What's new
By:

NASA Announcement/Discovery

Stoked said:
The materials harvested are transferable. So is the tech, it won't just be colony tech...

At this point a planetary colony and asteroid mining are both in the realm of achievable fantasy. We can get there but are not there.

As for NASA seeing Mars as a populist issue that gets them attention. Of course it is. It makes them relevant in the eyes of the public and brings in money and tech. That still makes Mars a focus.

A manned mission is not planned mid century. It is planed in the 2030s.

Is there even a time frame for asteroid mining? I did not see one after a brief google search.
Click to expand...

Now you're being hard-headed for no reason. Materials harvested on Mars already exist in larger quantities much closer to Earth (hell, they exist in much larger quantities ON Earth). No new tech will come from a tiny *** colony on a different planet.

2030s is in the "mid-century" range, specially that delays are a guarantee in large scale space projects.

There is a time frame for asteroid mining. Currently, companies are deploying small orbital telescopes to map near earth asteroids and plan which ones would be easiest to mine first. The hope is that by mid-20s robots can be sent to mine them, and bring back the materials closer to Earth. The time-frame for establishing orbital mining stations is about the same as a manned mission to Mars, and a lot sooner than any prospects of trying to establish a Martian outpost. By the time the latter is feasible, we'll be able to construct sizable space habitats.
 
Good, interesting conversation guys.
I have nothing to add.
Good read though
 
Siro said:
Now you're being hard-headed for no reason. Materials harvested on Mars already exist in larger quantities much closer to Earth (hell, they exist in much larger quantities ON Earth). No new tech will come from a tiny *** colony on a different planet.

2030s is in the "mid-century" range, specially that delays are a guarantee in large scale space projects.

There is a time frame for asteroid mining. Currently, companies are deploying small orbital telescopes to map near earth asteroids and plan which ones would be easiest to mine first. The hope is that by mid-20s robots can be sent to mine them, and bring back the materials closer to Earth. The time-frame for establishing orbital mining stations is about the same as a manned mission to Mars, and a lot sooner than any prospects of trying to establish a Martian outpost. By the time the latter is feasible, we'll be able to construct sizable space habitats.
Click to expand...

lol, I am the only one open to both. You have been the one railing against one option. So who is being hard headed? You have already admitted your emotional state in this thread.

Most of the tech for a "colony" already exists. The problem is getting there and the tech needed for that.

Either way we grow, learn and expand and I will be happy.
 
Okay, I really need to get back to work. It's been a fun discussion. :)
 
Keep in mind I am not arguing against asteroid mining, I think it will be hugely beneficial.

I am arguing for a Mars colony as well.
 
Stoked said:
Honestly I see no reason why both cannot happen at relatively the same time. Much of the tech is transferable between the two.

Go Mars to get the population into space exploration and use asteroid mining to get corporations into space exploration.

But your terms "useless", "dead end"... about a Mars colony seem extremely short sighted and surprise me to be honest.
Click to expand...

It's dead end in that it is basically colonizing a planet that has 1/5th or less the potential of earth to support life. Say we do eventually get a colony going on Mars, and it can support a few hundred million people. That is just a fraction of the solution. If life on earth keeps changing at the rate it has been, the mars colony is probably an inevitability, but the space colonies are quite possibly the one thing that will take humans to the next level evolution wise.

Imagine terraforming mars, and in 1000 years you finally get to live there without some special device to deliver enough oxygen, and you live there with probably max 1 billion other people who have to figure out a way around the problem of their bone mass disappearing. Now imagine living on that planet and looking up at a space colony orbiting mars that contains 10 billion people living an easy life.
 
b_line said:
It's dead end in that it is basically colonizing a planet that has 1/5th or less the potential of earth to support life. Say we do eventually get a colony going on Mars, and it can support a few hundred million people. That is just a fraction of the solution. If life on earth keeps changing at the rate it has been, the mars colony is probably an inevitability, but the space colonies are quite possibly the one thing that will take humans to the next level evolution wise.

Imagine terraforming mars, and in 1000 years you finally get to live there without some special device to deliver enough oxygen, and you live there with probably max 1 billion other people who have to figure out a way around the problem of their bone mass disappearing. Now imagine living on that planet and looking up at a space colony orbiting mars that contains 10 billion people living an easy life.
Click to expand...

It is not a dead end in the sense that we learn massive amounts from that colony that can be applied later to other planets, space flight, robotics, how differing levels of gravity affects humans... For that aspect Mars and the moon are the only viable options. I am not arguing against space stations, they will be fantastic. A massive amount of benefit comes from them. But so does a planetary colony.

Humanities future is not in only one or the other.

But one thing Mars has right now that other options do not is the ability to inspire humanity in general. Getting the American, and other nationalities, behind a renewed push into space is critical right now.
 
Answer for both stoked and siro: colonize Venus. It has 91% earth gravity and is close enough to the earth to travel to. Just have to stop that pesky runaway greenhouse effect.
 
I've yet to run across a techy discussion where Siro doesn't impress me with his knowledge. I thought I was curious and full of sometimes useless knowledge, but he runs circles around me. Anyway, I really enjoyed reading the discussion and, like b-line, I'm now a believer that asteroid mining is the way to go. The reasons I don't think we should simultaneously go both directions as Stoked is suggesting is cost. Since we probably can't financially afford to do both at once (and even if we do it will slow don the progress of both of them), why not do the one that has the most real world application, solves overpopulation concerns, and virtually assures the survival of our species?
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I've yet to run across a techy discussion where Siro doesn't impress me with his knowledge. I thought I was curious and full of sometimes useless knowledge, but he runs circles around me. Anyway, I really enjoyed reading the discussion and, like b-line, I'm now a believer that asteroid mining is the way to go. The reasons I don't think we should simultaneously go both directions as Stoked is suggesting is cost. Since we probably can't financially afford to do both at once (and even if we do it will slow don the progress of both of them), why not do the one that has the most real world application, solves overpopulation concerns, and virtually assures the survival of our species?
Click to expand...

I think it's possible is asteroid mining is as easy and as profitable as Siro is making it out to be that it will be something tackled by private enterprise, so it may not end up being a matter of divided focus and funding. It could still be possible for government run space agencies to send people to Mars.

Siro, would it change your mind if there was a better than not chance of finding evidence of life on Mars and human explorers greatly improved the chances of finding the best evidence? I think finding evidence of extraterrestrial life would be absolutely massive as far as getting the gears turning in the direction of space exploration in many forms.
 
Gameface said:
I think it's possible is asteroid mining is as easy and as profitable as Siro is making it out to be that it will be something tackled by private enterprise, so it may not end up being a matter of divided focus and funding. It could still be possible for government run space agencies to send people to Mars.

Siro, would it change your mind if there was a better than not chance of finding evidence of life on Mars and human explorers greatly improved the chances of finding the best evidence? I think finding evidence of extraterrestrial life would be absolutely massive as far as getting the gears turning in the direction of space exploration in many forms.
Click to expand...

I don't see why humans would be required to find evidence of life. All the instruments can be controlled remotely. However, in such a hypothetical scenario, a research outpost becomes a priority. But if life currently exists on Mars, then Terraforming gains a moral aspect, as such a process would destroy a unique branch of life. My preference would be enhancing the biosphere potential for that separate branch on Mars, while we continue building Earth analogues in space.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...he-distance-record-for-quantum-teleportation/

https://www.npr.org/sections/alltec...rting-is-real-even-if-trekkie-transport-isn't

Teleportation. The development of this tech could be monumental in man's exploration of the galaxy.

Let us say that man creates a Mars colony/space station and we start teleporting people and materiels there. Speed of light correct?

Then from that point they leave to go to Jupiter's moons. Set up another space station/colony. Teleport there. Then Pluto...then outside our solar system.

What do you think of teleportation in this light Siro? Yes it is probably decades away if not longer but the development has started.

Edit: Even at the speed o flight it is not instantaneous over this vast distances. How would that affect a person's psychological state? Would they have to be sedated?

Reminds me of a short story I read about the future and teleportation. This society develops teleportation between planets but as it was developed they discovered that all life, even down to rats, birds...had to be sedated first or they went completely insane and dies shortly after arrival. So in this story there is mandatory, enforced sedation before teleportation.

Well this family is going on a vacation and getting teleported. The son (like 10 or so) has never been teleported and is scared. Well he doesn't want to be sedated so he fakes taking his meds and pretends to sleep. All his family goes thru and is woken up on arrival. Then his turn comes and when he arrives he is insane and dies after a minute or two. but as he is dying he keeps screaming about eternity. Apparently to the mind the teleportation is literally eternity. The brains feels as if it has had 0 stimulus for eons and then bam. It is all back and the brain basically crashes and the person dies. Family watches has their son dies in front of them and realizes he has experienced eons of isolation and the eventual torture of that.
 
Last edited:
Stoked said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...he-distance-record-for-quantum-teleportation/

https://www.npr.org/sections/alltec...rting-is-real-even-if-trekkie-transport-isn't

Teleportation. The development of this tech could be monumental in man's exploration of the galaxy.

Let us say that man creates a Mars colony/space station and we start teleporting people and materiels there. Speed of light correct?

Then from that point they leave to go to Jupiter's moons. Set up another space station/colony. Teleport there. Then Pluto...then outside our solar system.

What do you think of teleportation in this light Siro? Yes it is probably decades away if not longer but the development has started.

Edit: Even at the speed o flight it is not instantaneous over this vast distances. How would that affect a person's psychological state? Would they have to be sedated?

Reminds me of a short story I read about the future and teleportation. This society develops teleportation between planets but as it was developed they discovered that all life, even down to rats, birds...had to be sedated first or they went completely insane and dies shortly after arrival. So in this story there is mandatory, enforced sedation before teleportation.

Well this family is going on a vacation and getting teleported. The son (like 10 or so) has never been teleported and is scared. Well he doesn't want to be sedated so he fakes taking his meds and pretends to sleep. All his family goes thru and is woken up on arrival. Then his turn comes and when he arrives he is insane and dies after a minute or two. but as he is dying he keeps screaming about eternity. Apparently to the mind the teleportation is literally eternity. The brains feels as if it has had 0 stimulus for eons and then bam. It is all back and the brain basically crashes and the person dies. Family watches has their son dies in front of them and realizes he has experienced eons of isolation and the eventual torture of that.
Click to expand...

That kind of entanglement based teleportation is probably not possible for transference of physical goods. Let me dig in my post history to find where I explained the phenomenon since I don't have as much time to explain now.

So each entity in the universe exists as a wave described by a wavefunction. These wavefunctions contain all the properties of the entity. So a proton, for example, has a wavefunction that can be used to calculate its energy and charge and so on. But a proton is made up of other particles called quarks. Quarks also have wavefunctions. In a particle accelerator, like the LHC, protons are smashed together so hard that they disassociate into other particles, including quarks. Those particles that come out of the protons are all entangled with one another. Why? Because they came from the same source wavefunction. The proton had a charge of +1. All the particles that come out of it must have a charge that add up to +1. It had a certain spin, energy, momenta, and they are all subject to conservation laws. So when physicists gather all the signals they received from smashing a particle, they add them up. If they add up to less than the original particles, then a discovery is possible!

The opposite is also true. Just like one particle can break apart into a bunch of entangled particles, a bunch of particles can be combined into a single system. In other words, you start with two particles, and you put them in a situation where their once separate wavefunction merge into one. The original wavefunctions can no longer be separated from the combined one. It is now a single system that contains the combined properties of the constituents (similar to the way quarks and gluons make up a proton).

Taking the simple example of spin, you start out with one electron with an up spin and another with a down spin. Once the two electrons entangle, they will form a new entity with zero spin (up + down = zero). Now you perform a spin measurement on the first "particle" (on the entangled system), and since nature won't allow you to see a particle than is spinning up and down at the same time, it will either give you up or down. But now the wavefunction that contained both spins is depleted! If you measured one spin as an up, then all that remains in the function is the down spin. The second particle is forced to take the remaining spin. So knowing the property of the first will ensure you know the property of the second.

This works for all properties, not just spin. For example a photon with no charge can transform into an entangled positron-electron pair with zero net-charge, even though both components are charged.
Click to expand...

So the "teleportation" of properties across two particles happens instantaneously, and not at the speed of light. However, information is bound by the speed of light. You can't just entangle the particles of a human being and teleport them to a different place. What you'll get is a particle soup with similar properties, which doesn't really help. For teleportation to work, one side has to know the exact attributes of the particles in a person, and their relation to one another, transmit the information to the receiver, and then have the receiver construct a new human. I guess it is similar to the method used in Star Trek.

But the computing power and general level of technology required to do this is unfathomable. It won't happen in the next few decades, and I doubt it happens in the next few centuries. By the time humanity is able to teleport matter across such distances on such scales, off-Earth expansion will have become trivial eons before.
 
Siro said:
That kind of entanglement based teleportation is probably not possible for transference of physical goods. Let me dig in my post history to find where I explained the phenomenon since I don't have as much time to explain now.



So the "teleportation" of properties across two particles happens instantaneously, and not at the speed of light. However, information is bound by the speed of light. You can't just entangle the particles of a human being and teleport them to a different place. What you'll get is a particle soup with similar properties, which doesn't really help. One side has to know the exact attributes of the particles in a person, and their relation to one another, transmit the information to the receiver, and then have the receiver construct a new human. I guess it is similar to the method used in Star Trek.

But the computing power and general level of technology required to do this is unfathomable. It won't happen in the next few decades, and I doubt it happens in the next few centuries. By the time humanity is able to teleport matter across such distance on such scales, off-Earth expansion will have become trivial eons before.
Click to expand...

Hmm, interesting. So any materials would probably need to be shipped to such stations instead of teleported. Communication would be feasible but not transportation of goods and personnel.
I knew you'd know more about this.
 
Stoked said:
Hmm, interesting. So any materials would probably need to be shipped to such stations instead of teleported. Communication would be feasible but not transportation of goods and personnel.
I knew you'd know more about this.
Click to expand...

Not faster than light communication. Information has to be transmitted at the speed of light. However, I have read some speculative papers that try to propose ways of "guessing" information in entangled particles using probability machines and predictive algorithms. It is an interesting idea, but I have serious doubts about their feasibility.
 
Siro said:
Not faster than light communication. Information has to be transmitted at the speed of light. However, I have read some speculative papers that try to propose ways of "guessing" information in entangled particles using probability machines and predictive algorithms. It is an interesting idea, but I have serious doubts about their feasibility.
Click to expand...

I was thinking speed of light.

As for the future and what it holds I guess we will just have to see what we make of it.
 
Stoked said:
I was thinking speed of light.

As for the future and what it holds I guess we will just have to see what we make of it.
Click to expand...

Well, we're communicating at the speed of light right now. So I accept the reality of that. :p
 
Gameface said:
I think it's possible is asteroid mining is as easy and as profitable as Siro is making it out to be that it will be something tackled by private enterprise, so it may not end up being a matter of divided focus and funding. It could still be possible for government run space agencies to send people to Mars.

Siro, would it change your mind if there was a better than not chance of finding evidence of life on Mars and human explorers greatly improved the chances of finding the best evidence? I think finding evidence of extraterrestrial life would be absolutely massive as far as getting the gears turning in the direction of space exploration in many forms.
Click to expand...
Until I see a private company take on either of these projects I'm going to assume it's going to require government involvement to make it happen. It would not surprise me if private enterprise partners with the government, and even eventually takes over the project, but it makes no logical sense to me to pursue a second project that has the probems Siro has outlined. I have not done research outside of this thread on either of the projects, though, so I'm relying on Siro's information to form my opinion at this point. If it turns out that the what he is saying is substantially wrong my opinion may change.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Until I see a private company take on either of these projects I'm going to assume it's going to require government involvement to make it happen. It would not surprise me if private enterprise partners with the government, and even eventually takes over the project, but it makes no logical sense to me to pursue a second project that has the probems Siro has outlined. I have not done research outside of this thread on either of the projects, though, so I'm relying on Siro's information to form my opinion at this point. If it turns out that the what he is saying is substantially wrong my opinion may change.
Click to expand...

Private companies are now moving into space flight and space tech. In time who knows what will happen. Either way I think America needs a push.

Come one Russia and China! Reignite the space race. Americans love to compete, it's in our blood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top