Cooking on Mars and in Space

Austin Stanley · 2002-06-19 20:32:02

Another problem that cannot be ignored in both Mars exploration and colonization is food.

Generaly speaking, food cannot be kept "fresh", or in a ready-to-eat fashion for long periods of time. Even food kept safe from bacterial and fungal contamination will eventual break down from heat and other sources.

So most food is kept in some in-ediable (or at least un-appitising fashion), and then cooked before it can be consumed. On earth this posses little problem. However, in a zero-G or enclosed hab enviroment, several other factors need to be taken into consideration:

Safety. A fire breaking out in space or in a hab on Mars would be VERY, VERY bad news. Open flames are absolutly forbidden, and ovens, broilers, and friers likely would be as well. Even the beloved microwave could potentialy be a risk.

Efficency. Weight must be kept to a miniumum, both in cooking equipment, and cookware which must be disposed.

Enviroment. Most proposed habitats (both in space and otherwise), would have signifigantly diffrent air-pressures and make-up then is found on earth. This can also effect the cooking process, and must be compenstated for.

So, what do you think, how should food preperation be handled?

Lil_vader · 2002-06-20 11:29:26

Drying food will probably be more efficient than canning it. I've tried doing both, and even though dried food doesn't taste as good, its rather easy to do and doesn't take much preparation time or special equipment.

One possible advantage to the lower atmospheric pressure on Mars is that it would make freeze-drying much easier.

Palomar · 2002-07-12 14:07:26

Another problem that cannot be ignored in both Mars exploration and colonization is food...
So, what do you think, how should food preperation be handled?

*If we're talking while folks are en-route to Mars [or to Earth, in the early missions], I presume they will eat freeze-dried rations like the Apollo astronauts did. I'm thinking the only "cooking" appliance on the spacecraft will be a coffeemaker of some sort...if that.

While actually on Mars, say amongst the first settlers? I have no idea. How would fire behave in the lesser gravity? Maybe some sort of pressure cooker could be set up, which is heated by an electrical source. I suppose an electrical oven and stove would work okay -- but anything cooked [vegetables, rice, whatever] would have to be enclosed, otherwise it'd be floating out -- unless it's submersed in water. If I even know what the heck I'm talking about; the lower gravity thing is going to be fun to deal with, when it comes to outright cooking on Mars.

Good ponderings...and just some thoughts.

--Cindy

Phobos · 2002-07-12 22:04:59

I wonder if it might be possible for the crew to grow small quantities of fresh food in centrifuges as they travel to Mars. If I remember correctly experiments like this have been done successfully in space. Maybe someone skilled in plant genetics could create a specialized vegetable plant that would grow very short and could thrive in artificial light. I bet radishes would do fine even though I'm not sure you could do much with a radish. I guess you could spice up some of that freeze-dried salad.

Palomar · 2002-07-13 09:30:43

Maybe someone skilled in plant genetics could create a specialized vegetable plant that would grow very short and could thrive in artificial light. I bet radishes would do fine even though I'm not sure you could do much with a radish. I guess you could spice up some of that freeze-dried salad.

*I definitely think that's worth checking into, not only for the nutritional value and variety it'd add to meals, but also because it'd serve as another diversion...and it's psychologically healthy for many people to care for and watch plants grow. Perhaps edible flowers could be considered, as well; not only do they add nutrients, they'd lend their natural beauty to the surroundings as well. I'm thinking I'd like to care for and watch green things growing en-route to Mars, even if I'm not much of a gardener here at home. It'd be a worthwhile endeavor in more ways than one.

--Cindy

Auqakah · 2002-07-13 13:11:51

I'm sure on Earth that growing plants is a good thing for a group, psychologically, but we are talking a group of people in isolation save for audio and video links. Think of the sexual tension. Now is growing something new, a new life, a good idea, psychologically? I see problems with that. Its a constant reminder of sex, in an environment that would already be sexually charged. One other problem; although not really food based, how on earth (or not, as the case would be) would you prevent the build up of pheremones? What sort of effect would that have on the crew/colonists? And surely the growing of plants would only make things worse in that area?

Palomar · 2002-07-13 14:59:23

I'm sure on Earth that growing plants is a good thing for a group, psychologically, but we are talking a group of people in isolation save for audio and video links. Think of the sexual tension. Now is growing something new, a new life, a good idea, psychologically? I see problems with that. Its a constant reminder of sex, in an environment that would already be sexually charged. One other problem; although not really food based, how on earth (or not, as the case would be) would you prevent the build up of pheremones.

*I am absolutely bewildered by your post...no sarcasm intended. Growing plants -- whether radishes or edible flowers -- have ::zero:: sexual connotations to me.

I don't foresee any problems in this respect at all.

--Cindy

Auqakah · 2002-07-13 15:41:35

Consider that most land-living species base when they mate and produce offspring around when the most food is available. Also note the higher child rate in families living on farms. Plants represent fertility, fertility obviously is a link to sex. The link isnt immediatley obvious, and not so strong outside of isolated conditions, but if you're going to be spending a large amount of time in close quarters with only a few people, you dont really need any reminders of sex. Every single person is releasing pheremones; hence everybody to a certain degree is more sexually charged. The formula for the total number of sexual relationships in any given group is n(n-1)/2.
(n being the number of people in the group)
So if you have a group of just 20 people, then you have a potential 190 relationships. So you dont need to make the atmosphere in those small, cramped conditions - where people are working together, exercising together, eating together, always within site of another person - any more sexually charged than it has to be. Don't need murder en route ???

Plants are generally considered to be a sign of fertility. Its the growing part, mostly... Also, we eat food. Much of our diet is plant based. Therefore, the best time for us to produce children is when the most food is available, ie. when there are many plants about to become harvestable. It's like in a rural village with no access to outside sources of food, with three farms. The birthrate nine months after every harvest would shoot up, as in many cultures just a few hundred years ago.

Palomar · 2002-07-13 15:51:27

Also note the higher child rate in families living on farms.
Plants represent fertility, fertility obviously is a link to sex. The link isnt immediatley obvious, and not so strong outside of isolated conditions, but if you're going to be spending a large amount of time in close quarters with only a few people, you dont really need any reminders of sex.

*I was born and raised in a rural agricultural town; it seemed to me the town dwellers and farm folks were having about the same number of children. Do you have a statistic you can quote, backing up your claim of families on farms having a greater number of children? I'm not being rude or sarcastic -- please know that.

I honestly don't see plants as related to *sex* amongst humans. You and I are apparently on very different wave-lengths I just see them as sources of food and beauty.

--Cindy

Byron · 2002-07-13 16:03:18

The formula for the total number of sexual relationships in any given group is n(n-1)/2.
(n being the number of people in the group)

This formula only works when you have an equal number of males and females....I doubt that the first mission to Mars will be 50/50 gender-wise....the crew mix will probably consist of one married couple, and the rest of the crew male. With this kind of crew set-up, the risk of unintended sexual relations will be near zero, irregardless of how many plants are grown, or the amount of pherenomes in air..lol.

I really don't see plants increasing the risk of sexual relationships, any more than the simple matter that these people will be packed into a tiny space together for months on end...so it would be behoove the mission planners to eliminate the main factor that precipates sexual relations to begin with: evenly matched males and females in extremely confined conditions. The simplist solution is often the best.

B

Lil_vader · 2002-07-14 16:24:46

According to several studies, humans are no longer able to sense or respond to pheremones. We just don't have the same triggers that animals have. Even extremely high concentrations of pheremones in the air have no effect on human behavior.

Also: psychological studies of group dynamics have shown that when small groups of people were forced to live in isolation (except for each other) and faced with often-stressfull circumstances, the groups that coped best were made up entirely of women!
In second place were the groups made of couples that had been married 10 years or more. There were several other combinations tried, but the groups made entirely of men usually fell prey to internal competition and did the worst.
(Keep in mind that these are generalizations. The article I read about this was almost 12 pages long, and I'm sure the raw data could have filled a couple of filling cabinets )

Auqakah · 2002-07-15 13:51:54

Hmm... I shall search for said statistic, although I dont remember where I read that... It may well have been in Nature magazine a few years back. As for humans not responding to pheremones.. I doubt that very much. Did the studies test humans in a prolonged, closed environment? Air circulation in buildings is rather different to an enclosed controlled environment on a ship. Plants have been linked to sex in several ways; firstly, there is the aspect of new life, when the plants are grown. This naturally - in many people, not all, nothing affects everybody the same way, of course - reminds people of sex, as sex is the act of producing life, fundamentally.
Plants can be linked to sex very easily.
For example:

Plants = Fertility = Sex

I don't think sending one married couple and having an entirely single sex crew otherwise would be all that advisable.
Primarily, a single sex crew does not prohibit sexual relations - just take a look at prisons, if you wish to see proof that a single-sex environment ends any chance of intercourse. Also, the jealousy would be extreme - imagine you are not having sex at all, but you are constantly seeing a married couple together. They dont have to ever show any intimacy - you know they're married, and you know they're both getting something that you and everybody else isnt. That isn't a healthy environment.
The only solution would be to send an entirely single sex crew, or a 50-50 basis - and either way has problems. Anyway, the only point I was making was, that the growing of plants for food en route (ie at the point when things are most dangerous, and concentration is most needed) could prove problematic.

Palomar · 2002-07-15 18:47:33

Plants can be linked to sex very easily.
For example:
Plants = Fertility = Sex

*Yes, I did manage to figure that one out for myself.

However, not everyone has a tremendously strong sex drive, nor is sex consistently at the forethought of all people. I'm not saying that you are this way; however, plants have never effected me in this regard. They are simply plants which grow, sprout, bloom, whatever -- no fetish.

Of course, thanks to a certain someone, I'll never look at a box of Count Chocula breakfast cereal the same again either...[has nothing to do with sex].

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-06-19 20:32:02

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#2 2002-06-20 11:29:26

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#3 2002-07-12 14:07:26

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#4 2002-07-12 22:04:59

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#5 2002-07-13 09:30:43

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#6 2002-07-13 13:11:51

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#7 2002-07-13 14:59:23

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#8 2002-07-13 15:41:35

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#9 2002-07-13 15:51:27

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#10 2002-07-13 16:03:18

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#11 2002-07-14 16:24:46

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#12 2002-07-15 13:51:54

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

#13 2002-07-15 18:47:33

Re: Cooking on Mars and in Space

Board footer