NASA Announcement/Discovery

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Well what minerals does it hold? It could be possibly a gold mine. But to me the biggest benefit of Mars is all the tech advances getting there and staying there will require. Getting to, and staying on Mars, prepares humanity for the next step and beyond.

And think of the reality TV shows. This would be a ratings bonanza!

 

[Siro]

In the long term the survivability of the human species is dependent upon establishing non-earth colonies, eventually even outside of our solar system. The overriding motivator for me, though, is the challenge and how I believe the majority of the world would coalesce behind such an epic endeavor.

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment. Mars, however, will play ZERO role in humanity's long-term survival. The effort required to make it livable is unthinkable, even with futuristic technologies like molecular replicators (which won't be available for at least a century). And even then, it is a **** life. Mars has one problem that cannot be fixed; low gravity. Humans cannot survive long term in that environment, let alone have and raise children. I've read some attempts to remedy that in serious sci-fi, but it involves re-engineering the human race. Which would mean Mars colonists would no longer be compatible with Earth!

Mars terraforming is a silly fantasy when vastly superior options exist. Namely, spinning orbitals. You send out robots to mine asteroids, bring back the material to Earth orbit, and construct a spinning ring around the planet (and eventually farther out in space). That way, you'll have as much area as you want. You can even build it large enough to fit a trillion humans if needed. It would have the same gravity as earth. It will be built with the same atmosphere. Natural environments can be designed to provide spacious rural areas with all of Earth's ecosystems. And all of that would be easier than actually making Mars barely livable!

A hundred billion dollars spent on automated asteroid mining would be a history-changing endeavor. A Mars colony would be pretty cool and inspirational, or something.

 

[Siro]

Well what minerals does it hold? It could be possibly a gold mine. But to me the biggest benefit of Mars is all the tech advances getting there and staying there will require. Getting to, and staying on Mars, prepares humanity for the next step and beyond.

Every element and compound found on Earth can be found in space in infinite quantities (with the exception of complex organics). For the rest, read above.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment. Mars, however, will play ZERO role in humanity's long-term survival. The effort required to make it livable is unthinkable, even with futuristic technologies like molecular replicators (which won't be available for at least a century). And even then, it is a **** life. Mars has one problem that cannot be fixed; low gravity. Humans cannot survive long term in that environment, let alone have and raise children. I've read some attempts to remedy that in serious sci-fi, but it involves re-engineering the human race. Which would mean Mars colonists would no longer be compatible with Earth!

Mars terraforming is a silly fantasy when vastly superior options exist. Namely, spinning orbitals. You send out robots to mine asteroids, bring back the material to Earth orbit, and construct a spinning ring around the planet (and eventually farther out in space). That way, you'll have as much area as you want. You can even build it large enough to fit a trillion humans if needed. It would have the same gravity as earth. It will be built with the same atmosphere. Natural environments can be designed to provide spacious rural areas with all of Earth's ecosystems. And all of that would be easier than actually making Mars barely livable!

A hundred billion dollars spent on automated asteroid mining would be a history-changing endeavor. A Mars colony would be pretty cool and inspirational, or something.

Hmm. Sounds dope. Sign me up.

 

[Stoked]

Every element and compound found on Earth can be found in space in infinite quantities (with the exception of complex organics). For the rest, read above.

I see exploring space as a series of steps. You have to learn to walk before you can run. Mars seems like a logical step in that direction.

 

[Stoked]

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment. Mars, however, will play ZERO role in humanity's long-term survival. The effort required to make it livable is unthinkable, even with futuristic technologies like molecular replicators (which won't be available for at least a century). And even then, it is a **** life. Mars has one problem that cannot be fixed; low gravity. Humans cannot survive long term in that environment, let alone have and raise children. I've read some attempts to remedy that in serious sci-fi, but it involves re-engineering the human race. Which would mean Mars colonists would no longer be compatible with Earth!

Mars terraforming is a silly fantasy when vastly superior options exist. Namely, spinning orbitals. You send out robots to mine asteroids, bring back the material to Earth orbit, and construct a spinning ring around the planet (and eventually farther out in space). That way, you'll have as much area as you want. You can even build it large enough to fit a trillion humans if needed. It would have the same gravity as earth. It will be built with the same atmosphere. Natural environments can be designed to provide spacious rural areas with all of Earth's ecosystems. And all of that would be easier than actually making Mars barely livable!

A hundred billion dollars spent on automated asteroid mining would be a history-changing endeavor. A Mars colony would be pretty cool and inspirational, or something.

I agree. I guess I just see as that cool, inspirational step getting us closer to that automated asteroid mining, manned missions to Jupiter, pluto and beyond.

 

[Siro]

I agree. I guess I just see as that cool, inspirational step getting us closer to that automated asteroid mining, manned missions to Jupiter, pluto and beyond.

Asteroid mining is much easier than a Mars colony. There are ****loads of asteroids near Earth that can be exploited, even with current technology. There are even companies that are planning pilot projects within the next decade.

https://www.planetaryresources.com/

I'm all for a manned mission to Mars. I think the symbolic value and technical knowledge gained from constructing such a mission would be worth it. But not a Mars colony. That is extremely costly with little short or long-term benefit.

 

[Stoked]

Asteroid mining is much easier than a Mars colony. There are ****loads of asteroids near Earth that can be exploited, even with current technology. There are even companies that are planning pilot projects within the next decade.

https://www.planetaryresources.com/

I'm all for a manned mission to Mars. I think the symbolic value and technical knowledge gained from constructing such a mission would be worth it. But not a Mars colony. That is extremely costly with little short or long-term benefit.

Sorry, by Mars colony I am thinking more along the lines of a mining/research site. Not a full fledged city with hundreds of thousands of people.

Either way the lessons for any type of colony will need to be researched, constructed and tested and Mars is the best place to do that.

Not terraforming.

 

[♪alt13]

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment. Mars, however, will play ZERO role in humanity's long-term survival. The effort required to make it livable is unthinkable, even with futuristic technologies like molecular replicators (which won't be available for at least a century). And even then, it is a **** life. Mars has one problem that cannot be fixed; low gravity. Humans cannot survive long term in that environment, let alone have and raise children. I've read some attempts to remedy that in serious sci-fi, but it involves re-engineering the human race. Which would mean Mars colonists would no longer be compatible with Earth!

Mars terraforming is a silly fantasy when vastly superior options exist. Namely, spinning orbitals. You send out robots to mine asteroids, bring back the material to Earth orbit, and construct a spinning ring around the planet (and eventually farther out in space). That way, you'll have as much area as you want. You can even build it large enough to fit a trillion humans if needed. It would have the same gravity as earth. It will be built with the same atmosphere. Natural environments can be designed to provide spacious rural areas with all of Earth's ecosystems. And all of that would be easier than actually making Mars barely livable!

A hundred billion dollars spent on automated asteroid mining would be a history-changing endeavor. A Mars colony would be pretty cool and inspirational, or something.

Disagree

Asteroid bombardment of Mars wouldn't be more costly than mining asteroids and then returning the resources to earth. Yes there would be more to it than just that but it's arguably the "largest" part of the endeavor. Also no one really knows what the long term effect of 1/3 earth gravity would be or how easily the human body would adapt to it. We have had astronauts on the space station lose significant bone and muscle mass but that's weightlessness. Even if colonists eventually become physically unable to return to earth they likely wouldn't anyway. The distance is so great and the dangers of transit so large that human travel between worlds would be limited. Further I'm kinda surprised for someone that talks about the future melding of man and machine to be so pessimistic about our ability to overcome biological limitations.

I think that the "terraforming" of Mars is a worthwhile project but that it will take generations. The first step will be asteroid mining as it will provide its own financing. Once we have developed and mastered efficient processes to move asteroids around I believe humanity will decide to attempt the terraforming of Mars.

 

[Siro]

Disagree

Asteroid bombardment of Mars wouldn't be more costly than mining asteroids and then returning the resources to earth. Yes there would be more to it than just that but it's arguably the "largest" part of the endeavor. Also no one really knows what the long term effect of 1/3 earth gravity would be or how easily the human body would adapt to it. We have had astronauts on the space station lose significant bone and muscle mass but that's weightlessness. Even if colonists eventually become physically unable to return to earth they likely wouldn't anyway. The distance is so great and the dangers of transit so large that human travel between worlds would be limited. Further I'm kinda surprised for someone that talks about the future melding of man and machine to be so pessimistic about our ability to overcome biological limitations.

I think that the "terraforming" of Mars is a worthwhile project but that it will take generations. The first step will be asteroid mining as it will provide its own financing. Once we have developed and mastered efficient processes to move asteroids around I believe humanity will decide to attempt the terraforming of Mars.

Asteroid mining can be done near Earth and is vastly easier than mining asteroids near Mars, then using them to bombard the planet in sufficient quantities, then wait for the millenia it takes for the environment to settle. And all of this so we can live in non-native environment that may not prove completely disastrous (but will likely be). This is specially hilarious coming from a man who argued that we shouldn't even intake any artificial chemicals that may have unknown health consequences decades down the line. Outrageous. Simply outrageous.

Orbitals are the way to go. They have unlimited potential compared to a limited romantic idea like terraforming Mars. By using self-replicating robots, they can be done completely automatically, without worrying about re-engineering humans to live in a **** environment, unable to ever return to Earth.

And my argument is about which would be worth a large investment, say hundreds of billions of 2015 dollars, in the medium term. I don't care what humanity does a thousand years from now, when both tasks are equally trivial. I think space habitation is what we should focus on accomplishing by the end of the century. On this time-scale, any resources spent on Mars habitation are wasted resources. Given the options.

This is a good website on the subject of space habitats versus planetary colonization:

https://www.nss.org/settlement/space/

 

[♪alt13]

Asteroid mining can be done near Earth and is vastly easier than mining asteroids near Mars, then using them to bombard the planet in sufficient quantities, then wait for the millenia it takes for the environment to settle. And all of this so we can live in non-native environment that may not prove completely disastrous (but will likely be). This is specially hilarious coming from a man who argued that we shouldn't even intake any artificial chemicals that may have unknown health consequences decades down the line. Outrageous. Simply outrageous.

Orbitals are the way to go. They have unlimited potential compared to a limited romantic idea like terraforming Mars. By using self-replicating robots, they can be done completely automatically, without worrying about re-engineering humans to live in a **** environment, unable to ever return to Earth.

And my argument is about which would be worth a large investment, say hundreds of billions of 2015 dollars, in the medium term. I don't care what humanity does a thousand years from now, when both tasks are equally trivial. I think space habitation is what we should focus on accomplishing by the end of the century. On this time-scale, any resources spent on Mars habitation are wasted resources. Given the options.

This is a good website on the subject of space habitats versus planetary colonization:

https://www.nss.org/settlement/space/

First off I hope you're not taking offense when I disagree with you. It seems like you might be lately?

Second, Bold is a gross exageration of what I argued. I only argued prudence was logical from an individual standpoint and that pesticides are generally bad for you.

Back on subject: "Millenia for the environment to settle" is a mischaracterization of the process. If we do this we aren't just going to throw asteroids at the planet willy nilly. We will carefully select appropriate asteroids and put them on a trajectory to burn up in the atmosphere. We will warm it just enough and continually improve the environment overtime. Think shooting stars not KT extinction event. We won't live in a non-native environ, the settlers that make that decision will.

We won't have to re-engineer people! Mars colonists will not be returning to earth so any loss of bone density and muscle mass is just adaptation to the environment. Russian cosmonaut ,Gennady Padalka, who is the current commander of the International Space Station, has now been in orbit for more than 804 days across five missions. <That's weightlessness not 38% Earth gravity, like Mars has, and he has to come back to earth gravity. We can go to mars and back and be ok. We could go to mars to stay and be ok without re-engineering people. Low gravity adapted people(takes a long time to change so much to make return to earth impossible) may not be able to return to earth without assistance/innovative new "repairs", but that's ok. Again, we won't have to re-engineer people but even if we did we likely would have advanced far enough to re-engineer them back. The problem with adapting to low gravity environment is only the return to earth. Something that is not necessary for Martians to do.

The only advantage to the Orbital station you linked is proximity to earth. Mars beats them out in every other way namely the all important resources. Mars has everything a society needs in scales of magnitudes greater than an orbital colony could ever achieve. It would be easier to send your "self-replicating robots" to Mars and let them build a colony on martian soil.

I'll end on a few points I think we may agree on.

1)We need to develop a mission with international partners including Russia that is not subject to nuclear treaties. We could with today's technology send a probe to Proxima Centauri(the nearest star to us, besides Sol smart ***) that would reach the system within the century. That's a time span that I have some hope of living to see and my children would have a high probability of seeing.

2)Human re-engineering is a good thing. We aren't focusing on it enough, imo. It is the most exciting and trans-formative advancement that humans have ever and may ever accomplish. It also changes the calculus dramatically. You may not care what the human race will be doing next millennia but if you believed you and your children may still be around in a millennia you would.

 

[Gameface]

Just want to chime in a little.

I think Mars is extremely important in the development of humanity as a space going species. Short term the benefits might be small. But one major advantage I see to having a permanent human presence on Mars is that Mars is its own planet. Harvesting asteroids is an endeavor tied to Earth. The asteroid miners will not develop an individual identity separate from the people of Earth. I think, over time, Martian society can do for humanity what European settlement in the Americas did. It's a new world. One not tied to the old ideas and old modes of thinking. We (Earthlings) will eventually learn a lot about ourselves by seeing what Martians make of their opportunity in a completely new world.

Just like Stoked said, you have to crawl before you can walk and you have to walk before you can run. Mars is a stepping stone to a new age of space exploration. You can dismiss it as a romantic notion or you can try to understand the pull that romantic notions have on people.

The biggest difference between having people on Mars and mining asteroids is that Mars can ultimately become humanities second home. Asteroid mines cannot.

I also think that you have somewhat overestimated the difficulties, which I find odd. I know you are an admirer of humanity but yet you seem to think we won't find solutions to the problems you've outlined?

 

[b_line]

Those earth orbiting things are pretty cool. Those are the stations they live in at the end of interstellar, right? I see a few problems with those things, like water and oxygen levels, as well as protection from debris. They are incredibly fascinating. The website siro linked said they estimate they could support ten trillion people! That's insane! Basically that would be limitless. It would change the entire view of life.

 

[fishonjazz]

In the press conference they are talking in detail about a manned mission to mars in the "near future." They've been talking about growing crops, using plants to create breathable air, collecting drinkable water, etc.

Has man not been to Mars yet?

I thought they had

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Has man not been to Mars yet?

I thought they had

You've been taking some pretty trippy meds, haven't you. You need to be careful with the dosage.

 

[fishonjazz]

You've been taking some pretty trippy meds, haven't you. You need to be careful with the dosage.

So man has not been to Mars?
Well why the **** not?!!!

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

So man has not been to Mars?
Well why the **** not?!!!

There's a rumor out there that it would be a pretty costly and technologically challenging adventure, but that's probably just the Illuminati messing with our minds.

 

[fishonjazz]

There's a rumor out there that it would be a pretty costly and technologically challenging adventure, but that's probably just the Illuminati messing with our minds.

And water on mars makes it cheap?

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

And water on mars makes it cheap?

Oh boy.

 

[Stoked]

And water on mars makes it cheap?

There have not been any manned missions to Mars for numerous reasons. One of which is travel time. It is supposed to take our fastest ships 6-9 months to reach Mars and once they are done another 6-9 months to return home. They have been studying the psychological effects of that in people. Not to mention being able to land safely and then take back off on a world with 0 support. It is a HUGE technological hurdle.

I think we are fully capable. What I am hoping for is a joint Russian/Chinese announcement that they are sending a joint manned mission to Mars. That will kick our butts (Americans) into gear.