You are not logged in.
Hmm, that will teach me to reply to spammers.. ah well.
They could keep themseleves quite busy with two years of Geology and Biology for two years, that is what we expect of them on Mars.
Unless you want to test out different ways of Terraforming Antartica...
Even the elected leader would have to be careful about mutinies.
Like how the UN declared what human rights were, and then magically the world was better?
There was the Kellog-Briand Pact which outlawed war in 1929...
Religions are even more stubborn than governments. If the guys at the top start making ungodly edicts then everybody abandons them. Thats where we got the Protestant move a.k.a. Christianity and how Shi'ites and Sunnis Split.
You would have to get a prophet to come forward who was accepted by every religion, and then he would have to declare that God had abandoned violence as a way of getting things done. It would have to be added to everybodies canon of scripture, something unachieved by nearly anyone since Moses and even then he has a lot of versions floating around.
Religion is not like tax law, its not something there to suit your whim, its considered to be there because it -is-.
Below a thousand people its quite easy for personal charisma and respect to over-rule elections.
If the most popular guy who obviously knows best, doesn't accept nomination then your 'government' will be completely undermined. Loyalty is harder to ascribe to government when you know everybody in the entire nation.
Certainly with groups of only one hundred it would be quite hard to over-rule particualry willful individuals.
You need to get Antartica out of your head. Go decimate more of Alaska.
In terms of getting in an out above the artic circle, there are systems capable of that, but no one wants to spend the money. You would be creating analouge Mars rovers.
You said you wanted to create and artifical homestead, well it doesn't have to be cold outside, it could be really hot instead. Environmental control is quite similar either way, although it is somewhat harder, energetically speaking to stay cold in a hot environment.
The extra structure detracts from the homliness of the dome. Although you do want to make it big enough to put a couple of large trees in the center, and maybe a cherry tree in the middle of a field.
The majority of the actual home could be as large as the dome itself, but under ground.
Also would you light the sky blue, or mabye have it blue at the top then tinting through purple and down into red at the bottom? I don't think it will cut down on light received.
The other point you are missing is that most religions don't view anybody as innocent, particuarly not adults. If you agree with execution of criminals, that is capital punishment, then you understand the viewpoint of religious extremists.
Human evolution... we tend to bread on really silly things, like on not having melanin or having the fortune to know how to operate bleach. Being strapping and healthy gets you drafted and killed. I don't know that natural selection could possibly operate in that way, before it ever kicked in we would be engineer ourselves into catastrophic blobs, one of many answers to Fermi's paradox.
I haven't been to anartica yet, I am hoping to go there for a post-grad or two.
I would leave the Oil alone as long as possible. There are some applications we may take a very long time to replace oil in. Aircraft to start with. We don't need Oil that badly, we just need to cut back on our excesses.
To test these domes you might want to try somewhere closer to home, up on a moutain plataeu somewhere. The Rockies, the Andes, Tibet. However they won't be the same as engineering for the greater gravity will complicate them somewhat and reduce their elegance and transparency.
It could reasonably be done using current materials although you would need an pretty serious and clean manfuacturing environment set up on mars.
Muscles are generally use 'em or lose 'em.
Bed ridden patients have a huge problem of muscle wasting. Muscles (heart included) already adapt to need quite efficiently.
They would just have to avoid getting killed while carrying out the war for God.
It would be extremely hard to make a case for any religion that God doesn't like death in general.
Besides certain countries are killing in the name of liberal democracy. Previously Kamikazes died for their emperor.
These 'suicide' bombing are closer to that. They are more kamikaze than suicidal. Their purpose is not to end their life, they don't want to end their lives, they want to end yours. That is why they look at the reward so strongly. They would really prefer not to die, but there are some things on this earth that are so evil that men must lay down their lives to stop.
yeah, oops.
So your 'enlightened' solution is to run away? Boy those muslims are so very primitive...
These primitive people you so despise, are often educated in western universities and have had the opportunity to witness first hand how empty your religious adherence to 'liberalism' is. Its an educated choice to live for something instead of nothing.
You really sound like the enlightened male who says 'women are just like regular people!'
By the way the 'liberal' United States inflicts economic penalties upon New Zealand because we won't let nuclear power be utilised in our country.
Thats so arbitrary though
I liked the early idea, I dont mind having fifty planets, the more the merrier.
we are faced with a primitive culture that will not deal with our liberal modern ways of thinking,
They could say exactly the same thing. That might is right and the dollar rules all seems pretty primitive to a lot of people.
As far as I knew the Mars Society was primarily a lobby group. In that sense it has been pretty successful. Nasa is on track to Mars. the problem now is possible derailment, not turning Nasa around as it was before. We have Heavy Lift back, or we will, and its named Ares no less. Nobody is talking about Shuttle 2 or expanding the ISS.
The DRM is pretty close to anything Zubrin could have asked for. There is no more Battlestar being batted around, its all light and direct with ISRU to get back after a two year stay.
Or problem now is avoiding derailment, and as GCNR like to point out, the long term problems with the Mars Direct Architecture. It’s going to be extremely easy for enthusiasm to dwindle after the first crew has their parade.
We need to be figuring out how to change the mindset away from exploration and onto colonisation. Get the idea of long-term burned into the public culture, so people expect a large base in fifty years.
Our projects need at some point, to shift to being colonisation analogues.
I would consider those to be artifical if THEY HAD BEEN FOUND ON EARTH.
There is not enough information present to indicate an organising force outside of nature.
Right angles, tetrahedrons and straight lines are all features commonly found in nature. I have done way to much geology to even begin to suspect atrificiallity there. Mostly its just curious.
Find six perfectly smooth and regular slabs mounted vertically next to each other, covered with regular inscriptions, and you might have something.
Or show that 'the face' or the pyramids were made out of regular sub-units.
To me they scream naturally occuring.
How well do your batteries respond to a hard vacuum?
How does their performance hold up -100C?
But what if perhaps it does. Maybe Osama and Co. are right. Once we all repent the terror can stop.
Who says they were aliens? Maybe we fled and the global cultural records of catastrophe are our last remnants of that.
I thought I was the local religious nutter?
Okay if we are going to be unscientific (and ungodly, for all science has been based in religious assumptions, like the fact that there are rational laws to uncover because they were invented by a rational God(Kepler) or that God would create the simpler of two equal possibilities(Occam)) then what are your revelations that the planets are hollow?
Are the public, like many sacred texts? Most talk abouts lakes of fire, not bubbles.
Or are your revelations personal? If they are can you describe them?
I am just point out that you need to propose why the sun is where it is.
Also if gravity is weaker then you need another force to explain what is holding the planets together and preventing them from flinging themselves apart.
You need to add something to the theory is all. Such as a structural explanation of how your planetary models hold together.
SRAM:
That site does not address the problems of centripetal stress, or large asteroid strikes among other things. Unless they were attempting to postulate a theory of gravity where gravity tries to move everything into spheres... But then why is the Sun at the center of the system. The Hollow Planets model would be more plausible if there was nothing at the center of the solar system.
>>>>>>><<<<<<<
It cannot be a solar system if there is no centroid sun.
( Are there any systems without a centroid sun(s) ? )
That is the point. To fit the hollow planets model, the Sun should have formed something closer to a Dyson Sphere out where Jupiter is, with hollow planets orbiting just inside and outside of the Sun.
SRAM:
That site does not address the problems of centripetal stress, or large asteroid strikes among other things. Unless they were attempting to postulate a theory of gravity where gravity tries to move everything into spheres... But then why is the Sun at the center of the system. The Hollow Planets model would be more plausible if there was nothing at the center of the solar system.