Leaving America for Freedom, Earth for Mars


Recommended Posts

Patriotism in my lexicon is a devotion to country which is embodied in citizenship of that country. Not by abandoning that country to live in permanent exile when its current government thwarts and outrages me. But I am not an American and perhaps should not comment on this subject.

And thank you for the lesson on virtues. I see that they come in descending order, depending on context.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The biggest problem with Antarctica is the Antarctic Treaty, which bars pretty much every activity needed to build and sustain human communities. Antarctica is governed by a government consortium and private settlements to exploit local resources are prohibited. Otherwise it would hold interest.

Living on Mars or even the Moon would not pose the problems of living on the bottom of the ocean.

Seasteading is a very interesting concept. See http://www.seasteading.org/ Patri Freidman, Milton’s grandson, heads up the operation. But it still has a way to go in terms of funding.

The Mars Society just concluded its 16th annual conference. At least three talks were on radiation issues among others and there is a rich archive of materials going back a decade and a half on every aspect of Martian exploration and settlement. (You can view talks that were live streamed on the website http://www.marssociety.org/ .

I was expecting Baal to be the last speaker, to refute all of the accumulated reasoning, thought, and wisdom concerning the challenges of settling Mars. But I’m sad to see that his intellectual contribution to the debate was “Mars is a shit hole.” Sigh!

I have already explained why mars is a shithole in this and other threads.

1. It has no magnetic field. So terraforming will not produce an atmosphere that will last.

2. we do not possess anywhere near the technology to terraform mars anyway

3. The journey is too long with current propulsion technology

4. The distance is too great for comprehensible two way communication. At best mars is 20 light minutes away from earth and at worst several light weeks distance.

5. There is no economic benefit to be gotten from settling mars.

6. When we are technologically ready to mine the asteroids mars might be a good intermediate gathering and shipping location

The moon has many more benefits at a fraction of the cost.

What we need first and foremost is brand new propulsion technology. Burn and coast is totally unsuitable for long manned missions. Until we get steady burn technology we will not even be able to colonize the solar system and establish habitats around Mars or on any of the Saturnian or Jovian moons. Short of new propulsion technology all huffing and puffing about long range manned mission is just blowing hot air.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem with Antarctica is the Antarctic Treaty, which bars pretty much every activity needed to build and sustain human communities. Antarctica is governed by a government consortium and private settlements to exploit local resources are prohibited. Otherwise it would hold interest.

Living on Mars or even the Moon would not pose the problems of living on the bottom of the ocean.

Seasteading is a very interesting concept. See http://www.seasteading.org/ Patri Freidman, Milton’s grandson, heads up the operation. But it still has a way to go in terms of funding.

The Mars Society just concluded its 16th annual conference. At least three talks were on radiation issues among others and there is a rich archive of materials going back a decade and a half on every aspect of Martian exploration and settlement. (You can view talks that were live streamed on the website http://www.marssociety.org/ .

I was expecting Baal to be the last speaker, to refute all of the accumulated reasoning, thought, and wisdom concerning the challenges of settling Mars. But I’m sad to see that his intellectual contribution to the debate was “Mars is a shit hole.” Sigh!

The flight to Mars would take six to eight months. Unless you've got some tech from Avatar to put the passengers of the ship on ice, they're going to get psychologically messed up during the trip. Add on to that that they will need to wait about another year-and-a-half until they can fly home, then their minds will suffer more. No one (or almost no one) can handle being separated from civilization for so long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The flight to Mars would take six to eight months. Unless you've got some tech from Avatar to put the passengers of the ship on ice, they're going to get psychologically messed up during the trip. Add on to that that they will need to wait about another year-and-a-half until they can fly home, then their minds will suffer more. No one (or almost no one) can handle being separated from civilization for so long.

The exposure to cosmic rays during the voyage will also do a number on them. Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

The flight to Mars would take six to eight months. Unless you've got some tech from Avatar to put the passengers of the ship on ice, they're going to get psychologically messed up during the trip. Add on to that that they will need to wait about another year-and-a-half until they can fly home, then their minds will suffer more. No one (or almost no one) can handle being separated from civilization for so long.

The exposure to cosmic rays during the voyage will also do a number on them. Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Heh. That'd be entertaining. But wouldn't cosmic rays not be able to penetrate metal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

You'd need a damn big wheel for that to work. My guess is that we aren't going to have the capacity to send out anything more than a compact shuttle to Mars in the near future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

You'd need a damn big wheel for that to work. My guess is that we aren't going to have the capacity to send out anything more than a compact shuttle to Mars in the near future.

Why would you need a wheel?

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

You'd need a damn big wheel for that to work. My guess is that we aren't going to have the capacity to send out anything more than a compact shuttle to Mars in the near future.

Why would you need a wheel?

J

Gravitation can be simulated by turning the wheel to generate centrifugal forces. Down = outward on the circumference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

You'd need a damn big wheel for that to work. My guess is that we aren't going to have the capacity to send out anything more than a compact shuttle to Mars in the near future.

Why would you need a wheel?

J

Gravitation can be simulated by turning the wheel to generate centrifugal forces. Down = outward on the circumference.

Um, yeah, I get the idea that centrifugal forces simulate gravity, which is why I brought up the idea of centrifugal forces being used to simulate gravity as a simple solution to the problem that you identified (bones turning to chalk in zero g).

The point of my asking why one would need a wheel was to suggest that structures other than wheels can achieve the same effect.

The thrill ride called the "skyscraper" would be an example:

sky3big.jpg

See what I'm saying?

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there is the matter of zero g. The bones of the voyagers will turn to chalk even with exercise machines aboard.

Ba'al Chatzaf

So you're theory is that the voyagers would let their bones turn to chalk in zero g rather than make use of the very simple and obvious solution of using centrifugal force as a substitute for gravity?

J

You'd need a damn big wheel for that to work. My guess is that we aren't going to have the capacity to send out anything more than a compact shuttle to Mars in the near future.

Why would you need a wheel?

J

Gravitation can be simulated by turning the wheel to generate centrifugal forces. Down = outward on the circumference.

Um, yeah, I get the idea that centrifugal forces simulate gravity, which is why I brought up the idea of centrifugal forces being used to simulate gravity as a simple solution to the problem that you identified (bones turning to chalk in zero g).

The point of my asking why one would need a wheel was to suggest that structures other than wheels can achieve the same effect.

The thrill ride called the "skyscraper" would be an example:

sky3big.jpg

See what I'm saying?

J

I do indeed. Now tell us how to build such a ship with current energy and propulsion technology

ba'al chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two habitats, initially together, separate them in space by a cable, set them spinning about a common axis.

~snip~

How would crew members get from one to the other?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two habitats, initially together, separate them in space by a cable, set them spinning about a common axis.

~snip~

How would crew members get from one to the other?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Why would they need to? At the end of the trip reel them back together hook them up and make a landing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assume for the moment that some kind of centrifugal force arrangement can be rigged to simulate a sufficient g-force to preserve the bones. The real problem is with cosmic radiation and solar radiation. Once clear of the earth's magnetic field the vessel with be showered by charged particles from the sun and cosmic radiation (high energy particles from god knows where in the galaxy). This will do considerable damage to D.N.A. and almost certainly produce cancer from the extended exposure to the radiation both in transit and on Mars itself.

If the travelers can get under ground quickly are carry ray proof habitat building material they will be safe enough on the planet, but in transit they are exposed. The trip to and from Mars will take the better part of a year when Mars is in conjunction with Earth so the travelers will almost certainly suffer from some from of cancer from the exposure.

We do not have the propulsion technology (yet, anyway) to build vessels that can protect the travelers from solar and cosmic radiation.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two habitats, initially together, separate them in space by a cable, set them spinning about a common axis.

~snip~

How would crew members get from one to the other?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Why would they need to? At the end of the trip reel them back together hook them up and make a landing.

Sex. There will be a race on to have the first human baby born on Mars. The sex should start six months from orbit but not more than eight. The men and women should be kept separate until then.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody know the SciFi of recently deceased Scots author, Iain M Banks?

He intricately described giant wheels in space, 100's of kms. in diameter - inhabited by colonies of some millions. Hell of a writer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody know the SciFi of recently deceased Scots author, Iain M Banks?

He intricately described giant wheels in space, 100's of kms. in diameter - inhabited by colonies of some millions. Hell of a writer.

Thanks Tony, I'll try him. I'm a big fan of Larry Niven and "Ringworld". And everything else he's written.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know nothing about Neil Armstrong the man. His character and individual traits are most remarkable.

Einstein was a very great man, I revered him as a youth. But he was not an individualist in the philosophical or political sense.

Emphasis mine. So the philosophical individualistness of person matters when you evaluate them? Okay...
Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick point: There are decades of excellent research by scientists done on the topics concerning traveling to and settlement of Mars. I've offered the Mars Society website as one good gateway. There were at least three discussions on radiation issues at that group's conference about two weeks ago. Scholars will disagree on various issues but they always approach the issues from a rational, evidenced-based perspective. Anyone seriously interested in these issues should check out the materials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not technologically ready to attempt building permanent settlements on Mars. We need significant advances in propulsion technology. This will cut down on transit time and make the issue of solar and cosmic radiation less critical.

The Spaniards knew that there was gold in the new world. The Portugese knew there was a fortune to be made in oversea spice trade. What on Mars will bring gobs of money and profit to people who advocate settling there. In short, what makes Mars an economically worthwhile place to go?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not technologically ready to attempt building permanent settlements on Mars. We need significant advances in propulsion technology. This will cut down on transit time and make the issue of solar and cosmic radiation less critical.

The Spaniards knew that there was gold in the new world. The Portugese knew there was a fortune to be made in oversea spice trade. What on Mars will bring gobs of money and profit to people who advocate settling there. In short, what makes Mars an economically worthwhile place to go?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Since you're the moon-man here answer your own question respecting the moon. I do believe you mentioned astronomy, but that doesn't seem enough.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now