The Difficult Ones

Calliban · 2021-04-29 15:10:05

Interesting thread. Regarding whose laws apply on Mars, it will be the laws that apply in the nation where the establishing entity is incorporated. I agree with Kbd on this. It cannot really be otherwise, unless or until, your Mars base achieves a degree of self determination.

Many people automatically assume that it is desirable for that to happen as soon as possible. But establishing your own laws, government body, trading arrangements, extradition treaties, etc, is not a trivial exercise. It is a costly endeavour and you need a certain scale before it can work effectively. Musk's proposed 1 million person colony would appear to me to be large enough to make that exercise an affordable burden. Remember, it comes with costs that have to be averaged over the whole population. If the colony consists of 1000 colonists, then it would seem altogether less affordable. Somewhere between those two numbers, the costs are affordable enough and the desire for independence great enough, to tip the balance.

Racial diversity adds no value at all to a society in and of itself. In fact, it generally leads to division and conflict, because human beings are naturally tribal. The fact that BLM exists is enough to prove that. It doesn't matter whether you personally like that fact. Human beings are the rough tribal things that they are and their limitations need to be respected. The far left appear to value racial division for its own sake. But this is a consequence of the sickness of their minds. The Japanese avoid the problems resulting from racial division by not allowing immigration into their country. Australia had a white only immigration policy for much the same reason. Society may choose to relax controls on who can settle there, in order to allow access to a broader skill base or to bolster a shrinking population, allowing government to continue paying debts. In this case, having extra skilled citizens is an asset that you might not have had without relaxing the rules. But their racial differences in itself, is not valuable in any practical way. It is a problem that must be managed.

In the case of East Asians, who have evolved in complex hierarchical societies, that is going to be easier than it would be for Africans, who did not evolve complex society before white man came along and where the law is the word of the man with the biggest gun. These people are belligerent and violent and will be a constant thorn in the side of any society that they settle in. I think that if technical ability is used as the determinant for who emigrates to Mars, problems of racial friction will be much less of a problem. In the US, Whites, East Asians and Indians get along quite well, because they have the IQ levels that enable them to work and thrive in complex societies with differentiated roles. Disputes are settled non-violently and crime is low level. The people that can't do well in that situation are the Africans, who appear to suffer endemic violent crime and low levels of academic achievement. They just don't have the ability to live and thrive in complex societies. Of course, we are constantly told that this is the result of oppression from the evil colonialist whitey population. But the fact is that the Asians and Jews have managed to do extremely well in Western countries. If migration is based on genuine ability and achievement, you won't see many African trouble makers on Mars. Those that do make it, will be top tier in terms of ability and hopefully able to rise above crude tribalistic violence and victim culture.

Last edited by Calliban (2021-04-29 16:00:15)

RobertDyck · 2021-04-29 17:20:04

Again, the point of moving to Mars it to tell government where to shove it! The excessive unreasonable overbearing regulation that exists on Earth right now is why many people want to move to Mars. And zero tax. The United States expects any American citizens will remain citizens, and that means the IRS can continue to charge you tax. That defeats the point.

tahanson43206 wrote:

The only Americans who (I am under the impression) willingly give up their citizenship have stashed ill gotten gains in foreign countries.
The idea of an honest American giving up citizenship for an adventure in a place away from US jurisdiction seems quite surprising (to me at least).
I'd much rather see other citizens of ** other ** Nations give up their citizenship.
I can just imagine how your idea would resonate in China, to pick just one prominent example.

I worked in the United States a couple times. In 1996 I worked in a suburb of Richmond Virginia for 6 months. To be technical, it was 2 days short of 6 months. The US demands its citizens pay income tax, even if they don't reside in the United States. This is offensive, but in the case of Canada there's a treaty. If a Canadian works in the US for less than 6 months, then he doesn't pay income tax to the US (IRS). He only pays tax to Canada (CRA). But if he works more than 6 months, he does have to pay tax to the IRS... and CRA, both! The second time I worked in the US was 1999/2000 in Miami Florida. I had a 12 month contract. My employer terminated me early, I only worked for 9½ months, but that's over 6. I paid income tax to the IRS. CRA allowed me to treat that as a foreign tax credit. The Canada/US income tax treaty states whatever I pay to the US is supposed to be deducted from what I owe to Canada. Of course the tax form has a complicated formula that resulted in me paying a little more. They always manipulate it so you pay more. And Florida doesn't (or didn't at that time) have any state income tax. But I came from Manitoba, so had to fill out a Manitoba income tax form. Manitoba does, so the fact Florida doesn't didn't help me at all.

If you move to Mars and retain your citizenship, you will have to pay income tax to the IRS. And they will charge you state tax for whichever state you came from.

You think only the very rich want to get away from tax? No! Average working people who don't earn enough to make ends meet are very angry at the government for taking what little they have. If a ticket to Mars becomes affordable, many will go. Even if they arrive with nothing but the clothes they wear and some luggage. They could get a job on Mars to earn enough to build a homestead. With no tax, that should be possible on Mars. On Earth... not so much!

At the 2004 Mars Society Convention in Chicago, we had one person give a presentation in "tracks". His point was we have to designate vast tracts of land on Mars as nature preserves. Act now before it's too late! But there is no nature on Mars. We looked. Ok, NASA has some locations they think *might* hold fossil evidence of past life. But designate large areas as off limits before the first human has ever set foot on the Red Planet? That's absurd! Yes, I spoke up. I'm a moderate, but that day I sounded like a redneck. I'm afraid I deliberately pulled out everything that the tree-huggers would hate. Shocked him to the max.

I am also reminded of an old cartoon: Yogi's Gang. Each episode the group would go to another remote location trying to find the "perfect place". But each time they brought all their old habits with them. Each episode they went to a clean, pristine location. But then littered profusely, complained about the litter, then moved on in search of the next "perfect place". The reason for going to Mars is to get away from government interference in your affairs. Some busybody dictating to you what you can or cannot do on your own property. And to get away from tax. If you bring all the crap with you, then that defeats the point of Mars.

You want another example? A couple years ago a neighbour replaced the roof on his garage roof. Actually the woman owned the house, her boyfriend moved in. After he replaced the roof of her garage, he complained about my garage. He claimed the shingles of my garage roof were not good enough. He also complained about the fence. I was out of work, surviving on what little I had. I had rebuild the fence in the 1990s, replacing fence posts. Made a measurement error, rebuilt the fence a couple inches on my side of the property line. But that means it's entirely on my property. The previous owner of that house built up soil around their house, directing rain water away from the foundation. My house is in the city, properties on this block are only 25 feet wide. The neighbour packed the soil against the bottom edge of the wooden pickets of my fence. This caused the bottom edge to rot. The neighbour's boyfriend decided to help himself, rip pickets off my fence. I caught him, told him to stop. He yelled at me. So I called the police, had them to to him. The troublemaker then called city bylaw enforcement. The city demanded I replace shingles on the roof of my garage. I didn't have money to do so, had to borrow money from a relative. Did the work myself to keep cost down. But the neighbour also complained about debris between the garages. That debris was the old roof from his garage (his girlfriend's garage); debris he put there. The city bylaw enforcement officer gave me a written order to remove that debris at my cost. While working on the garage, I discovered the debris had retained water, caused rot in the bottom clapboards of my garage, and bottom of the wall studs. That garage wall had drywall and insulation. I had to throw out the drywall and insulation. Doubled wall studs and lift that wall back up. Replace the clapboards. All at my cost. A couple other neighbour garages down the back lane had roofs in worse condition, and one house was worse. But I had to do this because the city intervened. And I had to replace the fence... again at my cost. He damaged my garage, damaged my fence, stored debris, all of which I had to fix at my cost. I tried to contact my city councillor, but he wouldn't answer my calls. They city lawyer even dragged me into court! The lawyer claimed the city was prosecuting me, and called the neighbour a "witness". Luckily the neighbour couldn't be bothered to stay in court until the case was called. The city lawyer dropped the case when the neighbour left.

This is an example of a working guy getting screwed. And I saw many cases that day I was waiting in court, cases where the city interfered with their homes.

Another example: I read in the newspaper that a homeowner in another part of the city hired someone to do some work. The workman replaced the eavestrough (Americans call it a gutter). The city bylaw enforcement officer gave the homeowner a ticket for not having an eavestrough. The workman was just replacing it with a new one! And that same house had a window removed, replaced with wall. The city bylaw enforcement officer issued a ticket for "inappropriate window glazing". That wasn't a window at all any more! It was a wall! The ticket was issued after OSB was put up. The workman had to wait for warm weather before applying stucco.

When I lived in Virginia, my immediate supervisor built a double detached garage behind his house. The county inspector said he can't build there. A corner of the garage went over the natural gas line. The homeowner (my boss) offered to increase the thickness of the concrete so it's thick enough to ensure it doesn't put pressure on the natural gas line. The inspector accepted a bribe, and agreed to the thicker concrete. Yes, government inspectors in the US take bribes.

Are you beginning to understand why real people want to tell government where to shove it?

kbd512 · 2021-04-29 17:40:53

Robert,

The Taliban harbored terrorists who took up arms against American civilians. We defend American civilians using our military. Americans are not obliged to suffer through repeated terrorist attacks against our civilians, to suit your anti-American sentiments. I dispute the claim that terrorists wearing civilian clothing, flying civilian airliners into civilian buildings, is some form of "asymmetric warfare", but if you consider the attacks on USS Cole and our embassies to be some form of "asymmetric warfare", then we Americans consider bombing the country of origin that harbors such terrorists to be our version of asymmetric warfare. We're not giving up our citizenship merely because you don't like our government's response to terrorist attacks on our people.

louis · 2021-04-29 17:46:39

I think it will be quite difficult for Mars to be your libertarian paradise until you get to the point where people can live in their own homesteads...then it might be possible for them to live more freely. That would mean developing cheap pressurised habs and cheap energy and life support systems. I can see that being a possibility and it might prove attractive to a lot of people. Maybe mining their own water from a local glacier, growing their own fresh food in farm habs, and maybe selling some to outlets in the big city to provide some cash with which to purchase clothes and technical gadgets.

Some people might find it claustrophobic but I guess you could get in your rover every now and then and drive around the landscape.

RobertDyck wrote:

Again, the point of moving to Mars it to tell government where to shove it! The excessive unreasonable overbearing regulation that exists on Earth right now is why many people want to move to Mars. And zero tax. The United States expects any American citizens will remain citizens, and that means the IRS can continue to charge you tax. That defeats the point.
tahanson43206 wrote:
The only Americans who (I am under the impression) willingly give up their citizenship have stashed ill gotten gains in foreign countries.
The idea of an honest American giving up citizenship for an adventure in a place away from US jurisdiction seems quite surprising (to me at least).
I'd much rather see other citizens of ** other ** Nations give up their citizenship.
I can just imagine how your idea would resonate in China, to pick just one prominent example.
I worked in the United States a couple times. In 1996 I worked in a suburb of Richmond Virginia for 6 months. To be technical, it was 2 days short of 6 months. The US demands its citizens pay income tax, even if they don't reside in the United States. This is offensive, but in the case of Canada there's a treaty. If a Canadian works in the US for less than 6 months, then he doesn't pay income tax to the US (IRS). He only pays tax to Canada (CRA). But if he works more than 6 months, he does have to pay tax to the IRS... and CRA, both! The second time I worked in the US was 1999/2000 in Miami Florida. I had a 12 month contract. My employer terminated me early, I only worked for 9½ months, but that's over 6. I paid income tax to the IRS. CRA allowed me to treat that as a foreign tax credit. The Canada/US income tax treaty states whatever I pay to the US is supposed to be deducted from what I owe to Canada. Of course the tax form has a complicated formula that resulted in me paying a little more. They always manipulate it so you pay more. And Florida doesn't (or didn't at that time) have any state income tax. But I came from Manitoba, so had to fill out a Manitoba income tax form. Manitoba does, so the fact Florida doesn't didn't help me at all.
If you move to Mars and retain your citizenship, you will have to pay income tax to the IRS. And they will charge you state tax for whichever state you came from.
You think only the very rich want to get away from tax? No! Average working people who don't earn enough to make ends meet are very angry at the government for taking what little they have. If a ticket to Mars becomes affordable, many will go. Even if they arrive with nothing but the clothes they wear and some luggage. They could get a job on Mars to earn enough to build a homestead. With no tax, that should be possible on Mars. On Earth... not so much!
At the 2004 Mars Society Convention in Chicago, we had one person give a presentation in "tracks". His point was we have to designate vast tracts of land on Mars as nature preserves. Act now before it's too late! But there is no nature on Mars. We looked. Ok, NASA has some locations they think *might* hold fossil evidence of past life. But designate large areas as off limits before the first human has ever set foot on the Red Planet? That's absurd! Yes, I spoke up. I'm a moderate, but that day I sounded like a redneck. I'm afraid I deliberately pulled out everything that the tree-huggers would hate. Shocked him to the max.
I am also reminded of an old cartoon: Yogi's Gang. Each episode the group would go to another remote location trying to find the "perfect place". But each time they brought all their old habits with them. Each episode they went to a clean, pristine location. But then littered profusely, complained about the litter, then moved on in search of the next "perfect place". The reason for going to Mars is to get away from government interference in your affairs. Some busybody dictating to you what you can or cannot do on your own property. And to get away from tax. If you bring all the crap with you, then that defeats the point of Mars.
You want another example? A couple years ago a neighbour replaced the roof on his garage roof. Actually the woman owned the house, her boyfriend moved in. After he replaced the roof of her garage, he complained about my garage. He claimed the shingles of my garage roof were not good enough. He also complained about the fence. I was out of work, surviving on what little I had. I had rebuild the fence in the 1990s, replacing fence posts. Made a measurement error, rebuilt the fence a couple inches on my side of the property line. But that means it's entirely on my property. The previous owner of that house built up soil around their house, directing rain water away from the foundation. My house is in the city, properties on this block are only 25 feet wide. The neighbour packed the soil against the bottom edge of the wooden pickets of my fence. This caused the bottom edge to rot. The neighbour's boyfriend decided to help himself, rip pickets off my fence. I caught him, told him to stop. He yelled at me. So I called the police, had them to to him. The troublemaker then called city bylaw enforcement. The city demanded I replace shingles on the roof of my garage. I didn't have money to do so, had to borrow money from a relative. Did the work myself to keep cost down. But the neighbour also complained about debris between the garages. That debris was the old roof from his garage (his girlfriend's garage); debris he put there. The city bylaw enforcement officer gave me a written order to remove that debris at my cost. While working on the garage, I discovered the debris had retained water, caused rot in the bottom clapboards of my garage, and bottom of the wall studs. That garage wall had drywall and insulation. I had to throw out the drywall and insulation. Doubled wall studs and lift that wall back up. Replace the clapboards. All at my cost. A couple other neighbour garages down the back lane had roofs in worse condition, and one house was worse. But I had to do this because the city intervened. And I had to replace the fence... again at my cost. He damaged my garage, damaged my fence, stored debris, all of which I had to fix at my cost. I tried to contact my city councillor, but he wouldn't answer my calls. They city lawyer even dragged me into court! The lawyer claimed the city was prosecuting me, and called the neighbour a "witness". Luckily the neighbour couldn't be bothered to stay in court until the case was called. The city lawyer dropped the case when the neighbour left.
This is an example of a working guy getting screwed. And I saw many cases that day I was waiting in court, cases where the city interfered with their homes.
Another example: I read in the newspaper that a homeowner in another part of the city hired someone to do some work. The workman replaced the eavestrough (Americans call it a gutter). The city bylaw enforcement officer gave the homeowner a ticket for not having an eavestrough. The workman was just replacing it with a new one! And that same house had a window removed, replaced with wall. The city bylaw enforcement officer issued a ticket for "inappropriate window glazing". That wasn't a window at all any more! It was a wall! The ticket was issued after OSB was put up. The workman had to wait for warm weather before applying stucco.
When I lived in Virginia, my immediate supervisor built a double detached garage behind his house. The county inspector said he can't build there. A corner of the garage went over the natural gas line. The homeowner (my boss) offered to increase the thickness of the concrete so it's thick enough to ensure it doesn't put pressure on the natural gas line. The inspector accepted a bribe, and agreed to the thicker concrete. Yes, government inspectors in the US take bribes.
Are you beginning to understand why real people want to tell government where to shove it?

RobertDyck · 2021-04-29 17:51:47

louis wrote:

Some people might find it claustrophobic but I guess you could get in your rover every now and then and drive around the landscape.

A reason for MCP spacesuits. And ensure habitat pressure is maintained such that you can go outside any time, no pre-breathe.

louis · 2021-04-29 18:00:25

About 60 million European deaths (Europeans killing each other) in two world wars and war, until the late 1940s, had been pretty much endemic in Europe.

Similar fatality rates were experienced in East Asia as Japan sought to subdue China and other territories. The Chinese then fought a civil war that killed millions. Their political infighting under the Communists also resulted in huge death tolls from starvation. In Korea millions died in war. In Indonesia during the persecution of Communists and Chinese communities a 100,000 died.

India has always experienced appalling communal violence. It is thought two million died during the communal violence that erupted when partition was put into effect.

While Africa has had some appalling Civil Wars, wars between states have been very limited.

I think a little humility is in order.

Calliban wrote:

Interesting thread. Regarding whose laws apply on Mars, it will be the laws that apply in the nation where the establishing entity is incorporated. I agree with Kbd on this. It cannot really be otherwise, unless or until, your Mars base achieves a degree of self determination.
Many people automatically assume that it is desirable for that to happen as soon as possible. But establishing your own laws, government body, trading arrangements, extradition treaties, etc, is not a trivial exercise. It is a costly endeavour and you need a certain scale before it can work effectively. Musk's proposed 1 million person colony would appear to me to be large enough to make that exercise an affordable burden. Remember, it comes with costs that have to be averaged over the whole population. If the colony consists of 1000 colonists, then it would seem altogether less affordable. Somewhere between those two numbers, the costs are affordable enough and the desire for independence great enough, to tip the balance.
Racial diversity adds no value at all to a society in and of itself. In fact, it generally leads to division and conflict, because human beings are naturally tribal. The fact that BLM exists is enough to prove that. It doesn't matter whether you personally like that fact. Human beings are the rough tribal things that they are and their limitations need to be respected. The far left appear to value racial division for its own sake. But this is a consequence of the sickness of their minds. The Japanese avoid the problems resulting from racial division by not allowing immigration into their country. Australia had a white only immigration policy for much the same reason. Society may choose to relax controls on who can settle there, in order to allow access to a broader skill base or to bolster a shrinking population, allowing government to continue paying debts. In this case, having extra skilled citizens is an asset that you might not have had without relaxing the rules. But their racial differences in itself, is not valuable in any practical way. It is a problem that must be managed.
In the case of East Asians, who have evolved in complex hierarchical societies, that is going to be easier than it would be for Africans, who did not evolve complex society before white man came along and where the law is the word of the man with the biggest gun. These people are belligerent and violent and will be a constant thorn in the side of any society that they settle in. I think that if technical ability is used as the determinant for who emigrates to Mars, problems of racial friction will be much less of a problem. In the US, Whites, East Asians and Indians get along quite well, because they have the IQ levels that enable them to work and thrive in complex societies with differentiated roles. Disputes are settled non-violently and crime is low level. The people that can't do well in that situation are the Africans, who appear to suffer endemic violent crime and low levels of academic achievement. They just don't have the ability to live and thrive in complex societies. Of course, we are constantly told that this is the result of oppression from the evil colonialist whitey population. But the fact is that the Asians and Jews have managed to do extremely well in Western countries. If migration is based on genuine ability and achievement, you won't see many African trouble makers on Mars. Those that do make it, will be top tier in terms of ability and hopefully able to rise above crude tribalistic violence and victim culture.

Calliban · 2021-04-29 18:19:42

louis wrote:

About 60 million European deaths (Europeans killing each other) in two world wars and war, until the late 1940s, had been pretty much endemic in Europe.
Similar fatality rates were experienced in East Asia as Japan sought to subdue China and other territories. The Chinese then fought a civil war that killed millions. Their political infighting under the Communists also resulted in huge death tolls from starvation. In Korea millions died in war. In Indonesia during the persecution of Communists and Chinese communities a 100,000 died.
India has always experienced appalling communal violence. It is thought two million died during the communal violence that erupted when partition was put into effect.
While Africa has had some appalling Civil Wars, wars between states have been very limited.
I think a little humility is in order.

Point taken. I suppose that when we look at murder count it is difficult to find any segment of humanity that aren't total bastards. Lets hope that the first few centuries of Mars history are less bloody than the past few centuries of Earth history. But maybe it is an inevitable situation. Human beings are tribal and competitive, in a world of limited resources. The result is conflicts that slaughter millions and lay waste to entire nations. Looking at the past, there would appear to be little hope that more of the same won't occur in the future.

kbd512 · 2021-04-29 18:21:59

louis wrote:

About 60 million European deaths (Europeans killing each other) in two world wars and war, until the late 1940s, had been pretty much endemic in Europe.
Similar fatality rates were experienced in East Asia as Japan sought to subdue China and other territories. The Chinese then fought a civil war that killed millions. Their political infighting under the Communists also resulted in huge death tolls from starvation. In Korea millions died in war. In Indonesia during the persecution of Communists and Chinese communities a 100,000 died.
India has always experienced appalling communal violence. It is thought two million died during the communal violence that erupted when partition was put into effect.
While Africa has had some appalling Civil Wars, wars between states have been very limited.
I think a little humility is in order.

^^^ This ^^^

Our collective human history has been horribly violent, at slightly different times and places, but for very similar reasons, despite claims to the contrary. A little bit of mutual respect and understanding goes a very long way. Automatically assuming the worst of other people based upon where they're from or what they look like is definitely NOT a good look for the society of the future. I think we should judge everyone by the content of their character, as Dr. King suggested. I'm not a fan of this "I'm better than you" line of thinking. As someone who's been around the world a time or two, I've seen vanishingly little evidence that any group of people is inherently better than the next, and literal mountains of evidence that we, as a species, need to treat each other much better than we have in the past.

louis · 2021-04-29 18:27:36

"The U.S. government does not require naturalized U.S. citizens to relinquish citizenship in their country of origin. Although the Oath of Allegiance to the United States speaks of renouncing “allegiance and fidelity” to other nations, U.S. immigration law does not explicitly address the topic of dual citizenship. The best summarization of the U.S. government’s position on dual citizenship lies in a U.S. Supreme Court opinion, which explains that “a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both.” The U.S. Department of State also has a more technical discussion of dual citizenship."

https://www.boundless.com/immigration-r … tizenship/

A legal mess. The Oath of Allegiance would clearly be unenforceable in many respects given the Supreme Court judgement.

2. You're just asserting that to be the case that an American company must follow American laws even though operating on Mars. Does an American company have to follow American laws when operating in France? No. And if you are saying American laws apply, well no American law or constitutional provision allows a company to arrest someone and hold them against their will, does it? So what would be the legal basis for arrest and constraint if someone for instance was found guilty of say theft or sexual harrassment on Mars? More particularly how would it apply if non-American citizens were involved. I think there is simply no existing legal provision that covers operation of Mars bases. No doubt American courts would be sympathetic to the idea of extending their writ to Mars. Space X isn't always going to be flying out of the USA exclusively.

If you are going to attempt to apply maritime law (no basis for that) then there are plenty of American ships owned by American companies and commanded by American officers that fly under the flag of Panama.

What's to stop Space X "registering" a Starship with another country?

In any case if you say "American law" applies, then it can only be that law and not something in addition. This is why I say that when you talk about a command structure and reference the military, you are forgetting about the voluminous regulations. In the USA and UK these regulations have legal force - are approved by statute or other legal power. Now, unless you have regulations with legal backing you can't have the sort of command structure you are talking about.

As I say, I don't think these matters will be a problem in the earliest missions when you can maintain a lot of quality control over team selection. But later, when you have people on Mars working for universities, space agencies, companies and charities (e.g. ones interesting in climate change and the like) plus independent tourists, then you have to get ready to deal with conflict and transgression.

kbd512 wrote:

Louis,
louis wrote:
I don't have any major disagreements with what you write, except you seem to assume context, but I do have some comments:
1. The US now allows dual nationality so I think it is an entirely open question whether a person who is both an American citizen and a citizen of the People's Republic of China owes loyalty primarily to one or the other. Both countries require that you travel the globe with your loyalty to their constitution with you at all times. The US is unusual in often extending its laws e.g. commercial laws to other countries' territories.
The US allows dual citizenship, but you swear an oath of allegiance to the United States of America and renounce any oaths taken to any foreign country. If you refuse to take the oath, then you're not an American.
louis wrote:
2. The OST explicitly excludes signatories (including the USA) making any claim to the territory. It could be said that saying your constututional writ runs on Mars is making a claim to the territory. It wouldn't be very logical for the US to say "we make no claim to Mars but we expect every American to adhere to all our laws while on Mars including in relation to taxation, commerce, property ownership and so on". What would be the status of non-Americans at a Space X base? Would they have the same obligations as American citizens?
I can tell you that if you're on an American-flagged ship or base, which would include any mission that launches from American soil or uses American space technology (rockets, life support, space suits, etc), then American laws apply. There's no such thing as a "SpaceX base", apart from the legal entity that owns the property. SpaceX is an American corporation subject to American laws, plain and simple. All legal arguments to the contrary have been repeatedly struck down by the courts. If you operate a corporation from American soil, then you're subject to American laws, no matter where else you operate. An American company accused of stealing IP from a Chinese corporation would be prosecuted in an American court for doing so. Pirates have tried to make the claim that American laws don't apply to them when they attack American ships. The American Navy thinks otherwise and will execute them on the spot if they refuse to be taken prisoner.
If the UK creates their own space rockets launched from UK soil, then UK laws apply.
If the Canadians create their own space rockets launched from Canadian soil, then Canadian laws apply.
The laws related to citizenship and incorporation don't cease to apply because you operate somewhere else. That's why Tesla factories operated in China are operated under a separate legal entity that's subject to Chinese laws. Other corporations establish legal entities in other countries for the same reason. Long story short, laws apply, no matter where you are.
louis wrote:
3. You seem to assume there will be a rigid command structure. Space X have never stated there will be. Command structures more often than not go with voluminous military or similar regulations which ultimately are backed up by statues approved by the state.
No, I don't, but any mission involving astronauts will have a clearly defined command structure. I get the impression that people who have never been in the military think you have people going around screaming, "I order you to do this! I order you to do that!", but it simply doesn't work that way in real life. It's more like, you walk into the ready room and say, "Good morning, Skipper, what are we doing today?", to which he or she responds, "Well, we've been tasked by headquarters to do X today, so what assets do we have available for that mission?"
You do have to address officers as "sir" or "ma'am" or by their proper rank and officers do have to address the enlisted by their proper rate. There are also informal or hurried conversations where we dispense with ranks and rates to get a job done faster, and will simply address someone by their last name or callsign so everyone else knows who we're talking to. Nobody salutes anyone on a battlefield or comes to attention, and both officers and enlisted around you will become more than a little irritated with you if you insist on doing that, mostly because the enemy may not be able to tell who's who when they start shooting.
Believe it or not, there is mutual respect amongst members of the military for both the offices and jobs that we do, which is ultimately a sign of respect to the people and to the country for which they stand. I always find civilian responses to love and respect for your fellow countrymen a bit mystifying. I don't see how you can have much mutual cooperation without love and respect for each other.
louis wrote:
4. Having regard to 1 and 2 above, I think the issue of what status rules on Mars have remains problematic. It probably won't be an issue for Mission One and the early missions when teams are small. But by the time you've got say 100 people on Mars - some Space X employees, some American nationals, some non-American nationals, some employees of Universities , other space agencies or large companies (Earth-based) and some individual paying "guests", then you have no easily defined command structure and it is not clear whose rules apply. This is one of the reasons I would like to see a clear route map to a single sovereign democratic self-governing state for the Planet Mars. This would be a staged process. You could start with a governor, and then have a governor with an appointed advisory council, before you introduce some elections for advisory council members, and gradually democratise the whole process as the population of Mars grows. We have examples from history where colonial companies like the East India Company and Hudson Bay Company would appoint governors.
Again, you have to cooperate with each other and have minimum standards for behavior towards each other. If you want to take a vote on who's in charge, that's fine, but then you have to carry out the orders of those appointed over you. Civilian authority doesn't change the fact that the ship or base has to be cleaned / repaired / inspected / etc if you want to live.
The military clearly defines lawful orders and your duty to refuse unlawful orders and to arrest anyone who gives an unlawful order. Even COs are subject to the law. If they issue an unlawful order, the Master-At-Arms will confine the CO to quarters and the XO will take over pending the outcome of a court martial. This has happened before aboard warships of every nation, and while it's obviously very serious, there are also legal remedies for dealing with unlawful orders.
The CO tasking you with performing a particularly dangerous repair assignment is lawful, even if you or someone else thinks the necessity of carrying out the repair is questionable. You can ask the CO if he or she will reconsider or provide details about why you think the repair is unnecessary, but since ultimate responsibility rests with the CO, being ordered to repair the ship or base is at the CO's discretion. If the CO orders you to kill someone on the spot who does not clearly present a danger to anyone else, that would clearly be unlawful and cause for the CO's immediate arrest.
louis wrote:
5. Regarding diversity, there are a number of issues:
(a) In a very small team you can probably have a lot of diversity without any risk to standards of output. The larger the workforce, the greater the risk unless all the skill areas you are interested in (engineering, farming, rocket experts) are already fully diverse (which I think we can assume is not the case). I don't think you should value diversity over work quality standards but you can see there is pressure in that direction.
(b) For Mission One, I think there will be a big focus on the people going to Mars, and I think there will be a lot of pressure to create a diverse team. That's not particularly my wish, just a statement of reality and I was giving an indication of what I think would be considered an "ideal" team in the current era.
(c) How do you define diversity? If you value it, are you trying to replicate on Mars (in a proportionate way), American diversity (which still is a majoritarian European origin country I believe) or world diversity (where Europeans are quite a small minority)? Is it not about proportions and percentages - is it enough to simply to have all the races and nationalities across the world represented? Or are you trying for a different diversity on Mars? Are you looked to create more a mixed race community where there are no sharp racial differences in appearance, more a blended continuum...more Brazil than USA.
(d) Your views on women and their interests, however objectively true, could get you fired from a lot of places now. This is the problem with letting PC ideology run rampant - it stifles free debate, just as much as in the days when patriarchy ruled unchallenged.
(e) Religious diversity could be even trickier. Are we looking to reflect religious belief on Earth with strict proportions of Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Daoists and so on ? Or are should we actually be looking to recruit people who don't practise a religious faith in any overt fashion. You will be saving yourself a helluvalot of bother if you go for the latter.
I don't have a dictionary definition for diversity because it's subjective. I can tell you that innate physical characteristics are not a mark of useful diversity. I do value diversity of thought, skill, education, and character. Having a mission with one American, one Russian, one German, one Canadian, one Japanese astronaut / cosmonaut or what have you, is not inherently useful. A mechanic is useful if the problem is a broken engine. A mechanic is not useful if the problem is a broken leg. If each of those people bring unique and useful skills to the mission and they're the best at what they do, then that's useful diversity. What they look like and where they're from is superfluous. They either work well with each other and have the required skill set for the mission or they don't.
My bunk mate in boot camp was from Nigeria. He wasn't useful to the US Navy because he was from Nigeria. He was useful because he was highly intelligent (at least according to military testing, although I'm sure a few civilians will think otherwise because he joined the military), followed orders, and was good at what the Navy wanted him to do. I also had a friend from New York on my first ship. He wasn't "usefully diverse" because he was from New York vs Nigeria vs somewhere else. Once again, he was intelligent and required very little guidance on orders because he was good at his job. The Chief or Division Officer really likes being able to simply tell the sailors, "We need to do X today", then walk away, and come back later after "X" has been done. They really don't have any interest at all in telling you how to do your job. They want you to already know that and to inform them of any problems with whatever you've been ordered to do, so they can inform their superiors or otherwise facilitate a solution.
My views on differences between men and women is merely admitting to the simple fact that we are different in meaningful ways. It's not a criticism. This was in response to all-men or all-women missions. If the people on the mission don't represent human society, then you don't have a human society on Mars. Having both men and women present is a pretty fundamental aspect of human society. Any society that survives beyond a single generation will also have children present. As I stated before, the fact that we're different is NOT an actual problem. Natural selection already dictated to us that we complement each other. The overriding theme behind my commentary is that you absolutely need BOTH, or you don't have a well-functioning society. One is not better than the other. I've seen and read enough "battle of the sexes" nonsense in media lately to know that it's pure idiocy. Men are not better than women and women are not better than men.

Calliban · 2021-04-29 18:37:57

RobertDyck wrote:

louis wrote:
Some people might find it claustrophobic but I guess you could get in your rover every now and then and drive around the landscape.
A reason for MCP spacesuits. And ensure habitat pressure is maintained such that you can go outside any time, no pre-breathe.

It is hard to overestimate the value of a pressure suit that can be donned and removed as quickly and easily as heavy clothing. It is fun to speculate how far such an advantage might stretch. Provided that you have systems in place to provide enough food, water and oxygen, an atmosphere is no longer a requirement for human life. Since we all wear clothing anyway, wearing stretching whole-body tights doesn't seem like something that would add much cost. I wonder how far we could ultimately develop that advantage? How many activities could be carried out in non-pressurised buildings on Mars? Could we have non-pressurised factories, operated by men in counter pressure suits? How about non-pressurised offices? Could pressure suits ever be comfortable and nimble enough to allow people to easily do without pressurised spaces for hours at a time? We would still need pressurised areas of course. You can't eat or drink, pee or shit wearing a suit. And fine work involving fingers would be more difficult. But with a cheap, comfortable suit that is easy to put on and take off, the need for pressurised areas is greatly reduced. It takes a lot of the drive out of terraforming if we can do that. It would mean that buildings on Mars could use similar bricks and mortar construction as we employ here on Earth. Except weathering would not be an issue and entire structures could be made of compressed soil, even roof areas.

Last edited by Calliban (2021-04-29 18:55:42)

louis · 2021-04-29 18:38:09

I like the anarchic streak in Musk but I do wonder whether, once he gets his rockets to work, he will really be able to put together a workable settlement plan.

A plan is required in my view.

I think Space X should establish a Mars Corporation, to oversee operations on Mars, and there be a programme moving towards self governance. Initially Space X could have a controlling interest in the Mars Corporation, The Mars Corporation should have a development plan. One element should be I think to invite people from all countries on Earth to apply to become part of the project, moving it away from an explicitly American identity, although I have always thought it will still have a strong American cultural flavour - something like an American campus feel where you have students and lecturers from all around the world.

Calliban · 2021-04-29 19:00:14

Musk is developing the transportation system. He is also involved in solar power, electric cars and subsurface engineering. But it is difficult to imagine that his company alone would develop all of the hardware needed to colonise another planet. The amount and complexity of equipment needed to do that, really boggles the mind.

RobertDyck · 2021-04-29 20:31:42

When I first joined the Mars Society, I didn't think MCP was real. Then I posted that on the old forum in 1999. A member who is an MP specializing in decompression sickness mailed to me a photocopy of the article from the Journal of Aerospace Medicine, April 1968. It was the paper by Dr Paul Webb, complete with photos of a test subject wearing the first prototype in a vacuum chamber. Wow! I've been a fan ever since.

I've also argued to keep suit pressure low, to not push the limits of an MCP suit. Current EMU, the white suit worn on ISS, uses 4.3 psi. Since ISS uses 1 atmosphere, suit pressure is relatively high to reduce oxygen prebreathe time. But that pressure causes major problems for MCP. Liquid silicone filled pads are required on palm and back of hands to spread the force evenly. Donning (putting on) becomes a problem. MCP works best when pressure is even, but donning and doffing (taking off) means there is a time when the suit is part way on, and you're in the pressure of a habitat (or Earth lab). When suit pressure is high and it's part-way on, it's very uncomfortable. Dr Webb's first prototype used 170 mm mercury (3.3 psi) because that's what NASA was talking about at that time. NASA was going to use 3.0 psi pure oxygen in the Apollo capsule, 3.3 psi in spacesuits. That way a suit could suffer 10% pressure leak without negative consequences. They changed to 5.0 psi pure oxygen in the Apollo capsule, 3.7 psi in suits. I've argued for 2.7 psi O2 partial pressure in habitats, 3.0 psi pure oxygen in suits. Again, 10% safety margin. Habitats with a mix of gas so total pressure is higher. Boulder Colorado has 2.54 psi O2 partial pressure, so I don't think this is extreme. Earth sea level has 3.078 psi O2 partial pressure.

Dr Dava Newman of MIT has said designing an MCP suit for 20 kPa (2.9 psi) is easy, designing for 30 kPa (4.35 psi) is hard. 3.0 psi = 20.684 kPa, so let's use that. Easy is good. Elon Musk is advancing technology quickly. One reason is he applies the principle: if it's difficult, find a better way. If there's an easy way or a difficult way, use the easy way.

One feature of MCP is no cooling system. All you need is a 1 litre water bottle. Use a plastic water bottle designed the same as a plastic pop bottle. Do we need to use more exotic polymer to make it more UV durable, gas impermeable, and able to withstand cold of Mars? Fine, make it of PCTFE: Clarus from Honeywell. But just a plastic pop bottle. With a plastic bag liner like the liner of a Playtex Nurser baby bottle. The liner would be connected to a tube to the helmet. A second tube would connect the water bottle itself to the air of the helmet. As you drink, water volume decreases, which draws air from your helmet into the water bottle. Volume remains constant, so no problems. A safety valve would only allow air to flow from the helmet into the tube if pressure difference is not too great. So if the hose got torn, it wouldn't release oxygen.

Yes, that's the entire cooling system. Elastic leotard. When you get hot, you sweat. Your body regulates temperature. The MCP layer will machine washable. And it will have to be: after wearing it for extended time, sweating the whole time. It will smell like a high school gym outfit. What does your outfit smell like after a game?

An MCP suit includes boots with a rubber air dam at the ankle, helmet with air dam at the neck, air bladder vest with non-elastic outer vest. And an outer layer for thermal and scuff protection. I visualize telemark ski boots, because they're hard with a hinge at the ankle. Makes pressurizing boots easy. Helmet like a closed-face motorcycle helmet. Or Mercury or Gemini helmet. But designed as a safety helmet, so possibly more like motorcycle. With a closed cell foam inside the hard shell, polymer film pressure bladder inside that, then open cell foam for comfort. So two pressure layers for safety. Bladder sealed to frame of visor. With two visors: inside and outer, both sealed to frame. All in case of crash while riding a 4-wheel ATV. The helmet would be tied by cables to the vest, similar to the orange ACES suit used on Shuttle. Thermal and scuff layer would be ski pants and parka, with thinsulate for insulation in atmosphere of Mars, and same outer layer as Alpine mountain climbing parka. With outer gloves made the same way.

Yea, Ok. The elestic MCP layer does require liquid silicone filled pads (bags) covering the groin, around up the butt crack, and trough of the lumbo-dorsal spine.

I've also suggested fit individuals with a thin vacuform plastic shell over the air bladder vest. If the outer vest is just non-elastic fabric, air pressure will expand to a cylinder. The purpose of the plastic shell is to squeeze the vest close to the body. The shell would have 2 parts: front and back, held together with buckles. The shell could use fluting to increase strength and keep it light. Fluting must be curved so it doesn't dig into the air bladder. That can be aesthetic. Muscle plate for men, ample busom for women.

PLSS backpack need only oxygen bottle, regenerable CO2 sorbent. One-way valves could ensure breathing moves air through the sorbent, and pressure regulator releases oxygen. A microcontroller could monitor the suit with sensors, using Bluetooth to communicate with an app on your smartphone. Pocket on suit forearm to hold a smartphone, and stylus for touch screen integrated with a glove finger. Bluetooth headset, but with power cable integrated to PLSS? How much power would the PLSS really need? Battery the size of a smartphone battery? Integrated with the helmet so body heat keeps the electronics warm? Most difficult part may be designing a smartphone to survive outside on Mars, and a spacesuit parka forearm pocket to use body heat to keep the smart phone warm.

RobertDyck · 2021-04-29 20:50:43

Calliban wrote:

It is hard to overestimate the value of a pressure suit that can be donned and removed as quickly and easily as heavy clothing. It is fun to speculate how far such an advantage might stretch. Provided that you have systems in place to provide enough food, water and oxygen, an atmosphere is no longer a requirement for human life. Since we all wear clothing anyway, wearing stretching whole-body tights doesn't seem like something that would add much cost. I wonder how far we could ultimately develop that advantage? How many activities could be carried out in non-pressurised buildings on Mars? Could we have non-pressurised factories, operated by men in counter pressure suits? How about non-pressurised offices? Could pressure suits ever be comfortable and nimble enough to allow people to easily do without pressurised spaces for hours at a time? We would still need pressurised areas of course. You can't eat or drink, pee or shit wearing a suit. And fine work involving fingers would be more difficult. But with a cheap, comfortable suit that is easy to put on and take off, the need for pressurised areas is greatly reduced. It takes a lot of the drive out of terraforming if we can do that. It would mean that buildings on Mars could use similar bricks and mortar construction as we employ here on Earth. Except weathering would not be an issue and entire structures could be made of compressed soil, even roof areas.

So back to your points. I think a lot will be done indoors. There will be prospecting, done in a suit. Some mining may requite going outdoors. But there's been a lot of progress with remote mining. Factories would be indoors. But construction would be outdoors in a suit. Office indoors. Geologists and astrobiologiests will spend long trips outdoors, pressurized rover but a lot in a suit. Cement requires air pressure so the water doesn't freeze or boil, so mortar for brick or concrete will require a pressure tent.

Camping. You could carry a pressure tent. Imagine a 7-foot diameter (2.13 metre) dome tent. With integrated air mattress floor. With layers of aluminized polymer suspended by threads inside the air mattress, forming multi-layer insulation. With a small fan like a computer case fan that can blow air from the bottom layer of the air mattress to the top layer. That's for cooling, with a thermostat to turn on/off the fan. Entry film door that can seal like the zipper seal of an Apollo A7L spacesuit. Suit PLSS backpack can provide life support in the tent. 4-wheel ATV rover can recharge tent battery for fan, and PLSS battery. With extra O2 bottles on rover, and CO2 sorbent canister.

I looked at a small sorbent that auto-regenerates. I have a paper from NASA about microwave regeneration. It requires silver oxide granules instead of sheet metal. A microwave oven is more energy efficient than a toaster oven. So batteries to regenerate the sorbent, or just extra sorbent canisters? Based on current lithium-ion battery technology, we're better of with just extra canisiters.

Still, camping.

louis · 2021-04-30 16:00:04

It would make a huge difference psychologically if you could simply don an MCP suit within 10 minutes and "pop out". During peak insolation in the summer on Mars temperatures can reach up to 20 celsius on a regular basis. I think the main issue would be radiation dose.

I was thinking the other day the Boston Dynamics' robodog could be useful for this sort of scenario. Your personal robodog could carry your oxygen supply so you could go much further without having to carry tanks yourself. Emergency robodogs could be positioned all along hiking routes, able to rescue anyone who has a problem with oxygen supply.

Outside the main settlement maybe you could have a system of covered walkways to minimise the radiation risk...so these could take you well out of the city area before you have maybe 30 mins of hiking out in the open.

With 0.38 gravity we can probably wear some heavy duty headgear - bit like peasant hats in the Far East - to help protect us from radiation.

It would be great in high summer to have mesh inner gloves so you could actually feel the things you touch on Mars. You might even be able to wear a fine mesh face mask so you get some feel of the "breeze" on your face.

RobertDyck · 2021-04-30 16:40:31

Remember, radiation on the surface of Mars is about half that of ISS. In order to reduce radiation exposure to that of a US nuclear reactor worker, you have to limit time outdoors in a spacesuit to 40 hours per week. That's average; you could spend 2 weeks outdoors then 8.6 weeks (2 months) without going outside at all. That time outdoors could include a pressurized rover. Who suggested a geologist could take an extended trip in a rover, then spend months indoors? Was it Spacenut? I like it.

I'm not a big fan of "wind in my face". I prefer warm summer weather, hot and no wind. But if you want to feel "breeze" on your face on Mars, realize that would require the same elastic fabric as the rest of the MCP suit. If breathing air for the suit is pressurized to 3.0 psi (20.684 kPa) then the "girdle" on your face must apply the same pressure. How would you do that? I'm thinking a more practical design is something like a closed-face motorcycle helmet, worn on the head, not shoulders. And a breathing mask like a jet fighter pilot. That way breathing air is separated from air over your eyes. So humidity in breathing air doesn't cause your visor to fog.

Alternatively, you could wear a fire fighter's face mask. With soft rubber cover over the rest of your head. Something air tight. The hard helmet was to provide a crash helmet, safety when driving a 4-wheel ATV on the rugged terrain of Mars.

Hmm. Images of fire fighter masks all have a pressure regulator on the mask. An MCP suit could put the regulator in the backpack. Basically 3 hoses: CO2 sorbent to mask with pressure regulator to release O2, from mask to air bladder vest, from vest to CO2 sorbent in backpack. The last connection could be a direct connection rather than a hose. The second hose could connect to the backpack where it connects to the vest. That would mean two hoses from the helmet or mask, with a one-way valved where the mask attaches. These fire fighter masks have a high pressure hose to a regulator on the mask. Keeps the hose smaller, but the mask heavy and not compatible with a rebreather system.

louis · 2021-04-30 19:07:18

When I've read up on this before now I've come away with the impression that the scare stories about your eyes poppng out, your blood boiling and your tongue being detached from your mouth are not realistic scenarios. Your skin over the face is actually a pretty good protection against pressure effects. This is based on individuals involved in unfortunate vaccuum chamber accidents etc on Earth. I think a very tight face mesh should be sufficient to stop your face blowing up but also allow you to experience the wind and temperature on Mars directly. But obviously you could only go out and about with partially exposed hands and face if the temperature is not too low.

RobertDyck wrote:

Remember, radiation on the surface of Mars is about half that of ISS. In order to reduce radiation exposure to that of a US nuclear reactor worker, you have to limit time outdoors in a spacesuit to 40 hours per week. That's average; you could spend 2 weeks outdoors then 8.6 weeks (2 months) without going outside at all. That time outdoors could include a pressurized rover. Who suggested a geologist could take an extended trip in a rover, then spend months indoors? Was it Spacenut? I like it.
I'm not a big fan of "wind in my face". I prefer warm summer weather, hot and no wind. But if you want to feel "breeze" on your face on Mars, realize that would require the same elastic fabric as the rest of the MCP suit. If breathing air for the suit is pressurized to 3.0 psi (20.684 kPa) then the "girdle" on your face must apply the same pressure. How would you do that? I'm thinking a more practical design is something like a closed-face motorcycle helmet, worn on the head, not shoulders. And a breathing mask like a jet fighter pilot. That way breathing air is separated from air over your eyes. So humidity in breathing air doesn't cause your visor to fog.
Alternatively, you could wear a fire fighter's face mask. With soft rubber cover over the rest of your head. Something air tight. The hard helmet was to provide a crash helmet, safety when driving a 4-wheel ATV on the rugged terrain of Mars.
Hmm. Images of fire fighter masks all have a pressure regulator on the mask. An MCP suit could put the regulator in the backpack. Basically 3 hoses: CO2 sorbent to mask with pressure regulator to release O2, from mask to air bladder vest, from vest to CO2 sorbent in backpack. The last connection could be a direct connection rather than a hose. The second hose could connect to the backpack where it connects to the vest. That would mean two hoses from the helmet or mask, with a one-way valved where the mask attaches. These fire fighter masks have a high pressure hose to a regulator on the mask. Keeps the hose smaller, but the mask heavy and not compatible with a rebreather system.
https://assets.plainpicture.com/public- … 495889.jpg https://media.spokesman.com/photos/2015 … ighter.jpg

louis · 2021-04-30 19:19:57

People not to recruit for the Mars Mission...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZps0fR5TE4

Calliban · 2021-05-01 06:09:05

louis wrote:

People not to recruit for the Mars Mission...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZps0fR5TE4

Make a note of that Elon. No woke, self-important millennials on Mars :-)

GW Johnson · 2021-05-01 10:56:07

Re posts 40-42 just above:

I have addressed the MCP suit thing, and appropriate habitat atmospheres, in prior years, both on these forums, and on my "exrocketman" site. There is a fair-to-middlin'-good Wikipedia article on the MCP suit, that even gives some history that happened prior to Dr. Paul Webb experimenting with his elastic space leotard design in the late 1960's. My Dad (who was an aeronautical design engineer, as was myself) knew Webb. Webb was the go-to survival expert for high altitude bailout, among other things, which was of interest to my Dad's design of high performance jet aircraft in the 50's and 60's and 70's.

The Wikipedia article mistakenly claims that suit pure oxygen feed pressure must be 4.3 psia; they got that from NASA. The same article correctly gives the minimum feasible pure oxygen feed pressure as 2.5 psia, further down in the article! That's pretty much the same number as I got, from looking at flight oxygen mask limits, and allowing for water vapor displacement inside the wet lungs. You can see what I determined on the "exrocketman" site, if you use the navigation tool on the left. Click on 2016, then click on February, then the title is "Suits and Atmospheres For Space".

The main problem with Webb's suit was difficulty donning and doffing the tight garment pieces. His fundamental suit is essentially just vacuum-protective underwear, with an oxygen pack, a breathing helmet, and a tidal volume bag. You put unpressurized protective outerwear garments on, over his vacuum-protective underwear. That's how you cope with mechanical and thermal threats. I came up with a way to reduce the don/doff difficulty by reducing the number of layers, and adding back in the capstan tensioners concept of the "partial pressure suit". That is also posted on "exrocketman": click on 2017, then November, and the title is "A Better Version of the MCP Space Suit?"

The first physiology limit here is partial pressure of oxygen available inside the wet lungs where water vapor displaces it, along with the atmospheric pressures at altitudes where vented pure oxygen masks become necessary in flight. Whenever the ambient atmospheric pressure is too low, you have to do "pressure breathing" to get enough oxygen diffused across the lung tissues into the blood. That diffusion pressure difference (oxygen partial pressure inside the lungs vs oxygen partial pressure in the blood) sets the min oxygen partial pressure you have to have in your breathing gas pressure, once you allow for the displacing effect of water vapor partial pressure at body temperature.

What I got, and posted in the suits and atmospheres article, was 2.48 psia min pure oxygen feed pressure (in the helmet), remarkably close to the 2.5 psia Wikipedia cited in their article. I recommended a minimum suit pure oxygen pressure of 2.67 psia, which gives you some leakdown margin (near 10%). Back in 1968, Webb was using 3.3 psia, because that was what NASA was then using. They've since gone to 4.3 psia. Dava Newman, who did MCP work at MIT, said during her efforts, that MCP design at 4.3 psia was hard, but it was easy, at or below 3 psia.

I could not get down to zero pre-breathe time with my suit recommendations, but I did come up with a somewhat-lower-pressure, slightly-higher-oxygen habitat atmosphere that also met very realistic fire danger criteria based on chemical reaction-rate effects. Pre-breathe times should be much shorter than those NASA has to use going from "air" at 1 atm to pure oxygen at 4.3 psia. I would have examined that issue, if I knew how to estimate pre-breathe times; I don't.

The second physiology limit here is that bad things happen if the pressure in the fluids and tissues of your body do not match the pressure of the gases in your lungs. If that difference exceeds 2 psi, the lung tissues rip ("pneumothorax"), and you drown in your own blood. This is irreversible damage, but death takes a few to several minutes. Scuba divers (and the hard hat divers of old) knew about this, and were trained to avoid it: never hold your breath as you rise.

At lower differences, the lungs are OK, but over time, blood fluids perfuse into the less-pressurized tissues, causing very painful, but reversible swelling ("edema"), and fainting as blood pools in unpressurized extremities. It takes about half an hour for unpressurized hands to start swelling from vacuum exposure. What prevents all this is applying a pressure to the skin all over the body that equals the pressure of the gases in the lungs. It doesn't have to be perfectly even, but it does need to be fairly close to even.

Because our bodies are essentially water balloons in their physical characteristics, it does not matter one whit whether this countering pressure applied to the skin ("counterpressure") is applied as gas pressure, or as mechanical pressure. Doesn't matter how you squeeze the water balloon, the pressure inside it is still the same.

The old "partial pressure" suits were tight garments that countered the required breathing pressure for very high altitude bailouts (70,000 feet and higher). Hands and feet were left unpressurized, and limbs not as squeezed as torso. It worked fine for a 10-minute bailout. The original "full pressure" suits (gas balloon suits) were a response to much longer exposures than a bailout (for the U-2 and SR-71 high altitude spy planes).

My point: there is sufficient payoff here with MCP (lightweight, launderable, very supple space suits of great mobility, and great versatility) so that somebody really needs to be working on this! As far as I can tell, no one is. Dava Newman was hired away from MIT by NASA, but not to work on space suits, MCP or otherwise. Paul Webb is dead.

My "exrocketman" site is "An Ex Rocket Man's Take On It", located at http://exrocketman.blogspot.com

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2021-05-01 10:57:24)

RobertDyck · 2021-05-01 12:06:29

In 2005, I posted on this forum that Dr Paul Webb would celebrate his 80th birthday that year. He was healthy at that time, but for how much longer? Chris Vancil of the Mars Society spacesuit taskforce took up the challenge. He organized a spacesuit symposium as part of the Mars Society convention that year. So one track was the symposium. We had people from ILC Dover and Hamilton Sundstrand and a few others. Dr Webb himself was invited as our special guest. I was hoping younger industry people would take the chance to learn from Dr Webb, but unfortunately they were more interested in marketing their latest work. Well, I got to meet Dr Webb briefly, and his wife. Nice guy. His presentation included high definition colour video of the test subject in 1967. It was originally film, but he had digitized it so was video from his laptop. The same grainy photocopy that I've posted on this forum, but his version was high-def, colour, and smooth video. Dr Webb created a group of researchers willing to work on it, and a website for the group. Website formed in 2009, was updated January 2011, but disappeared by 2013. I think it was taken down later in 2011. Website has a link to a YouTube video, but unfortunately the YouTube video has also been removed. I got one paper by Dr Webb from 2009, and I have a paper that Dr Webb published with AIAA in July 2011. But unfortunately that's it.

GW Johnson · 2021-05-02 10:06:38

RobertDyck:

I found Paul Webb's obituary on-line using google search on "paul webb yellow springs ohio". He died 18 May 20, 2014, which explains why his websites disappeared about that time. He died peacefully at home at the age of 90, not quite 91. Excerpt below.

GW

Paul Webb
By YS News StaffPublished: May 29, 2014
No Comments
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Paul Webb
Paul Webb

Paul Webb, M.D., long-time resident of Yellow Springs and research scientist of international renown, died peacefully in his Yellow Springs home on May 18, at the age of 90.

Dr. Webb was born in Willoughby, Ohio, on Dec. 2, 1923, to Monte Bourjaily and Barbara Webb. The Bourjaily children included Vance Bourjaily, author of novels, short stories, essays and reviews, whose works were acclaimed by critics, who likened them to those of F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway.

Always an enthusiastic student, young Paul received his M.D. from the University of Virginia in 1943 and an M.S. in physiology from the University of Washington in 1949. He accepted a position at a hospital in Montreal, Canada, where he met and was smitten with a young nurse named Eileen. She became Eileen Webb on March 13, 1948. He served in the U.S. Army from 1948 to 1950, taught physiology at University of Oklahoma medical school from 1952 to 1954 and worked at the Air Force Biomedical Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base from 1954 to 1958.

In 1959 he founded Webb Associates, a research company, in Yellow Springs. Webb Associates performed several major research studies for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Office of Naval Research and the Air Force.

While working with the Office of Naval Research, Dr. Webb developed an interest in protective clothing for persons working in dangerous environments — an interest that stayed with him throughout his life. With support from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), he began work on a very lightweight elastic space activity suit that greatly reduced the physical energy required of the wearer, as well as enabling the wearer to move about with much greater freedom and comfort than with the established NASA suits, which were cumbersome and heavy.

Shortly thereafter Dr. Webb designed and built his famous calorimeter, a wearable device for measuring the heat produced by the human body. It consisted of an undergarment in which closely spaced water-filled tubes worn next to the skin absorbed heat from the body; as water was pumped through the tubes, it carried the heat through a specially designed computer that precisely measured the heat and displayed and printed the result in calories. The system could thereby tell how much heat energy the body used at rest and in various kinds of activity. When worn, the calorimeter was connected to the computer by an “umbilical cord” containing the many cords and tubes involved, but the subject was able to move about in normal activities with relative ease and comfort.

The calorimeter could also be used to manipulate the human subject’s body temperature to compensate for discomfort experienced in too-warm or too-cool work environments.

Dr. Webb closed his Yellow Springs laboratory in 1982 and moved to France. There he performed experiments at Hospital Bichat in Paris. From 1984 to 1988 he worked in various technical companies and universities in Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden.

During his career Dr. Webb received a great many awards for his work; two of these awards are the Fritz J. Russ Award in bioengineering and the Jeffries Aerospace Medicine and Life Sciences Research Award from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, notification of which he received a short time before his death.

Survivors include his beloved wife, Eileen, of Yellow Springs; daughter and son-in-law Paula and Jerry Womacks of Yellow Springs; son Shaun Webb and his two sons of Iowa City, Iowa; and sisters Dale Ann Bourjaily, Abigail Bourjaily Campi, Valerie Hime and Hale Bradt.

Last edited by GW Johnson (2021-05-02 10:07:16)

RobertDyck · 2021-05-02 10:53:33

GW Johnson wrote:

RobertDyck:
I found Paul Webb's obituary on-line using google search on "paul webb yellow springs ohio". He died 18 May 20, 2014, which explains why his websites disappeared about that time. He died peacefully at home at the age of 90, not quite 91. Excerpt below.
GW

I realized he passed. Sad, I really admired his work. As I said, the reason I proposed invited Dr Webb in 2005 was his age. Thank you for the obituary; I wasn't able to find that. I wish they would have left up his YouTube video.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2021-09-03 07:34:29

Would Mars be run by a Military, an Imperial power, perhaps a Corporation or a 'Culture' of whatever nation gets there first.

It is said places like Iceland, Japan work because they are mono-cultural and homogenous, maybe I don't always agree, I'm not sure since Singapore and Switzerland also function in harmony even though they are multi-cultural.

Mars for certainwould be a frontier planet, I guess there could be competition for resources, even poverty but at what cost would you have rule, totalitarian government or imperial space power to eliminate some gang boss or have some undesirable sentenced to death?

‘The smartest person in any room anywhere’: in defence of Elon Musk, by Douglas Coupland
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ … tories.org

But what’s the deal with him wanting people to go to Mars?
This is actually the most baffling thing about Musk: what’s his deal with Mars? He loves discussing the creation of new platforms for humans elsewhere in the cosmos. He wants humans to be multiplanetary, telling Rolling Stone: “There have been five mass-extinction events in the fossil record.

louis · 2021-09-03 08:08:37

There won't be poverty on Mars! a highly educated population with a huge GDP and vast energy resources, advanced robotics and all the rest. Poverty won't get a look in - unless we deliberately import it.

Musk has said, for what it's worth, he wants the colony to be run on democratic principles, with a strong element of direct democracy.

Mars_B4_Moon wrote:

Would Mars be run by a Military, an Imperial power, perhaps a Corporation or a 'Culture' of whatever nation gets there first.
It is said places like Iceland, Japan work because they are mono-cultural and homogenous, maybe I don't always agree, I'm not sure since Singapore and Switzerland also function in harmony even though they are multi-cultural.
Mars for certainwould be a frontier planet, I guess there could be competition for resources, even poverty but at what cost would you have rule, totalitarian government or imperial space power to eliminate some gang boss or have some undesirable sentenced to death?
‘The smartest person in any room anywhere’: in defence of Elon Musk, by Douglas Coupland
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ … tories.org

But what’s the deal with him wanting people to go to Mars?
This is actually the most baffling thing about Musk: what’s his deal with Mars? He loves discussing the creation of new platforms for humans elsewhere in the cosmos. He wants humans to be multiplanetary, telling Rolling Stone: “There have been five mass-extinction events in the fossil record.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2021-04-29 15:10:05

Re: The Difficult Ones

#27 2021-04-29 17:20:04

Re: The Difficult Ones

#28 2021-04-29 17:40:53

Re: The Difficult Ones

#29 2021-04-29 17:46:39

Re: The Difficult Ones

#30 2021-04-29 17:51:47

Re: The Difficult Ones

#31 2021-04-29 18:00:25

Re: The Difficult Ones

#32 2021-04-29 18:19:42

Re: The Difficult Ones

#33 2021-04-29 18:21:59

Re: The Difficult Ones

#34 2021-04-29 18:27:36

Re: The Difficult Ones

#35 2021-04-29 18:37:57

Re: The Difficult Ones

#36 2021-04-29 18:38:09

Re: The Difficult Ones

#37 2021-04-29 19:00:14

Re: The Difficult Ones

#38 2021-04-29 20:31:42

Re: The Difficult Ones

#39 2021-04-29 20:50:43

Re: The Difficult Ones

#40 2021-04-30 16:00:04

Re: The Difficult Ones

#41 2021-04-30 16:40:31

Re: The Difficult Ones

#42 2021-04-30 19:07:18

Re: The Difficult Ones

#43 2021-04-30 19:19:57

Re: The Difficult Ones

#44 2021-05-01 06:09:05

Re: The Difficult Ones

#45 2021-05-01 10:56:07

Re: The Difficult Ones

#46 2021-05-01 12:06:29

Re: The Difficult Ones

#47 2021-05-02 10:06:38

Re: The Difficult Ones

#48 2021-05-02 10:53:33

Re: The Difficult Ones

#49 2021-09-03 07:34:29

Re: The Difficult Ones

#50 2021-09-03 08:08:37

Re: The Difficult Ones

Board footer