Greetings, Dr. Bell

BWhite · 2005-11-28 10:25:52

This article is interesting. A few excerpts:

I spend some time lurking in many online discussion groups concerned with space travel. From this I have learned that these opinion columns have made me something of a bete noir to the pro-space community.

As for myself, I believe you do raise serious, challenging points. At times.

But for years now, I have been meeting people who are both wildly enthusiastic about space travel as a broad intellectual concept and completely ignorant of the practical details. They don't know how rocket engines work. They don't know the basics of orbital mechanics. They don't know the facts (or the uncertainties) about the dangers of radiation and microgravity.

A legitimate criticism. Any space advocate who was born yesterday does need to stay up nights and study.

The materials are out there, on the internet. As for orbital mechanics, reading up on "Lo Roads" and Belbruno trajectories is way cool stuff. Whether we send people or toasters. And yes, I also believe radiation and microgravity are the most significant obstacles to the human settlement of space and far too little time and energy are being applied to those problems.

Radiation? My solution is to find/make water and place it between people and the nasty stuff. Boron doped hydrogen rich plastics will work also. Transhab, now Bigelow is a step in that direction.

Microgravity? We need research. Will 4 hours per day of centrifuge exercise solve the problem? 8 hours? We don't know, obviously, and do need to find out...

As for

politically impossible suicide missions

I say send a team of Jesuits who can help answer questions about how to live in microgravity. It would be a "mission" in several senses of the word. As for expense, the Vatican actually could purchase Microsoft, not the other way around - - another web based fantasy.

But it is good to know you read NewMars, nonetheless. 8)

No child could grow normally in the low lunar gravity. Even adult astronauts are carried away on wheelchairs after only 6 months in space (the last American to return from the ISS actually fainted from the stress of normal gravity)

True. Mars is a much better place to raise children and I agree with Gerard O'Neill that the moon is best used as a strip mine.

But no child will grow normally in 3/8ths gee either. I must agree again.

So that means we need research. Before building rockets, Elon Musk wanted to spin pregnant mice at 3/8th gee to study fetal development. Would 6 hours per day or 12 hours per day suffice to allow normal development? At 1.0 gee or 0.8 gee? We don't know.

I say its worth it to find out.

On January 1st 2004 the Atlantic Monthly contained a a short essay by William Langewiesche, someone who is NOT a space cadet. IMHO.

Shall humanity become a two-planet species? That simply is the central question of space exploration. It might not be feasible and we might watch in horror as everyone who tries to settle out there, dies horribly.

But that is the question, should we even try?

The fact, Dr. Bell, that you do "spend some time" lurking at our site and others suggests to me that you do harbor hope that it will happen but rather ask that we acknowledge the difficulty. Fair enough.

Or, I suppose we can just spend our time on internet debates concerning the Iraq war.

John Creighton · 2005-11-28 11:10:39

I read the article and it seems to be somewhat of an attack on the mars society. Oh well, who once said all publicity is good publicity? He seems to make a lot of assertions with out backing them up then goes on to complain about the lack of engineering details in Zubrin’s case for mars. I know Dr. Bell is an astronomer so I am not sure if he appreciates the amount of engineering work and research required to work out all details of Mars colonization.

Zubrin’s work well incomplete was a start and formed the foundation of the later NASA reference missions. I am also not sure if Bell is qualified to compare the quantity of engineering work done by O’Neal for L5 colonies to the quantity of engineering work done by Robert Zubrin. However, having been interested in Mars for a while I do know that there is much more information available now about settling mars available now then when I was first interested.

The examples he gave from the new mars discussion boards were miss represented. I believe the “one way suicide mission” was more put forth as a hypothetical and in the thread about building space ships on mars I am sure that the consensus was it was economically impractical. With his regard to another site about the ion powered blimp I wish he would give a reference to a link that thoughly examined the idea and discussed why it was unfeasible rather then just dismissing the idea out of hand. Anyway, I am not sure what Dr. Bell plans to achieve by these articles except perhaps advocating that we focus a little more on the biological research associated with low gravity.

clark · 2005-11-28 12:52:11

Jeffrey F. Bell...

You'll never get tenure this way. LOL!

Trolls come in different shapes and sizes. Just remember, don't feed the trolls.

Palomar · 2005-11-28 17:26:20

I read the article and it seems to be somewhat of an attack on the mars society.

*Indeed.

NONE of these experts thought that humans could adapt permanently to Mars gravity!

Why don't the Zubrinistas discuss these issues? They will have to be solved before anyone lives permanently on Mars (or even for the ~18 months which is the minimum useful stay time as fixed by orbital mechanics). It's not too early to think about them.

There have been discussions in this regard. He's a bit condescending here. The Search feature (when it works) would yield up some older or newer threads.

But at the Mars Society web site, you don't find any study groups of scientists and engineers and grad students actually working out the technology we will need to colonize Mars. Instead you find - a MARS COLONIZATION SONG CONTEST!!
No, I don't laugh like a hyena while reading the opinions of today's Space Cadets. I weep in frustration at how the pro-space movement has been taken over by technically illiterate cultists.

I can think of 2 frequent New Mars members who wouldn't fit into this category; they're often chatting in Human Missions...does Dr. Bell read those threads I wonder? Neither GCNRevenger nor Robert Dyck sound like starry-eyed illiterate dreamers to me. Far from it.

Not all of us pro-space advocates are geniuses with mathematics, physics, etc., nor are we Ph.D.'s. :-\ I try to be sensible [especially when it comes to crazy terraforming talk like dragging stuff from clear out there in the Kuiper Belt to Mars, to provide water...or exchanging Venus' orbit with Mars'...or wrangling comets to crash onto Mars, as though it'd be the easiest thing in the world to accomplish ].

I'm counting on the Brainiacs to have "the right stuff" to get (and keep) us there. And if they can't, well...

Zubrinistas...cultists

Puh-leeze...spare us the belitting labels. Your well-made argument needn't and shouldn't resort to it.

--Cindy

C M Edwards · 2005-11-28 20:26:31

His ad hominem argument cited a thread about JP Aerospace that I once took part in. Gee... I feel kinda bad now about that crew farts quip. :oops:

Still, I must concede the anecdotes he cited are very real. If he was expecting a peer reviewed online journal, I can understand why he was disappointed, but most space advocacy forums do actually claim to have a common interest in technical matters. I've often wondered how the contents of the New Mars and other forums measure up in terms of relevance and focus. There are actual methods of assessing the question. Since Dr. Bell is clearly ignorant of such matters (his essay is just a collection of anecdotes and generalizations), perhaps we should get around to using them? More importantly than strengthening our case, that information might strengthen us.

(And for your information, I prefer "Zubrin-American", thank you.)

BWhite · 2005-11-28 20:50:41

Speaking of JP Aerospace, my recollection is that the more technically minded people here started out scoffing and ended with, "Well maybe it might actually work, maybe at least."

clark · 2005-11-29 06:29:51

Why get upset by a snob?

Bell, as usual, scores cheap points with cheap shots by stripping out context to provide any type of objective assessment of the situation. Of course he does that, because, when all is said and done, you have to bray loudly (as any good ass knows) to be heard above the din of the herd.

Ask yourself what he is actually saying. What is his point? That the internet is rife with a wide assortment of people who are talking about a multitude of real or fantastical ideas? Oh my god, the sky is blue!

Posters in various threads of various fourms range from 9 year olds to 99 year olds. Each with varying degrees of sophistication and education. Taking to task everyone in blanket statements demonstrate that Bell really doesn't care one way or the other about the state of things.

If you are not aware, there is a little trick used by the more savy individuals... if you wish to be noticed, you can be loved, or you can be reviled. If you are loved, people will listen to hear what you have to say next. If you are reviled, people will listen to hear what you say next.

I didn't choose hwo the world works, but there it is.

Stop feeding the trolls, they live on web hits. Think about it.

Or don't, whatever.

Professor's live and die by publishing. You publish by either having something to say, or having a name for yourself (I of course avoid both). Bell has nothing to say, so that means what? Class?

SpaceNut · 2005-11-29 06:31:06

No, I don't laugh like a hyena while reading the opinions of today's Space Cadets. I weep in frustration at how the pro-space movement has been taken over by technically illiterate cultists.

I wonder does he mean the clowns at Michoud or of other Nasa Facilities that have royally screwed up as of late.

Yes we maybe bordering on being a cult like following of the the 60's of the Apollo age but then again dreams are what are hearts are hearing that never materialized. We see the future without fear of risks that we willl take and know that it will be laborous at first to gain that foothold we all dream of in colonization.

While I know that I am not as techically literate as most on every little bit of space, even Nasa's great astronauts go tough intense training to prepare them with the needed skills...

If you can learn that is all that matters you do not need to be an Eistien in rocket propulsion to know that if you burn fuel at a specific rate that you will exert a force oposite to its exit from the engine and that the rocket will move. Now learning the math equations for how long the needed burn is required is just for the use of the tool in order to move you from point A to B. and to calculate how much fuel you will need to move your ship.

Palomar · 2005-11-29 06:55:16

No, I don't laugh like a hyena while reading the opinions of today's Space Cadets. I weep in frustration at how the pro-space movement has been taken over by technically illiterate cultists.

I wonder does he mean the clowns at Michoud or of other Nasa Facilities that have royally screwed up as of late.

*Lol! Excellent point, SpaceNut.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-11-29 07:15:39

Bell, as usual, scores cheap points with cheap shots by stripping out context to provide any type of objective assessment of the situation. Of course he does that, because, when all is said and done, you have to bray loudly (as any good ass knows) to be heard above the din of the herd.

And let's face it, clark knows what he's talking about on this point.

Then again, Bell's out-of-context citations do sort of illustrate the growing kook-factor in the space advocacy community.

clark · 2005-11-29 07:33:31

growing kook factor?!

*neigh*

Grypd · 2005-11-29 15:54:30

Growing Kook factor

I wonder if that is just a general indication of how truly people are committed to space certainly for the majority of the population it is considered "Kook" material. Either you are considered by this general public majority to be such an egghead to be interested in that sort of stuff or just strange. I subscribe to an online comic strip the only one but it has a fan club and forums. I looked into this forum and was genuinely shocked that a very obscure comic strip could have more members that the Mars society and space.com combined and over 5 times the postings.

How has this happened that mankinds destiny is a lot less popular than a psychopathic rabbit. Probably when it is constantly a case of Ivory towers and general putdowns.

Dr Bell if you dain to read this let me tell you that your constant negativitity and snipes at those actually currently involved in space only belittles you. If you find that the current space advocates are being small minded or are not technically literate as you claim to be then share your skills. Sitting in an Ivory tower is all well and good but the first duty of a professor as you claim to be and to work at the university of Hawai is to teach. It is one of the most sacred duties that of teaching, If you spent less time belittiling and putting down those involved in space and more in teaching and actively getting involved to change the consensus I would respect you. But you hide behind the falsehood that is scientific aloofness and so are not worthy of putting down those who are actively involved. You are so concerned about the state of space advocacy well let me tell you, you are part of the problem.

C M Edwards · 2005-11-29 16:09:47

growing kook factor?!

I'm reminded of a fable:

There once was a lady who was so rich that she had never needed to learn how to do any housework. Then one day, her enemies had all her servants jailed, and the rich lady had no one to keep her home.

Her enemies came to her as she lay crying on her polished marble steps, and asked, "What's wrong with you? Why are you whining?"

She told them, and they replied, "You are too rich! Soft living has made you lazy and stupid. Give us all of your money, and hard knocks will soon teach you to take care of your family like you should have." And they left her to bemoan her fate.

Afterward, the village washerwoman, a simpleton, happened by and saw the rich lady weeping. "What's wrong?" the washerwoman asked. "Why are you crying?"

The rich lady told her. The washerwoman was dull and slow of wit, and knew nothing of servants or being rich, but she said "Come with me," and took the rich woman to her humble home. There, she taught the rich woman how to clean a small room, how to cook a simple meal, and how to wash the clothes of an entire village.

The rich lady then went home and took care of her family until her servants were released. Afterward, she went into business with her new friend the washerwoman and made so much more money that now the washerwoman didn't need to do any housework either. Then she inherited still more money. Her enemies all died of envy and related diseases, and she lived a happy and prosperous life until the end of her days.

And the moral is:

Even if any passing moron can solve your problem, spiteful advice will not.

I don't know why Dr. Bell's essay and the ensuing responses reminded me of that. Perhaps it's because they elucidated the problem so clearly?

Dook · 2005-11-29 17:23:21

I liked the article because...he's right.

After all-One way suicide missions to mars?

What solutions have we come up with?

Most who spend time here have a more than average interest in space exploration but a very average mathematics and science knowledge level.

We are all passion, little substance.

Oh, if you disagree with me just listen to the Mars Songs and they will quickly change your mind.

clark · 2005-11-30 06:36:07

Dook,

Yeah, Bell is right on a certain level- a very shallow level.

Citing message boards as evidence of the sorry state of the intellectual and educational level of pro-space enthusiasts is misguided.

Message boards are merely a communication medium for people to, well, communicate. A message board will not get us any closer to the stars. What it does allow though is like minded individuals, or even those with a passing fancy to inquire, interact, and perhaps learn or think about something they didn't neccessarily consider in the first place.

One-way suicide missions to mars are fanciful. So is the ISS, Apollo, and discussions about a Space elevator. Yet to suggest that fanciful disucssions have no merit is a sign of intellectual stupor. People of all walks talk about space in a manner that makes it meaningful to themselves. That's the point, and that is ultimetly what the pro-space community needs. Finding ways to make space exploration relevant to more people- not predeterming how it should and should not be relevant (as Bell implies).

Understand that Bell comes from a group that has no real interest for humans in space. To this group, exploration is a telescope, or a robot. Human exploration limits their resources to do the things they feel are worthwhile.

You ask Bell (and people in his group) if we should send one human to mars, or 100 robots- what do you think the answer will be? Most here would clamor for the human.

To get a better grasp of what he is saying, how he is saying it, and the manner in which he says it, understanding the context of his motivations helps.

If he actually had something worthwhile to say, he might get tenure. But, as evidenced, I don't see that happening. But it is fun to think of him stewing late at night, waiting for his turn on the telescope, all the while blaming the pro-human-in-space groups as one of the causes of the lack of available time on telescopes.

BWhite · 2005-11-30 09:17:43

There is nothing suicidal about sending a handful of people to Mars, one way to stay, with a huge box of MREs, a greenhouse, prospects for re-supply, some rovers and a huge audience on Earth eager to see and hear what they might learn.

Risky? Yup. Potential for severe deprivation? Yup. Suicide? Nope.

= = =

Delete the Earth-return requirement and MarsDirect becomes simple-easy.

Cobra Commander · 2005-11-30 09:52:58

There is nothing suicidal about sending a handful of people to Mars, one way to stay, with a huge box of MREs, a greenhouse, prospects for re-supply, some rovers and a huge audience on Earth eager to see and hear what they might learn.
Risky? Yup. Potential for severe deprivation? Yup. Suicide? Nope.
= = =
Delete the Earth-return requirement and MarsDirect becomes simple-easy.

This is one of those cases where I can can completely agree with you, Bill.

John Creighton · 2005-11-30 10:05:46

There is nothing suicidal about sending a handful of people to Mars, one way to stay, with a huge box of MREs, a greenhouse, prospects for re-supply, some rovers and a huge audience on Earth eager to see and hear what they might learn.
Risky? Yup. Potential for severe deprivation? Yup. Suicide? Nope.
= = =
Delete the Earth-return requirement and MarsDirect becomes simple-easy.

If I recall the point of the thread is if coroners were cut as much as possible how cheep could a mars mission be? Such approach could be suicidal and thus the thread title was appropriate. It was more of a though experiment to establish a minimum cost. I hope it was just for entertainment and an intellectual exercise because in my opinion Zubrins mars direct cut enough corners.

Cobra Commander · 2005-11-30 10:24:14

If I recall the point of the thread is if coroners were cut as much as possible how cheep could a mars mission be?

Cutting coroners on a suicide mission. Great stuff.

Palomar · 2005-11-30 10:31:36

*Oooooo...that's quite the Freudian slip there, John. Lol...

--Cindy

C M Edwards · 2005-11-30 11:43:57

I liked the article because...he's right.

If a thousand clones of Jeff Bell typed on a thousand terminals, they might - over time - generate a coherent critique between them.

Dr. Bell may have a point, and it grates on me to think that this point has been made about us (citing me to make it). But we must realize: Dr. Bell has no interest in doing anything about that. In fact, what little I know about him suggests that it would tickle him pink to make it worse.

I noticed there were no real solutions proposed in his essay. So, perhaps we should propose some?

For example, I noticed the educational outreach section of the New Mars Forum was a little rusty. Perhaps we could start using that resource for our own members? I've also been neglecting the New Mars Wiki.

John Creighton · 2005-12-03 01:03:15

I was thinking about Dr. Bells article just a second ago and recalled that one of his complaints about the case for mars is it didn’t work out the thermodynamics of the greenhouses. Then I got thinking about how ironic this statement was given the number of times the greenhouse thermodynamics were discussed on these boards. The Caltech team I think did some work on this and I think they are worried more about the greenhouses getting too hot then too cold.

However, if they didn’t I already started some preliminary work on it in the new mars wiki well before Dr. Bell brought it up.

http://www.newmars.com/wiki/index.php/T … greenhouse

I realize right now it is just a few notes and not really any proper analysis but we all contribute to the wiki as volunteers. We are not getting paid for this and we have limits on our time. I am also not an aero space engineer. I don’t really think Dr. Bell appreciates the extensive amount of man hours it would take to do, extensive engineering work on every aspect of a Martian civilization. The work it would take to make Dr. Bell happy is unreasonable to ask from any single volunteer.

Even more importantly is the fact that, had Dr. Zubrin went into the extensive engineering details in the case for mars that would of made Dr. Bell happy his book would not of sold any where close to as many copies. The purpose of the book the case to mars was to communicate to a large audience the case for mars. It was not made to be a substitute for a doctorate in aerospace engineering.

Josh Cryer · 2005-12-03 11:21:46

Damn, I just noticed this thread. Jeff Bell read my thread? Hahaha. Beautiful.

The thing he fails to even address about that thread is that it doesn't require politics to be achieved, it only requires money. Any multibillionare can go to Mars with a $2 billion budget, using the plans outlined in that thread. It's actually a pretty shallow piece overall, and I would think clark is right on this one.

(edit: except where clark is wrong about suicide missions being fanciful)

John Creighton · 2005-12-03 13:05:46

Damn, I just noticed this thread. Jeff Bell read my thread? Hahaha. Beautiful.
The thing he fails to even address about that thread is that it doesn't require politics to be achieved, it only requires money. Any multibillionare can go to Mars with a $2 billion budget, using the plans outlined in that thread. It's actually a pretty shallow piece overall, and I would think clark is right on this one.
(edit: except where clark is wrong about suicide missions being fanciful)

Well, I suppose there are cheaper ways to end ones life but hey, look what the Egyptian Farrow’s spent on their tomes.

Earthfirst · 2005-12-07 19:27:21

This Dr. Bell guy thinks the folks at newmars be crazy? Well it may be true for some of us that post here. If having a dream of living on mars makes me crazy then lock me up in the state crazy house. Dr. Bell says people post ideas with out backing up there ideas with math. Well I am not an math person and I cant really do those math problems. I know more about plants then he does so that make his ideas that is does not back up with complex botanical science stupid too.
Also one way trips to Mars, I can think of many people who would do it but I am not one of them. I am not for one way trips to mars.
Some real kooks are on late night radio, coast to coast. The quest on there of really far out ideas compare to here. As for math here I read many a post with math I had idea meant but it supported their ideas.
Where did this guy get his PHD, Florida ST? As for the L5 society all there members are professors of science publishing their papers for their work at their schools. Here at newmars most people are just post there ideas for fun and do not need to be held to the same standerds as professinal publish papper like for Nature mag.
As for Dr. Bell him self he should be happy that there are people at all that talking or even care about mars or space. Most people I met don't care and have no idea at all about these topics. He should instead of spreading playerhate, post his own well written math ideas to show us the way. Playerhate act will not get more people to learn about space, just scare way folk. Veiw us like kids at grade school, dont expect us to know how to be PHD type of work. Just be happy that we want to learn about the subject and give us helpful hints along the way.
FYI Trolls are the lowest forms of internet life.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-11-28 10:25:52

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#2 2005-11-28 11:10:39

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#3 2005-11-28 12:52:11

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#4 2005-11-28 17:26:20

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#5 2005-11-28 20:26:31

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#6 2005-11-28 20:50:41

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#7 2005-11-29 06:29:51

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#8 2005-11-29 06:31:06

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#9 2005-11-29 06:55:16

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#10 2005-11-29 07:15:39

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#11 2005-11-29 07:33:31

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#12 2005-11-29 15:54:30

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#13 2005-11-29 16:09:47

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#14 2005-11-29 17:23:21

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#15 2005-11-30 06:36:07

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#16 2005-11-30 09:17:43

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#17 2005-11-30 09:52:58

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#18 2005-11-30 10:05:46

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#19 2005-11-30 10:24:14

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#20 2005-11-30 10:31:36

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#21 2005-11-30 11:43:57

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#22 2005-12-03 01:03:15

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#23 2005-12-03 11:21:46

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#24 2005-12-03 13:05:46

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

#25 2005-12-07 19:27:21

Re: Greetings, Dr. Bell

Board footer