pointed out, what do you do about the fact that some people work harder than others?  Personally, I think the new Martian economy will be based on a comprehensive barter system, with high-powered algorithm-driven computers controlling a system of currency based on the current value of all the things that people need..air, water, food, land, etc.  Money is just a "placeholder" of value, and as long as it's controlled in an objective manner (which is why computers are better than the whims of people in this aspect), there really shouldn't be any major problems with inflation or devaluation...

B

This brings to mind a rite that is performed on a regular basis by the over-winter crew at the South Pole Station in Anarctica.  It is called the 300 Club, and the requirement for membership is simple (nearly everyone becomes a member, btw) :  They wait until the outside temperature drops to 100 degrees below zero F, and then fire up the station's sauna to 200 above and strip off all clothing and gather up into the hot sauna for a while.  Then, when everyone's nice and toasty, they run out from the sauna and straight outside for 50-100 yards before dashing back inside...hence the name, "The 300 Club"...ouch!...LOL.

So the idea of dashing out into the near-vacuum of Mars is not quite as outlandish as it may seem at first glance...people who choose to live in overly harsh environments do have a tendency to have a few loose nuts and bolts in their heads.. 

B

I agree with you 100%.  The only reasons Bush is pulling this crap over Iraq and Saddam is to avenge his father, and to boost his own standings in the polls. (like that's really going to work)  Personally, I think if we do manage to knock off Saddam, we would end up with someone even worse in his place, like his crazy son.  We've got Iraq locked up under house and key, and there is very little evidence that Iraq is pursuing any sort of large-scale program of producing weapons of mass destruction...so why do we need to invade Iraq?

All this is beginning to look a lot like the actions of an arrogant, ageing empire throwing its weight around just because it can...let's stop this totally *unneccesary* war mongering right now and focus on the things that matter, like getting the human race into space once and for all.

B

Hey...that is a *very* good idea...

I'm a bit of a writer myself, so that's something I wouldn't mind contributing to a part of a 'group' project by M.S./ New Mars members.

Incidentaly, I am in the process of building a "Mars" website, called Red Frontier...the url is www.redfrontier.com.  I have tons of space and bandwidth available for something like this...and I'd be honored to host "Welcome to Marsbase" on my site...perhaps I should get the ball rolling by writing the firswt "installment" of it...

Check it out and see what you guys think of it anyhow...it is a Flash site (I haven't built a html version of it yet..lol), which requires Flash or Shockwave player, available at www.macromedia.com.

I'd have to agree...these crop circles are the work of dedicated pranksters..lol.  They ususally do it in groups, and they'll work through the night taking extreme care to make these "perfect" patterns.  Difficult, but certainly not impossible.  It's amazing what people can do with simple surveying equipment and basic tools such as ropes, stakes and tramble boards.

Just one of those weird things that people like to do in their spare time..

B

We've had plenty of discussion of the balance of security and personal freedoms.. i.e., the State vs. the Individual.  But there has been little discussion on the actual mechanism of government on a hypothetical Martian settlement/colony, other then the general idea of "this is the way it should be done."

As a person who is constantly seeking practical solutions to these kind of problems, I would love to see what some of your ideas of how an actual governing structure would be set up on Mars.

There's not many among us on this board that would disagree with the fact that a Martian society will be far different than here on Earth because of the deadly native environment and the large amount of interdependence upon each other to ensure continued survival within the settlement. So, naturally, the "Me, Myself, & I" instinct of humans here on Earth will have to be mitigated to a significant degree in order to make a Martian community work.  Since nearly everyone will be dependent on everyone else, people with selfish attitudes could be quite detrimental to the community as a whole.

As for the actual system of government, that "problem" may very well be taken care of by the "sponsor" of the settlement...and that enforcement of that governing structure would be carried out by the simple matter of continued support from Earth...if the "colony" refuses to cooperate, the supplies from Earth cease, and bye-bye colony...LOL...

HOWEVER....I do think that the day-to-day governance will be left up to the colonists themselves, within reasonable guidelines, of course.  The vast distances and delayed communications will make governing from afar problematic at the very least, and it will be in the best interests for everyone involved for the Martian settlers to take care of their internal matters as much as possible.  This having been said, I'm curious to what would actually work best in a small, "intimate" setting, especially in communities of less than a 1000 population.  I've stated in previous posts that I think the "big, happy family" model would work best, like the hippie communes of the '60's.  The idea of business and profit would certainly not work in this kind of environment....everyone would have to share the labor and resources equally to the greatest extent that is possible.

As for what I think would work best in this hypothetical settlement, I would propose a system of "tiered" representation...which would involve the populace electing a council, perhaps comprising as many as 10% of the entire population, which then would elect a much smaller group of people, like a senate.  The "senate" would then elect or appoint an executive leader or an executive panel.  This system would keep "politiking" at a minimum, and it would allow just about anyone to take place in the governing of the community at some point or another...and the community would be protected from the dangers of direct democracy.  Only the smartest, most responsible people would be able to rise to the position of top leadership, which would *help* (but not guarantee) to ensure that we don't have despotic leaders stepping in and taking over things for their own selfish desires.

Anyhow, this is just an idea of mine I'm throwing out...what are some of your ideas?  I would also like to see some discussion of "alternate" economic systems...if there is no profit motive, how will people establish a system of providing goods and services with each other in a fair and equitable manner?  Would the "laws" of economics here on Earth be rendered moot on Mars, or do they apply everywhere, no matter what? 

Enuff for now...     

B

An "automatic" tendency to link the "needs" of a Martian community with that of a totalitarian state?...I'm not quite sure what you mean by that, as I'm the last person in the world to think that a Mars settlement would be totalitarian in nature, and I really don't think clark feels that way either...

What clark has pointed out in various instances on this board, which I've come to realize as perfectly valid, is that the conditions of Mars will dictate how people will live, not the other way around...at least in the beginning.  There is simply no way that people will be able to just pack up their belongnings and carry on on Mars just like back here on Earth.  I don't like it, you may not like it..I doubt that clark likes it either, but there is no escaping the REALITY of a 7 mb atmosphere, constant radiation, extreme cold, ad infintum.  That is just the way Mars is, unfortunately... ???

What all this means is that a newly-established community will have to live under a totally different set of rules than we may be used to here on Earth...what those rules may be, that remains to be seen, but there's little question that people are going to have to modify their behavior in order to ensure the long-term survival of the community as a whole.

As much as a freedom-lover as I am...I actually don't have a "problem" with this, as no one will be forced to go to Mars against their will.  People will be selected for the privilege of going to Mars, whether it be for a visit or a lifetime stay.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Mars immigration authorities or whatever to stipulate that each immigrant will have to abide by a certain set of rules..(again, what these rules may actually be is debatable  )  If they don't like it, they don't have to go...they'll be plenty of others willing to take their place, believe me..lol.  I happen to like my freedom....so I think I'll stick with my own vision of "fantasy Mars", thank you very much....

As for your statement about waiting for people to change in order to "fit" on Mars...your point is perfectly valid...I would hate to see another "flag and footprints" as well...BUT...until we have some fantastic techologies that will enable us to fly into space for little more than the cost of a transcontinental flight, cheap, super-abundent energy supplies on Mars, the ability to build incredibly huge domes or other enclosed habitats, and the means to produce all manner of the "good things in life," your idea of getting as "many people as possible" on Mars is not going to happen.

Establishing a civilization on Mars is a process that will have to take us from point "A" (First Landing) to point "B" (first continually manned base) to point "C" and so on.  The "rules of the game" will undoubtably change as conditions permit...but I personally have to admit it isn't going to be bed of roses, hence the "harsh reality" of what living on Mars is really going to be like.  This means no trips to the mall, no living in a nice, big house...no trips to the beach...the first Martian pioneers will be giving up more than you and I will ever know, and that is going to take some mighty courage from these brave souls to pull something like that off.

As for some of clark's statements about life support, etc...I think it's important to consider them in the proper context.  Like for example, I seriously doubt there was anything "wrong" with the U.S. going into Afghanistan to bust up those terrorist training camps...it is simply defending ourselves from further harm.  Same thing on Mars..if a person or a group of persons is engaging in activity that endangers the lives of everyone else, I fully support engaging in whatever means necessary to defend the community at large...survival has to come first...everything else comes second, third, etc.

Hope this clears things up a bit...

B

...Good question, actually..LOL.  I guess I just wanted to see what kind of debates it would generate.   It's always a good thing to see ideas and thoughts hashed out in the open, and these debates have opened up whole new worlds of thought (sorry for the pun) for me.  In addition, it's just plain fun to debate about things like this ....

B

Interesting perspectives on WWII....  I've often wondered what would have happened if the Japanese had been "smart" enough not to bomb Pearl Harbor.  Chances are, we would have waited until Hitler had taken over all of Europe, including England and Russia, before we got involved into the war, and that would have been an awfully steep hill to climb, as having the use of England as a giant "aircraft carrier" is what enabled us to carry out the massive D-Day invasion of mainland Europe.  Without D-Day, and the fact the Nazis got hammered in Russia, Hitler would have gotten the upper hand for a while.

I say "for a while," because if Hitler did indeed attempt to invade the US, we would have, without any doubt, stopped him cold.  All you have to do is to imagine millions and millions of "Mr and Mrs Joe Blows" armed with their shotguns, just mowing down those Nazis as they landed on the beaches of the U.S....LOL.  They wouldn't gotten very far... 

Also, Hitler probably would have needed at least until 1945 to initiate his planned invasion of the US...just about when we had invented the atom bomb.  Without a doubt, we would have turned Germany into a huge slab of radioactive slag...and Germany, instead of being a major world power they are today, would just be a big empty spot on the map....

B

After poring my paper this morning, I still haven't found any mention of this asteroid...and my local newspaper is better than most...But, if repeated calculations do put the orbit on a close call with Earth in 16.5 years, yes, that's when you'll see the big "panic."

We would certainly see a dramatic interest in space, and with a 16-year lead time, I'm sure the world would attempt to put together a "diversion" mission.  I don't think blowing it up with nukes is a great idea, as that would mean we'd have a bunch of smaller rocks to contend with.  Some of you might lynch me for saying this, but I wouldn't be opposed to nudging it *just* enough to slam it into Mars (since it passes so close to it anyway), therefore eliminating the threat to Earth althogether. 

The bonanza of data from an asteroid impact on Mars would be nothing short of astonishing, magnitudes greater than the Shoemaker-Levy impact upon Jupiter in July 1994. (remember that?!?)  We would see for the first time what a 2km object moving at tremendous velocities will do to a "terrestrial" world, and since scientific discovery is predicated on studying change, the changes generated on Mars by such an impact would amount to a "tidal wave" of discovery.  The tremendous amount of regolith thrown up by the impact will give us a wide-open view of what's beneath the surface, whether water abounds, etc.  We would see how it effects the Martian climate, and what kind of long-range effects it would have...great for us here on Earth as we attempt to learn more about our own climate.

As an added bonus, the impact could very well increase the thickness of the atmosphere, making it at least a bit more hospitable for visits and eventual settlement by humans.

All you "reds" out there, feel free to fire away    If it comes down to it, if I had the choice of that thing hitting Earth or Mars, I'm going to pick Mars, and so will 99.999 percent of the world's population, and Mars has been hit by big rocks before in the past, so what's the harm in "causing" it to happen when we "need" it to happen?  We need to learn as much as we can about both Earth and Mars, so we can better take care of ourselves in the future, and such a project would be indeed the biggest science experiment of all time.   Besides, a dramatic asteroid impact on Mars would generate so much public interest in that world that continued government funding for further exploration of Mars would be almost a certainty....

Just something to think about...

B

I've been checking out some of the old Viking images that have been re-released, and I've noticed that the sky is blue in some of the photos, and in one instance, it actually had a green tint to it.  So, do any of you out there know what the color of the Martian sky is "supposed" to be? 

My theory is that the dust lofted high into the atmosphere is what causes the sky to have its "traditional" salmon color, but sometimes the atmosphere becomes devoid of suspended dust particles, which would give the sky an Earth-like hue on occasion.  *Or*...these images have been digitally processed to the extent we don't have a clue to what the Martian sky really looks like...lol..

B

Yes, I would say things might be getting a bit toasty for you...lol.

Density is a property of mass...which is why bulk is definately not the same as mass..so you've got the right idea there.  A dwarf star..or better yet, a neutron star, is made of highly concentrated mass...bulk concentrated in a very small space.  Mass, simply put, is "what's there,"  which then has properties such as weight in the presence of a gravitational field, and so on.  Remember that "weight" is just the result of a force being acted upon matter (gravity).  But as Phobos mentioned, we still don't really know why atoms have mass to begin with...we just know that it does..

B