You are not logged in.
Getting people to Mars is only part of the equation. Without an economically feasible way to transport hundreds of tons of supplies to Mars during each launch opportunity, colonization will never get off the ground (no pun intended).
I remember reading somewhere that a few near earth asteroids have convenient orbits that bring them in close proximity to both Earth and Mars. Maybe we could utilize these as cargo carriers between the two planets. You could pack a lot onto an asteroid. Byron mentioned the use of rail guns to blast payloads into orbit. I imagine if we just shot the payloads into space then used a tug to load them onto the asteroids we might save a lot of the expense of using conventional launch technology. Maybe we could put rail guns on the asteroids themselves to shoot the payloads into the orbit of the planet they're nearing. Probably not feasible, but who knows.
It would definately simplify life if we didn't have to worry about packing fuel tanks with all of the equipment required to keep cryogenic fuels in a liquid state. Since hydrogen peroxide has a lot of the same properties as water, I imagine it would freeze easily on Mars. In any event it should be easier warming up fuel than refrigerating it to near 0 temperatures.
Yeah I guess I better hurry up and decide whether I'm going or not. I want to go though, I've never attended anything like that before. Is anyone else here plannning to attend the convention?
Even with far better resolution coming from Mars, Mars still offers not one pixel of artificial content and, it's still damn cold, a real energy sink if there ever was.
Do you think we should actually try to set up a human colony on Venus to explore these artificial features you believe exist there? When you say Mars is more of an energy sink, are you saying that from the perspective of setting up a human colony
or are you saying its "evidence" that life is more likely to arise on Venus than Mars? Seems to me your going to need a hell of a lot more energy maintaining life on Venus than you would on Mars. I'd hate to get the air conditioning bill!
If you should feel the need as to doing/accomplishing something positive, then process upon whatever you can and refocus your resources towards the planet Venus. If you are in any military having access to those tactical laser cannons, perhaps you can find a way, as to sneaking one out for a little duty cycle testing (no questions asked). I wont even charge the government for my services.
Review the complete topic (launches new window)
This is truly to good. Is this guy suffering from delusions of grandeur or what?
Yes. My one desire as a kid was to be a professional astronomer. When I was around 9, I found a book in Ben Franklin 5-10 store called "A Golden Guide: Stars." I wringed my mother's arm to buy it for me; she did. I read and re-read that book for years, until the covers came off and the binding started coming loose -- not out of abuse, just out of sheer enjoyment of reading it; my favorite rainy-day book. The local public library had scant astronomy books. By the time I was 13, I was a regular subscriber to the magazine "Sky & Telescope." As for my beloved "Golden Guide" book on astronomy, it got lost somehow in my late teens;
Wow, that sounds uncannily similiar to my childhood. I don't remember exactly how I got interested in space though. I think I was just born with it. I think a lot of people with intense interest in any kind of science or art first developed it when they were under or around the age of 10. Once my niece gets to be around four years old I'm gonna try to spark her imagination by doing things like taking her to tide pools, etc. I originally wanted to be a marine biologist but my fate took me down a different path. Before I kick the bucket I'm hoping someone discovers giant squid alive in the depths of the ocean.
I've had a telescope for 20 years now; an Astroscan 2001 by Edmund Scientific; a 4.5 inch reflector. I plan to purchase an 8-inch Dobsonian reflector in the near future.
Can you see the polar ice caps of Mars with your 4.5" scope? I'm a complete idiot when it comes to telescopes, and so I dare ask, is it possible to see the moons of Mars with an amateur telescope that doesn't require its own dedicated plot of land? I'm also interested in viewing deepsky objects like nebulas and black holes (naw just kidding ). Which kinds of astronomical objects do you like observing the most?
We could probably invent robotic assistants to take care of the rote chores and routine construction tasks in a Mars colony. Even though our A.I. is currently no where near the intelligence of a chimp, it's improving fast and in fifteen or twenty years it possible we'll have A.I. that's up to the job. Setting up habitats on Mars for endangered species sounds like a noble idea, but I don't know if creating a labor pool of enslaved chimps is the best way to go about that. I'd support hiring people to do the jobs since bringing people to Mars is pretty much the point of going in the first place.
I may be biased in saying this, but I really relish the idea of Mars being cooler than Earth, even after terraforming.
Oh my god! Somebody else out there actually likes it when it's not a 190 degrees outside? Seems like the people where I live always complain about the weather when it dips somewhere below the 105 range. I guess it might be nice if you can afford the air conditioning bills! Personally, I hate it when it goes up 80 degrees, unless I'm swimming.
*Tides...yes, tides. I momentarily forgot that "little" item in my musings. Oh, geez. Well, on a positive note, maybe Marsians will never have to worry about being eaten by sharks.
LOL! Yeah, it'll be hard to live on a planet without a big ocean to visit and little tide pools to gawk over strange life in. The ocean is a magical place. MAybe we should just take Shaun's advice and ignore the whole problem. Maybe it'll just go away.
I hope I don't seem like I'm dismissing environmentalists as loonies. I certainly care about the environment, and while it's improving I'd like to see it in an even better state. I just feel a little angry that they are continually telling us that the world is in a terrible state when it is demonstrably not. They should have a little more faith in the intelligence of the public, rather than exploiting them. I strongly urge you to read the first sample chapter (PDF) from The Skeptical Environmentalist.
I agree that the environmentalists who constantly ring the fear mongering bell aren't helping their cause, because like Shaun said, it's likely that once we are able to move away from fossil fuels as an energy source a lot of our environmental problems will clear up. But JGM is right in that the developing world, notably places like China, are starting to demand the same high consumption living standards as the West and the best way to meet those standards is to develop space as both a source of materials and energy and perhaps manufacturing as well. Anti-space environmentalists seem to think we can just arrest and reverse technological development and revert back to living in caves and wearing
fig-leaves. They need to be realistic and realize that we need a solution that both protects Earth and isn't disruptive to peoples' living standards.
Man I want to go now. It would be a nice roadtrip excursion. *contemplates getting out checkbook*
*Now WHY would the concept of other stars having planets have been considered in the realm of science fiction? I'm an amateur astronomer since the age of 8. I've never considered it an impossibility or pooh-pooh'd the idea. Maybe most of humanity is still not too far from the old belief that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe...
Considering they've been finding planets for nearly ten years now on a regular basis, it's definately outside the realm of science-fiction. It's nice to know for sure though that there are planets around other stars that exhibit the properties of our Solar System. Your an amateur astronomer? I've been thinking about buying a telescope lately but there's to many to choose from and the good ones seem a lot more expensive than I thought they would be. About the only astronomy I do is going to look at the moon with a pair of binoculars I got for Christmas when I was around 10 years old. I am pretty good at finding Jupiter and Venus in the sky though. I've also tried to find the Orion nebula with the binoculars, but I never see it. Might be to much light pollution or something.
When I think of where I want to see the human future in space, I don't imagine humans being content with Mars. I see us in the Oort cloud, on asteroids, in the rings of Saturn and the moons of Jupiter. To my view, Mars is just step one into a much larger, deeper journey.
I view Mars pretty much the same way you do. It's just the next logical step on our further expansion into space. I sometimes wonder if anarchism will necessarily become the "political" reality of a space-faring species. There's so much room to roam around out there that it would be easy to run from the cops so to speak and keep setting up small colonies here and there. Not that I'm necessarily an anarchist though.
So why are so many people intrigued by the idea of turning mars into the same kind of place that we've just left? The rest of space is harsher than mars to a similar degree that mars is harsher than earth. To me, mars represents a training ground, a place to learn the basics of a spacefaring lifestyle. Turning it into a smaller, faded version of earth would be a huge diversion of resources that could otherwise be used to take us much farther, to many more interesting places. Terraforming seems like a big distraction from the things that space has to teach us.
If we intend to make a meaningful expansion into space it seems only logical to me that we would try to make our environment as comfortable and safe as we possibly can. Mastering terraforming would truly allow us to expand into space on a mass scale. Plus we are in no danger of using up resources in terraforming Mars considering the very vast material wealth of the Solar System that's at our disposal, particularly in the asteroid belt. Anyway, I don't think we are in sudden danger of becoming soft and forgetting how to colonize space if we terraform Mars.
There's another thing about terraforming that makes me nervous. Someday, eventually, humanity is going to meet extraterrestrial intelligence, and we might have an interest in the kind of impression we make on our new neighbors. Do we really want or need a terraformed mars on our resume? It might be seen as evidence of our tenacity, our technological prowess, and our mastery of the inanimate. It could also be seen as a tendancy to make ourselves incompatible with any other exotic life that comes along.
I think it's best that we look out for ourselves and forget what impressions we might make on an alien intelligence we have yet to meet. If the extraterrestrials are truly intelligent and reasonable we could probably explain to them that we only terraform planets that we feel certain are devoid of life. After all, it's quite possible the aliens themselves will be terraformers. And personally I think it's definately in our best interest to become "masters of the inanimate" as you put it. What right does any alien society have to impose their morals on us so long as we leave them alone? Wouldn't it be hypocrisy for them, who'd obviously have a high level of technology if they can understand the use and ramifications of our technology, from telling us we aren't allowed to develop technologies they don't like? If we come into ideological differences with any e.t. out there we'll just have to weigh the options.
Also, what is introduced into that body of water --though it will have to adapt to the differences Marsian gravity and etc has upon water from that of Earth's -- will be able to move freely about in the water (I suppose).
That's a good point. Large sea animals probably wouldn't have a problem with the effects of gravity but microscopic animals like plankton might not be able to adapt to the high surface tension. If such life can't cope than I think we're in trouble if we plan to introduce marine life. Plankton is one of the most important lifeforms in the foodchain. Another problem to contend with is the lack of tides. Land dwelling life might not be affected much by the lack of tides, but sea life definately will be. A lot of sea life depends on the tides as a marker for feeding, breeding, etc. Tides can be simulated in tanks, but for a Martian ocean, I think we might have problems.
I'm thinking it'll be easier to introduce marine life successfully to Mars once large bodies of water are established than it will be to introduce and sustain generations of land-based mammals, birds, etc. But, of course, I could be wrong. I'm just speculating...
It's probably safe to assume that marine creatures would be a lot easier to introduce than land based ones simply because the water is a good source of shielding from cosmic radiation. But then again if you got oceans your probably have a nice thick atmosphere that could block harmful radiation from land animals as well.
No problemo. It's probably logical to assume anyway that by the time we develop the technology to colonize Venus getting out of the gravity well will be no problem anyhow.
Now the question is- how do we reach the environmentalists with this message? They have to stop thinking the solution lies in an anti-technological stance. This is a losing battle. Modern humanity will insist on being technological. It's just a matter of what resources we exploit and how we reach them most effectively.
I think the problem with a lot of environmentalists is that they view anything that is done to the environment by people as being negative. So naturally they think that if we go tear up a sterile, utterly dead asteroid we're committing an act on par with cutting down an ancient, unspoiled forest. They need to be convinced that living eco-systems take precedence over dead matter on which no eco-system depends on to thrive, and thus we could save eco-systems by extracting materials from lifeless sources in space. Also they need to realize that we could solve a lot of our energy problems (which causes most of the pollution) by developing energy in space. It's just not good to stagnate technologically and then bitch about how bad things are getting. They either need to realize that we must work on these new technologies for exploiting space and energy or we could be facing an environmental disaster before we know it. I get the feeling though that a lot of the more radical environmentalists are just to irrational to even consider that technology and space could be a positive instead of a negative influence.
Has anyone read those articles about Greg Benford yet on New Mars? It was finally a relief to read that someone else outside of this forum thought that developing space will prove necessary in maintaining the environmental health of Earth. Now if those 2% of extreme and anti-technological sect of environmentalists would get off their hobbyhorses and see the light! Space technology will save us and the Earth, not doom us! Like Benford said, if we just sit around on Earth content that ripping up its crust can go on indefinately or that being anti-technological will help us, we're doomed. Of course you've got the misanthropic group of people out there who hate all of humanity and want to see it destroyed, but to hell with them, they're irrelevant and should hurry up and die off.
Do you have to be a society member to attend the convention? If they don't they should allow non-members to attend for a fee. And I agree, it'll be nice when we don't need NASA to get us anywhere anymore (even though they don't get us anywhere!)) If we're ever able to launch a mission soley from private funds I think we should set up base in Nigeria. They've expressed interest in exploiting space to help their economy but don't have the budget for it. Plus equatorial regions are good places to launch from if I remember right.
If you visit the Objective Force Warrior website you will see that these "suits" are intended to protect soldiers from chemical and biological agents - with fully contained air supplies as an option - contain micro-tubing for carrying heated or cooled liquid around the body, contain biosensors to monitor medical vital signs and the helmets can be sealed up with infrared optical devices and integrated night vision binoculars as well as GPS and communications gear.
Hey Bill you beat me to it! I saw this same article at another site and I was thinking the same exact thing. Even though I hate the idea of weapons, if this thing is good enough to run around to kill people in and survive war-like conditions, it should allow astronauts both comfort and dexterity on a level that exceeds any current space suit. The only problem though is that the space suit being mentioned isn't built for the vaccuum and temperature conditions of Mars. It would probably need additional layers and equipment to work properly in the Martian environment. But even then it's probably a good model to base a Mars suit on.
*I suppose it would depend on distance (actual or calculated) from the nearest human habitat (so it could be seen), but what about a flare gun (modified for the Marsian environment)?
It might be a good idea for the colonists to carry a flare gun on their belt as a means of last resort. I think bright green would be a good color for the flare. It would contrast nicely with the Martian colors.
*What the f*ck?! Please elaborate, or refer me to some web links. It's one thing to disagree with his plans; it's one thing to consider his plans unworkable -- but for some scientific folks to consider him in a manner similar to the leader of a religious cult?? Why I am surprised, though? I am, but now I'm questioning why I am. Short-sightedness isn't just limited to people with low IQs...Galileo's colleagues condemned him.
I've worked throughout my adult life with medical doctors; though they may be very intelligent and well educated, when it comes to plain old-fashioned common sense, some of them can be rather stupid. Maybe it's jealousy on their part, as well; nay-say it because it's brilliant, or at least the best working plan ever laid out for going to Mars, and they didn't think of it -- jealousy, in other words. Damn, this makes me mad.
Maybe I was exaggerating a bit when I made the connection of Zubrin as a cultist leader, but there are definately scientists and engineers out there who thinks he's some kind of whacked out crackpot with unworkable ideas. Give me some time and I'll dig up some material I've read to make my point. Those people often strike me as being very arrogant and closed minded. Granted, there are problems with Zubrin's plans, but to totally trash him as some delusional nut is going to far. I think its something all visionaries have to contend with, being put through the fire by unreasonable naysayers. And I know what you mean by educated and intelligent people acting unreasonable. I think my favorite example is the story of the truck that got caught under a bridge because it was too large. A bunch of engineers were trying to figure out how to get the truck out from underneath while ignoring one of the engineer's five year old who kept saying to let the air out of the tires.
I wonder if a human occupant would be able to survive being shot out of a Martian space gun. I know on Earth you'd be squashed like a bug since payloads have to accelerate to very high speeds quickly, but would the same be true on Mars? If you constructed the gun long enough perhaps you could reduce the acceleration rate to a point that a person could survive. It would beat having fleets of spacecraft with complicated engines that are prone to failure.
That's a scary thought. If permafrost is indeed uniformly spread over the planet just a few meters deep that might cause some problems. The melted permafrost could definately cause the support structures of the dome to sink.
Civil engineering practices on Earth could be applicable to this problem since the same things happen on this planet. If you encounter ground water that's above a certain level the solution is usually to build up the pad or sometimes you can situate the structure on piers using special and expensive types of concrete. If the underlying material has a high clay content, the supports will likely need expansion joints as clay is very expansive even after it's compacted (that's assuming the water is contained mostly in clays). Then again if the water is mostly contained in rock, it might be a non-issue.
*Hear, hear! Aesthetically speaking, glorious in that regard as well. I was in awe of the images of those towering, gleaming Saturn V's as a kid...and I still get "that feeling" when viewing video clips of them.
--Cindy
It going to be a long time I think before another space vehicle can capture the human spirit the way the Saturn V did. The space shuttle and other assorted modern rockets might be fabulous machines, but they just lack that "can do" feel that the Saturn V seemed to possess. Maybe it's because the Saturn V is the only vehicle to start us on a human journey toward other worlds. I wish I could have been around to see it take off for real. Anyways, I've been looking at NASA websites to see if I could find a clip of that video where it shows the stages detaching from each other in space. You wouldn't happen to know by any chance where I could download that?
I was breathless with anticipation as I attempted to access the site ... imagining all sorts of risque diagrams of sex in zero-g on the way to Mars!! (Yeah, right ... ! ) And I could only speculate as to what could be achieved in 0.38g on Mars!
Hmm, what would sex be like in 0g? Might be hard because all of that thrusting, pushing, slapping, etc would send your partner floating off away from you, you'd have to keep pulling them back. I imagine you'd have to make creative use of the walls. Maybe the Mars Society should make a cheesy video demonstrating the possibilities of sex in space to make money. They could suspend some porn stars by strings to emulate zero G. The Mars Society porn division could probably make enough money to go to Mars on its own not to mention all those glamour and popular culture mags would inadvertently advertise our cause when they pick up on these new ventures by the Mars Society. Nothing sells like sex!
But, putting aside my frustration re. "that site", I second what Adrian says: Join The Mars Society today!!! Unless you put your money where your exploration desires lie, you are as nothing! You don't register on the politicians' scopes and you don't really count!!
DO IT TODAY!!!!! (Or I'll be forced to send the heavies around to "talk to you").
Mr. Barrett I swear I'll pay up, I just need 24 more hours to get the cash! Please don't make me sleep with the fishies at the bottom of the lake!
I know what you mean Shaun. I rarely bring up my interest in space exploration outside of this board, but it seems whenever I do people think I'm talking about Astrology. People seem to lump us in with psychics and astrologers and obscure cultist freaks who think residents from Tau Ceti are coming to rescue them. Many people are to short sighted to realize that dedicated space development could help a lot of the environmental and energy problems we experience on the Earth. Sometimes I wonder if humanity is doomed to die because of its own stupid shortsightedness. Anyway, I notice that a lot of people even in the scientific community view Zubrin as something akin to the Rev. Moon. God forbid if we have forward looking visions of colonizing Mars and other places!!
I guess if your a coffee addict you could just drink cappuccino. Gonna have to spend a lot of time in the exercise room though. Speaking of calories, will Mars astronauts just subsist on the normal 2000 calorie diet or will they need more because of heavy activity or perhaps less?