You are not logged in.
Rovers suck for two primary reasons-
1. They Can't Think.
a.rovers can not determine anything, and all information from a rover is in question unless a human is actually present and able to monitor the experiment. Just look at the infamous mars 'life' experiment
b. who is gonna fix one if they break down? Robots can't fix themselves (or other robots, too many varibles for limited machine minds. . .)
2. They suck.
a. They suck in all manner of suckitude
b. I've seen better, and cheaper r/c monster trucks. . . .
c. No subsitute for the real thing. (man, of course, and I meant woman if you are a femmist extremist!)
"I am the spritual son of Abraham, I fear no man and no man controls my destiny"
Offline
Rovers have some things going for them though, they are much cheaper and safer to send to Mars. One of the problems with modern rovers is that they are small and limited energy and instrument wise. Instead of going through the hoopla of sending people and their instruments, it would be better just to send the instruments in a big, well powered robotic lab that could be better manipulated telerobotically (and I don't mean driving it in real time.) Anyhow, humans also break down and only have so much ability to fix equipment that goes haywire. Ultimately, you can't fix a dead human, especially if they're 53 million miles away.
My people don't call themselves Sioux or Dakota. We call ourselves Ikce Wicasa, the natural humans, the free, wild, common people. I am pleased to call myself that. -Lame Deer
Offline
Ultimately, you can't fix a dead human, especially if they're 53 million miles away.
true, but if they are only sick, they can heal themselves. Sick robots can't heal themselves and if they could, they would need such a large multitude of assistance that a mission would greatly increase in cost. Lets face it; robotics break down frequently and are not very suitable for an enviroment with so many varibles, most of them unknown.
Instead of going through the hoopla of sending people and their instruments, it would be better just to send the instruments in a big, well powered robotic lab that could be better manipulated telerobotically
It won't be manipulated better telerobotically. consider the 4-9 minute gap between communications and all that can transpire between. man on site will do more meanifull work. If a varible occurs that the operators discover, it is probably going to be hopeless to save the mission.
I believe if robotics are to suceed in space, robots will have to be able to deal with varibles and untill that happens (not until AI will that happen) robotics in space is largely a pipe dream.
"I am the spritual son of Abraham, I fear no man and no man controls my destiny"
Offline
erm...
Robots in space are a reality, they work very well to extend our capabilities and our horizons at a fraction of the cost and danger. They have also gathered every piece of information we have concerning anything further than the moon. Not bad really.
Im all for manned missions, but until then robots is all we have, and thats not so bad. They may be slow and have short lives but they get the job done.
Offline
They may be slow and have short lives but they get the job done.
I agree, but if they break down before they get the job done, what good is that? What happens if they can't get the job done?
Robots in space are generally relible, I agree, but only to do experiments with no unknowns. If there are unknowns then that robot is in deep feces.
"I am the spritual son of Abraham, I fear no man and no man controls my destiny"
Offline
The only reason we have any of the questions we do now is because the robots went out there and couldnt answer them. We send them out to do measurements and collect data, and they invariably come ack with more questions than answers, but thats what exploring is all about. We dont have any manned interplanetary capability and rovers are doing a fine job until we do, they keep our scientists busy and our pulic intersested. If it werent for robots alot of people would still probably argue there were little green men running around - theyve brought us this far and theyll carry on helping us in the future.
Offline
The only reason we have any of the questions we do now is because the robots went out there and couldnt answer them.
We are sending robots that are leaving too much to question. A full-time human station (like the barrows point at the north pole) will answer the questions in totallity instead of half-answers.
theyve brought us this far and theyll carry on helping us in the future.
I still haven't seen how you think robots will react to unknown varibles. They may be the best now, but humans are better with unknown varibles than robots.
probably. but only in direct supervision with humans (like the canada arm. . .)
"I am the spritual son of Abraham, I fear no man and no man controls my destiny"
Offline
My point is that you are being to harsh on them. They were never designed to fully repace humans and for a very long time will be incapable of doing so. Robots were sent out because it was the best and only option we had and currnetly have. Even when we do have a permanent presence they will still be used - they will be able to increase the capabilities of our crew and lighten their workload allowing them to concentrate on the big questions.
Offline
they will be able to increase the capabilities of our crew and lighten their workload allowing them to concentrate on the big questions.
exactly. I agree wholeheartedly with that statement.
My point is that you are being to harsh on them.
My point is that a lot of people expect too much from them.
"I am the spritual son of Abraham, I fear no man and no man controls my destiny"
Offline
everyone and everything is limited, whether man or machine. The day we create true AI is a day that will be seen as a duality: a day of joy and a day of sorrow
Humanity fears what it cannot understand, and it will fear AI, which will make robots perhaps the equals of humans. And if they become equals, self aware, intelligent, etc...then humans will have to accept them as being so...and with no 3 rule of robotics this time, for it would not be ethical to have them as second-class citizens if they really were possessed of artficial-conciousnesses.
"What you don't realize about peace, is that is cannot be achieved by yielding to an enemy. Rather, peace is something that must be fought for, and if it is necessary for a war to be fought to preserve the peace, then I would more than willingly give my life for the cause of peace."
Offline
Algol, well said, on all points.
I don't think people expect too much from rovers or probes, generally speaking. I mean, consider the press on Pathfinder. Everyone was basically made aware before it even left the pad that it was going to move at a few inches every now and then and had to be programmed and so on. I think, that it was made obvious to most people that rovers can't tell us exactness. Even humans couldn't be able to be exact without their own labs and so on. (A group of colonists could go to Mars and live there with very little or no scientific knowledge, for example.)
Some useful links while MER are active. [url=http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.html]Offical site[/url] [url=http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/MM_NTV_Web.html]NASA TV[/url] [url=http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004/]JPL MER2004[/url] [url=http://www.spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/statustextonly.html]Text feed[/url]
--------
The amount of solar radiation reaching the surface of the earth totals some 3.9 million exajoules a year.
Offline
Rovers suck for two primary reasons-
1. They Can't Think.
a.rovers can not determine anything, and all information from a rover is in question unless a human is actually present and able to monitor the experiment. Just look at the infamous mars 'life' experiment
b. who is gonna fix one if they break down? Robots can't fix themselves (or other robots, too many varibles for limited machine minds. . .)2. They suck.
a. They suck in all manner of suckitude
b. I've seen better, and cheaper r/c monster trucks. . . .
c. No subsitute for the real thing. (man, of course, and I meant woman if you are a femmist extremist!)
*I've often wondered how feasible it's really going to be for rovers to maneuver around the boulder-strewn landscapes of Mars. Not all areas are dotted with boulders, but it seems lots of it is (based on all the photos I've seen).
Better put a snow-shovel-like attachment ala Mack truck on them!
--Cindy
We all know [i]those[/i] Venusians: Doing their hair in shock waves, smoking electrical coronas, wearing Van Allen belts and resting their tiny elbows on a Geiger counter...
--John Sladek (The New Apocrypha)
Offline
We should just send humans...AIs are too simple to deal with the mars terrain, and unless you have people on-site, it will take far too long for a radio message to go through.
"What you don't realize about peace, is that is cannot be achieved by yielding to an enemy. Rather, peace is something that must be fought for, and if it is necessary for a war to be fought to preserve the peace, then I would more than willingly give my life for the cause of peace."
Offline
well, wouldn't there have to be some kind of habitation module on mars to keep the humans living for awhile?? and even if they did that, it would have to be built underneath the surface because of all the dangerous dust storms, unless there is some kind of building strong enough to take that kind of wind power, and i don't think there is.
Offline
Rovers suck for two primary reasons-
1. They Can't Think.
a.rovers can not determine anything, and all information from a rover is in question unless a human is actually present and able to monitor the experiment. Just look at the infamous mars 'life' experiment
b. who is gonna fix one if they break down? Robots can't fix themselves (or other robots, too many varibles for limited machine minds. . .)2. They suck.
a. They suck in all manner of suckitude
b. I've seen better, and cheaper r/c monster trucks. . . .
c. No subsitute for the real thing. (man, of course, and I meant woman if you are a femmist extremist!)*I've often wondered how feasible it's really going to be for rovers to maneuver around the boulder-strewn landscapes of Mars. Not all areas are dotted with boulders, but it seems lots of it is (based on all the photos I've seen).
Better put a snow-shovel-like attachment ala Mack truck on them!
--Cindy
Properly designed, they could unfold and erect themselves into six-foot high, six-legged walkers that would be able simply to step over, or straddle 90-percent of the rocks I've seen, so far, Cindy.
Offline
well, wouldn't there have to be some kind of habitation module on mars to keep the humans living for awhile?? and even if they did that, it would have to be built underneath the surface because of all the dangerous dust storms, unless there is some kind of building strong enough to take that kind of wind power, and i don't think there is.
My understanding is that the major dust storms on Mars reach ~250 miles per hour. That is a lot of wind
My guess is that permanent long term living modules for humans may have to be built a reasonable distance underground to avoid destruction by these high speed winds.
Ron Carlson
Offline
The Martian Atmosphere is about 1 % as thick as earth's. That means that a 250 mph wind on mars has as much strength as a 2.5 mph wind here.
The winds aren't really a problem, but those microscopic fines that get blown in them will be big trouble.
-Josh
Offline
The Martian Atmosphere is about 1 % as thick as earth's. That means that a 250 mph wind on mars has as much strength as a 2.5 mph wind here.
The winds aren't really a problem, but those microscopic fines that get blown in them will be big trouble.
jumpboy11j,
I wondered about the effect of atmospheric density but it still seems to me that a sand particle blowing along at 250 mph is still blowing along at 250 mph.
I certainly agree that microscopic particle contaminates from 250 mph winds will be a problem for machinery.
Ron Carlson
Offline
Oh, the sand particle hits with exactly the same amount of force. Assuming it weighs 1/10th of a gram, at 250 kph, that is (for each sand grain) like getting hit w/ a 1 kg weight moving at.-025kph)
-Josh
Offline