You are not logged in.
I've seen a lot of discussion about a Mars of the near future, a Mars under Earthling control, or at least strong influence, people speculating about whys and hows. All for good reason, but there has been little discussion about what a full fledged independant mars may be like. Now this isn't a Mars of the 2000s, 2100s or even 2200s. I'm imagining a Mars that has been fully terraformed and having its own self sustaining ecosystem for more than a thousand years. And a human population that has created its own identity as being Martian, not just of colonists.
People like to talk about how when Mars gets fully terraformed it will have a warm earth-like climate. I agree with this notion, only partly. I see a future green mars being more of a white mars. With the planet terraformed, yes the temperature will rise dramatically, but the planet will still be quite cold. At the equator I can only imagine a warm temperate climate, while in the area's closer to the midway points between the equator and poles being very Alaskan/Southern Canadian in nature. And then finally the 45 degree latitude lines will be be extremely arctic/tundra-ish in nature. But keeping all this in mind, i don't beleive it is fare for people to assume this to be a harsh climate. Actually quite in the contrary.
Many people think of the tropics when they think of a natural paradise, depending on your frame of mind this may be true, but i beleive that for many reasons, a temperate climate is far more desirable, and thus this is where my interest in the red planet comes in. Take the vast Tharsis range for example, imagine how beautiful it would be to see a vast alpine forest stretching across the mid section of the range, covered in serene white powder, and just imagine the tourism industry with the concept of low gravity skiing from the slopes of Olympus Mons.
Industry as a whole would thrive on a Mature Mars, logging for example while not even conceivable in the early stage, would be a powerful economy as Mars would help to supply luxury goods to the other colonies, such as Europa and Titan, and maybe even a Tamed Venus.
Culturally I see Martians themselves being a very confident and dignified people, hardened by the cold climate, and (if at first) by the early desolation of the planet formerly being a desert world. Take for account a societ that starts its existance as a bunch of scientists and pioneering rough-necks, and later as the planet changes, so the the people, Mars would become a major cultural and intellectual center in a new human galactic empire. People from other colonies would go to mars for their education, I actually can imagine mars being a renowned center of the arts and sciences. Not to mention the possiblity of being a major center in the medical community.
And just imagine the pride a future Martian society would have for simply being the first AND the oldest of the colonies.
Just throwing some ideas out there.
Please add to, or comment on any of these subjects. ^_^
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
This "mature Mars" has much to do with one's own ideas for social engineering that it is hard to guess what will really come about. If 16th and 17th century Europeans tried to guess what North and South America would be like in the 20th century they would have assumed aristocracy and monarchy being the dominant social classes; they never would have guessed the role of dictatorships in South America or democracy in North America, or the mix of races and ethnicities in either. Similarly, our guesses tend to look like democracy and capitalism if we like those two things, and the opposite of them if we don't.
If I ever get more of my novel up, you'll get an idea what I see, at least for a
Mars of seven thousand people that is heading to a hundred thousand in another few decades.
-- RobS
Offline
Please add to, or comment on any of these subjects. ^_^
Wow, a thousand years post-terraforming - my crystal ball gets a little hazy that far out. By that time, every gravity well has its space elevators, but one of the things that space elevators do is make it easier to build biospheres at places like L5. Mars is of course, crucial in the "short" term, but I wonder if, in the long run, living at the top of a gravity well doesn't beat living at the bottom?
At L5, you've got no-cost access to minimum energy orbits to any solar system location, asteroids and comets can be delivered to your doorstep with their own volatiles, and kilometer-scale disks of solar cells and parabolic mirrors with minimal supporting structures provide you with no-fuel EM and thermal energy clear through a billion terrawatts.
In addition, as technology improves, any individual biosphere - including Earth's or Mars' - is vulnerable to destruction by smaller and smaller groups of angry people. Unless we reach a point where noone ever has reason to be angry again, multiple independent biospheres may just be flat-out safer.
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
In 1000 years people might have found more earth-like places than Mars orbiting some of our closest stars, and they are going to spend lots of money (or rather machine time) on coming up with ways of getting there.
I have always imagined Mars in the far future to be an almost continuous city, and the low gravity makes it possible to build much taller structures than on Earth. I am not sure that terraforming will be a success though.
People are going to look just as they do now if we for some reason don't start genetically engineering ourselves. Evolution in rats and other fast reproducing mammals are much much faster, because they in 1000 earthling-years time could have gone through as much as 4,000 generations. The same amount of natural selection in humans would take at least 100,000 earthling-years.
I believe those who think of Mars of some kind of future Utopia will get very dissappointed. Mars will never be a paradise, and neither will any other human settlement. Just look at the world today - there are no such thing as a perfect society or culture - and there never will be.
[url=http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3941]Martian Settlement 2035?[/url]
Offline
I believe those who think of Mars of some kind of future Utopia will get very dissappointed. Mars will never be a paradise, and neither will any other human settlement. Just look at the world today - there are no such thing as a perfect society or culture - and there never will be.
That is an excellent point, and i am sorry if i made my 1000 year mars sound like a utopia, lol. Of course there would still be many social problems on the planet just as there are on earth, Human Nature always gets in the way of a true Utopia, and to be honest I'm glad. The idea of Utopia is actually rather boring to me.
In addition, as technology improves, any individual biosphere - including Earth's or Mars' - is vulnerable to destruction by smaller and smaller groups of angry people. Unless we reach a point where noone ever has reason to be angry again, multiple independent biospheres may just be flat-out safer.
I have to disagree, i would hope thatt our dependence on technology doesn't get to that point. Actually i see that in a thousand years, our species (even on the path it is now) would eventually reach a non-technological equilibrium with nature, ultimately seperating ourselves from nature for nature's benefit. With our perfecting of synthetic lubricants and renewable plastics, and with discoveries of "TRUE" renewable energy sources, i see that Nature will not depend on us in the least, and neither we on it. Ultimately what i'm trying to get at, is, that Mars would have a fully stable Terraformed climate. This is just a matter of personal opinion, but existence in "multiple biospheres" is kind of a bleak existance.
But yes, Terraforming is extremely expensive and its short-run gains are too few to make it practical, so ultimately, Yes Mars WILL be terraformed, but it MAY be one of the ONLY planets to be terraformed. Because quite simply in a thousand years, we'll have already expanded to the edges of the galaxy and colonized thousands of other Earth-like worlds, not Mars or Venus-like ones. <-- Of course my expansion predictions are in fact based on our current rate of technological advancement.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
I don't see society on mars as being much different from that on earth. People think the things are different in Europe or Japan, or the middle east but essentially they are the same. People everywhere try to live and get over the speed bumps in life the best way they can.
I predict that human civilization a thousand years from now on the earth and mars will be more at ease, less hectic, and almost stress free.
Imagine a four day work week (working six hours a day) since much of the work has already been accomplished. Automation is extensive and robots maintain machines in near perfect condition. The air is perfectly clean as well as the rivers and lakes. There is no trash anywhere. Flowered boxes, trees, and water fountains highlight the towns. The population of cities reduces because people can work online. People meet after work in parks to spend time with their families and participate in sporting events.
Offline
I don't see society on mars as being much different from that on earth. People think the things are different in Europe or Japan, or the middle east but essentially they are the same. People everywhere try to live and get over the speed bumps in life the best way they can.
I predict that human civilization a thousand years from now on the earth and mars will be more at ease, less hectic, and almost stress free.
Imagine a four day work week (working six hours a day) since much of the work has already been accomplished. Automation is extensive and robots maintain machines in near perfect condition. The air is perfectly clean as well as the rivers and lakes. There is no trash anywhere. Flowered boxes, trees, and water fountains highlight the towns. The population of cities reduces because people can work online. People meet after work in parks to spend time with their families and participate in sporting events.
YES!! Thats exactly what I've been trying to get at!!! w00t! Thanks man, lol.
But seriously, Mars will just be another (although COLDER) Earth, which ultimately is what Terraforming is all about.
And remember, SKI! Olympus Mons!
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
It is not a question of what society will be and what will dominate Mars in a 1000 years but what will actually be living there. Will we be able to envisage the changes that will have happened to mankind will we even be able to recognise if someone is Human. This I dont know and as such whatever we see society as is immaterial as it comes down to the best society for the needs of the people that populate it and how the changes we have done to ourselves will so change it.
A simple example and something we can do now what if we where to skew the birth ration of humanity into for every male born there are two or more girls born. What would this do for a society?
Then we get to the slightly more exotic in that we could turn into half machine-half biologic creature what society would the equivalent of a borg need?
In short it is how we turn out physically that will decide the society that makes Mars.
Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.
Offline
I agree with you partly. Yes, physical changes will in fact play a major role, but at the same time (at least a far as Mars is concerned) human beings will ultimately change little on the outside. Though internally i can foresee a lot of change, for instance in the case of those born and raised on Mars hundreds of generations out, they will probably be taller than Earthlings by a foot or two, but at the same time, thier bones and muscels will be far weaker, all because of lower gravity. In fact the same can be said for anything that lives on mars for any number of generations, take evergreen trees for instance, on Mars, while they are in fact suited for the climate, they will be massively taller because of the lack of strong gravity. Imagine a bunch of skinny redwoods!
I fail to see any legitimate reason for human beings to augment thier bodies with cybernetics, because even for war, only a select few would need cybernetic augmentation (the Marines for instance). Because war as a whole would nearly almost always be fought from orbit, because its far cheaper and safer for the attacking force to bombard a planet from orbit than it is to send a ground force. Marines would ussually be limited to diplomatic escort duty or search and rescue ops. Full On war would definately be a Naval affair.
oh geez, i've gone off topic. :oops:
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
I fail to see any legitimate reason for human beings to augment thier bodies with cybernetics, because even for war, only a select few would need cybernetic augmentation (the Marines for instance). Because war as a whole would nearly almost always be fought from orbit, because its far cheaper and safer for the attacking force to bombard a planet from orbit than it is to send a ground force. Marines would ussually be limited to diplomatic escort duty or search and rescue ops. Full On war would definately be a Naval affair.
Do you own a watch?
Do you have glasses?
Do you wear clothes?
If you do any of the above your are a technical Cyborg you are using artificial means to improve your life and that is why Cyborgs will happen it will be to make people get on better with there lives and to improve there lives in some way. We use computers and here I am typing by hand. The future may allow a person to store information and to be able to communicate by a permanent link they walk around with. People who have lost limbs or been blind may be cured by the addition of artificial limbs and these will make them cyborgs. Fashion may make people more and more machine persons. We are limited by our bodies we die. If your failing organs can be fixed by replacing with mechanical means is that wrong. People live about 25 years more now than there grandparents and your grandparents 25 more than theres. If you are old would you want a chance to have as normal life as possible and if this means artificial attachements that allow you to act as if you where in your 20s?
Cyborg civilisation would easily happen but what would bring it there is too much individual cases that could make it. In the end we dont really know as the future in a parable of star trek again is the unknown country.
Chan eil mi aig a bheil ùidh ann an gleidheadh an status quo; Tha mi airson cur às e.
Offline
all the things you talk about can be done just as well with bio-engineering and genetic altering, and better, because instead of having metal in our bodies, it would be our own bones.
Ultimately for me, i would hate to have ANY part of my body replaced with a machine. I love having a flesh and bone body and the concept of living without it is far too alien for my tastes.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
In addition, as technology improves, any individual biosphere - including Earth's or Mars' - is vulnerable to destruction by smaller and smaller groups of angry people. Unless we reach a point where noone ever has reason to be angry again, multiple independent biospheres may just be flat-out safer.
I have to disagree, i would hope thatt our dependence on technology doesn't get to that point. Actually i see that in a thousand years, our species (even on the path it is now) would eventually reach a non-technological equilibrium with nature, ultimately seperating ourselves from nature for nature's benefit. With our perfecting of synthetic lubricants and renewable plastics, and with discoveries of "TRUE" renewable energy sources, i see that Nature will not depend on us in the least, and neither we on it.
Oh, I didn't mean that individual biospheres would be destroyed by greed or negligence - although these are, of course, possibilities - but that it will become possible for a small group to deliberately destroy a biosphere, and that, unless we also invent a cure for hatred, someone will eventually pull the trigger. Perhaps I'm being overly pessimistic with respect to human social evolution.
Ultimately what i'm trying to get at, is, that Mars would have a fully stable Terraformed climate.
I think this is a certainty within the multi-millennial timeframe we're talking about. Unless native life is discovered - then I think you'll have a fight on your hands.
This is just a matter of personal opinion, but existence in "multiple biospheres" is kind of a bleak existance.
They'll be large - I'm talking rivers, trees and clouds - the inhabitants vote on how many days it should rain this year - the whole bit. After a dozen generations, they'll be completely natural. I think their low-cost access to energy and resources will make them wealthy.
I may be wrong. I'd love to hear counter-arguments that say why the bottom of a gravity well is the place to be. My intuition is that we'll need to live in the well until we learn how to build rock-solid biospheres (maybe 1000 years?), but after that, the action will shift to the liberation points.
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
I may be wrong. I'd love to hear counter-arguments that say why the bottom of a gravity well is the place to be. My intuition is that we'll need to live in the well until we learn how to build rock-solid biospheres (maybe 1000 years?), but after that, the action will shift to the liberation points.
.
Okay, this may go a little off topic, but i'll go with this. Ultimately, as much as i love space, and i admit the obvious benefits of being able to transport goods from one sphere to the next easily outside the gravity well are good reasons enough to take such a path.
BUT!
Humans are still animals, as much as we like to say we are different and special (and indeed we are), and as an animal, Myself (and many other people) would feel a lot more "at home" on a planet rather than a man-made biosphere. You also need to take many other things into consideration. Space Elevators, and Biospheres are more like "half-way" points between technological leaps, than actual technological leaps themselves. For instance space elevators, they can carry MASSIVE amounts of freight from the bottom of a gravity well, to the top with far less energy and far more easily than a rocket can. Just like Cranes can carry large numbers of material and parts to the tops of buildings faster and safer than a siimpler rope and pulley system. But then take the limitations of a crane into acount,
1. it can only go as high as its arm allows it.
2. It is still fixed the to ground.
3. Lifting space is limited.
Now you may ask, "what does a modern crane have to do with a space elevator?"
Here is my point.
Today we have a better system for transporting large material from the bottom of a worksite to the top of the site. Sky Cranes - Essentially helecopters with a rig on the bottom. They can carry material for as high as they have to go, AND can carry far MORE than a conventional crane.
Ultimately we will eventually carry freight off world by Single Stage to Orbit spacecraft equiped with engines and thrusters that us fuel more effieciently than modern space-craft, and carry just as much, if not more than a supermassive elevator, and here comes the kicker; all at a fraction of the cost. And of course someone else will invent something even better and make both methods obsolete.
And now coming back to Bio-Spheres, why live in a biosphere if Nature has already given us plenty of planets to occupy and live on. Which are perfectly habitable and require little maintenance. Plus OFFER resources instead of TAKE resources away. Nature had things figured out, all we need to do is work WITH it instead of against it. But i do see TEMPORARY biospheres being a VERY practical solution.
Say for instance we use them to PREPARE populations that are already en-route to an earth-like world. Have dozens of them strung together in a ring-like colony ship that when it reaches its destination would land each sphere onto predetermined points on the host planet. That way the planet would emediately become a self sufficient colony.
Also don't get confused, these ships will be traveling at speeds faster than light, AND probably the colonists will land on the host planet within the first generation. Most of the time spent on the colony ship would be around orbit of the planet. To allow the colonists to develope a sense of status-quo before they land.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
Humans are still animals, as much as we like to say we are different and special (and indeed we are), and as an animal, Myself (and many other people) would feel a lot more "at home" on a planet rather than a man-made biosphere.
You may be right. I don't think it would bother me.
space elevators, they can carry MASSIVE amounts of freight from the bottom of a gravity well, to the top with far less energy and far more easily than a rocket can.
Space elevators are much better than rockets because they don't have to lift their own fuel, but no matter what, they still require 14 kWh/kg to overcome gravity. Eventually, that is a competitive disadvantage.
And now coming back to Bio-Spheres, why live in a biosphere if Nature has already given us plenty of planets to occupy and live on. Which are perfectly habitable and require little maintenance. Plus OFFER resources instead of TAKE resources away. Nature had things figured out, all we need to do is work WITH it instead of against it.
Artificial biospheres would be built from resources unavailable to the gravity bound, like asteroids and lunar soil. Nothing but seed machines would be lifted from Earth's surface - way too energy-expensive. Nature gave us brains and hands. We make things. That is what humans do. It's as natural to create biospheres as it is to farm crops.
faster than light
Hmmm, yes, well, if you allow magic then anything is possible, I suppose. Makes for good space opera.
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
Oh, so its magic huh?
Here we are talking about elevators that extend beyond ATMOSPHERES, and you call FTL travel MAGIC???
Comon man, as scientifically improbable as it is, it's still possible. Many respected engineers and scientists have been working ways to make it work, so i wouldn't discount it so readily.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
Oh, so its magic huh?
Here we are talking about elevators that extend beyond ATMOSPHERES, and you call FTL travel MAGIC???
Comon man, as scientifically improbable as it is, it's still possible. Many respected engineers and scientists have been working ways to make it work, so i wouldn't discount it so readily.
Actually, I think you'll find that FTL travel contradicts the laws of physics as we currently understand them. For example, FTL travel means that we could time travel. Magic.
Space elevators were thought possible, but somewhat impractical (the cable needed to be the width of the solar system) until the discovery of carbon nano-tubes which seem to have a sufficiently high ratio of strength to weight.
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
Okay, yes your are right. The theory of reletivatey gets in the way there. But while the theory is mathmatically sound, it still doesn't change the fact that while the speed of light is in fact the fastest thing known in nature, there is no reason to say that you can't go faster. I don't want to turn this thread into a load of cow dung, so im not going to go much farther with this, but at the same time I refuse to think that ANYTHING is impossible.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline
Okay, yes your are right. The theory of reletivatey gets in the way there. But while the theory is mathmatically sound, it still doesn't change the fact that while the speed of light is in fact the fastest thing known in nature, there is no reason to say that you can't go faster. I don't want to turn this thread into a load of cow dung, so im not going to go much farther with this, but at the same time I refuse to think that ANYTHING is impossible.
May be this will be of interest to you ...
Warp Drive, When?
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/resea … /warp.html
.
Fan of [url=http://www.red-oasis.com/]Red Oasis[/url]
Offline
Yes! Thank you! That very informative, and very uplifting to know that they are at least looking into the subject.
[url=http://www.themercenary.net/index.htm][img]http://www.themercenary.net/smash.jpg[/img][/url]
Offline