How to get to Mars

[Revoltingest]

I doubt our present technology is up to the task just yet.
But the Wright boys had to start someplace.
From a flimsy powered kite to jet aircraft in just 4 or 5 decades.
A physics book written in the early 1940's proclaimed the sound barrier could
not be broken.
Chuck Yeager blew that out of the sky.

I agree.
More related R&D will pave the way for safer, smarter, more productive, & more cost effective missions.
When will be ready?
UuuUUuuuhhh?
(You can quote me on that!)

 

[Laika]

There are resources much more valuable than gold.


You can't possibly put a price tag on something like that, though. We could actively create planets.


Well, in order for something like that even be possible, we gotta start somewhere. Mars offers a nice trial run.

Many of the opponents of space travel use cost as a front for other objections. Namely the way they prioritise the short-term goals on earth with the long term investment neccessary for returns on space travel.

Whereas I want a death star!

 

[Quetzal]

I agree.
More related R&D will pave the way for safer, smarter, more productive, & more cost effective missions.
When will be ready?
UuuUUuuuhhh?
(You can quote me on that!)

We aren't too far behind, to be fair. We have gotten to Mars before. We just haven't been there ourselves. I am confident in the next 5-10 years we could develop a space craft that could land on Mars and then come back home. The biggest problems occur once we actually get to Mars. There is a significant amount of radiation that we would be exposed to. So we would have to develop some sort of structure that we could take with us to shield us from it or we would have to tunnel underground and the use the surface of the planet itself to shield us from it. Another problem that would require a more immediate solution is the creation of energy, ie: heat. In order for us to survive we have to create a significant amount of energy to either harvest the ice, filter the melted ice, and then use the water. Only to purify it again. Or we have to figure out a way to take the oxygen out of the atmosphere and fuse it with hydrogen to create water that way. Finally, we need a way to create a sustainable food source. Unlike on Earth, a drought would cause the price of corn to go up for a bit. On Mars, if we missed a harvest, it could wipe out the colony entirely. These are the problems that I find to be the most challenging so far.

 

[Quetzal]

Many of the opponents of space travel use cost as a front for other objections. Namely the way they prioritise the short-term goals on earth with the long term investment neccessary for returns on space travel.

This argument makes sense when we start talking about government funded projects because one could argue that their money is being spent in a way they don't agree with. I certainly don't subscribe to that line of thought, though.

 

[Revoltingest]

We aren't too far behind, to be fair. We have gotten to Mars before. We just haven't been there ourselves. I am confident in the next 5-10 years we could develop a space craft that could land on Mars and then come back home. The biggest problems occur once we actually get to Mars. There is a significant amount of radiation that we would be exposed to. So we would have to develop some sort of structure that we could take with us to shield us from it or we would have to tunnel underground and the use the surface of the planet itself to shield us from it. Another problem that would require a more immediate solution is the creation of energy, ie: heat. In order for us to survive we have to create a significant amount of energy to either harvest the ice, filter the melted ice, and then use the water. Only to purify it again. Or we have to figure out a way to take the oxygen out of the atmosphere and fuse it with hydrogen to create water that way. Finally, we need a way to create a sustainable food source. Unlike on Earth, a drought would cause the price of corn to go up for a bit. On Mars, if we missed a harvest, it could wipe out the colony entirely. These are the problems that I find to be the most challenging so far.

I believe it could be done as soon as you say.
But at our stage of development, it would be unacceptably costly, risky & unproductive.
There are so many more problems than you just stated, eg, human psychology, human physiological degradation, etc.
It would be a very complex system, with many failure modes.
We're just too new at this to colonize anyplace.
The Moon is a better choice anyway.

My idea......
Identify an asteroid we could capture using an ion drive rocket to slowly (100+ years) maneuver into near orbit around Earth.
This would provide materials, protection from radiation, protection from micro-meteorites, & quick access.

 

[Quetzal]

But at our stage of development, it would be unacceptably costly, risky & unproductive.
There are so many more problems than you just stated, eg, human psychology, human physiological degradation, etc.
It would be a very complex system, with many failure modes.
We're just too new at this to colonize anyplace.

I would agree with that. I do believe Musk is a bit too ambitious with his timeline. There would always be risk, but there needs to be an acceptable risk, too. It will take time, trials, errors, etc for us to get it right.

Identify an asteroid we could capture using an ion drive rocket to slowly (100+ years) maneuver into near orbit around Earth.
This would provide materials, protection from radiation, protection from micro-meteorites, & quick access.

Don't you think having an outpost on Mars would be a more logical first step? After all, that puts you closer to the asteroid belt.

 

[Revoltingest]

Don't you think having an outpost on Mars would be a more logical first step? After all, that puts you closer to the asteroid belt.

What the astronauts would need is to be close too is Earth.
Then they can safely work the bugs out of life in space.
They need to learn to handle equipment problems, disease, injury, mental issues, etc.
But there's so much scientific work that that can be done from a near Earth asteroid,
that it would be worth it....prolly of more value than a Mars mission alternative.

 

[Quetzal]

What the astronauts would need is to be close too is Earth.
Then they can safely work the bugs out of life in space.
They need to learn to handle equipment problems, disease, injury, mental issues, etc.
But there's so much scientific work that that can be done from a near Earth asteroid,
that it would be worth it....prolly of more value than a Mars mission alternative.

Good news is there no reason we can't do both. We currently have a spacecraft on it's way to mine part of an asteroid which will give us a few more clues on how to move forward.

 

[Quetzal]

My idea......
Identify an asteroid we could capture using an ion drive rocket to slowly (100+ years) maneuver into near orbit around Earth.
This would provide materials, protection from radiation, protection from micro-meteorites, & quick access.

Also, for what it is worth just in case I was unclear, I would 100% support this idea.

 

[David1967]

Since the topic has come up (and it almost always does when these discussions emerge), I suppose we should address the investment of space exploration and why it makes sense. In regards to SpaceX specifically, they are a profitable company on their own merit. To reiterate, the only way tax dollars are spent on a mission like this is if the government becomes a customer. Which is probable if SpaceX is successful. With that in mind, it is foolish to say "Well this is a waste" without any real claim to support it because you don't have a horse in the race.

Now, to open up the discussion up a bit and expand to the age old question: is this kind of investment worth it? This is a flawed perspective because it is very difficult to put a dollar amount on innovations related to this. You cannot put a dollar amount on the Moon landing. Who knows how many kids were inspired from that and went on to do wonderful work. There were also many side products to the R&D to such missions that we all benefit from. Your cell phone? A product of space exploration. Want a few more examples? Here you go:

• Aircraft collision-avoidance systems

• Cordless power tools

• Corrosion resistant coatings for bridges

• Digital imaging

• Ear thermometers

• GPS (global positioning satellites)

• Household water filters

• Hydroponic plant-growing systems

• Implantable pacemakers

• Infrared handheld cameras

• Kidney dialysis machines

• LASIK corrective eye surgery

• Memory foam mattresses

• Scratch-resistant sunglasses

• Safety grooving on pavement

• Shoe insoles

• Virtual reality

• Weather forecasting

All of these things came about due to investment in space exploration. Now, imagine if we are successful in establishing a colony on Mars. There is a long list of possible benefits associated with it.

• Technological innovations brought through solving problems on Mars

• Possible mineral resources found on Mars

• Investment of real estate on another planet

• Expand understanding and offer outlet for possible terraforming missions

• Creation of a way station for the mining of asteroids

• Information regarding life's origin and other biological sciences

The list goes on and on. Any of these ideas can spawn into a multi-billion dollar industry and can lead to unprecedented advances in ways we can't see yet. It is for this reason, and many more, that I will always advocate for Mars.

Quetzal, this thread is practically custom made for you. Thanks for all the info.

 

[Quetzal]

Quetzal, this thread is practically custom made for you. Thanks for all the info.

No problem and always remember, I am not a subject matter expert. The majority of my information is parroted from sources I trust, but your mileage may vary.

 

[Wirey]

We gotta leave sooner or later:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_Earth

By 2.8 billion years from now, the surface temperature of the Earth will have reached 422 K (149 °C; 300 °F), even at the poles. At this point, any remaining life will be extinguished due to the extreme conditions.

Lots of the first settlers of North America died learning how to do it, and it was expensive. But it turned out to be worth it. We might as well start now.

 

[Revoltingest]

Also, for what it is worth just in case I was unclear, I would 100% support this idea.

You'd better!

 

[Wirey]

No problem and always remember, I am not a subject matter expert. The majority of my information is parroted from sources I trust, but your mileage may vary.

This is the internet. We're all subject matter experts. If I wanted, I could explain to you how to reverse gravity and fly like Superman. I just don't wanna.

 

[jeager106]

Let me ask you. Is it even feasible we could "establish a permanent human presence on Mars." So far, except for pie-in-the-sky optimism, I've seen nothing of a concrete nature that suggests such an endeavor has a chance to succeed. AND, what will be the payback? What will we gain by this enterprise?


.

I understand that^^^^.
For the awful expense with today's tech what would be the reward?
Can't compare that with explorers like Columbus as they used already proven tech but it was
the destination that was unknown.

 

[Quetzal]

I understand that^^^^.
For the awful expense with today's tech what would be the reward?
Can't compare that with explorers like Columbus as they used already proven tech but it was
the destination that was unknown.

I already outlined possible rewards and outcomes along with other side products of similar research/projects. Sheesh. What more do ya want for an alien?

 

[jeager106]

I already outlined possible rewards and outcomes along with other side products of similar research/projects. Sheesh. What more do ya want for an alien?

I KNEW you were one of 'em!

 

[Quetzal]

I KNEW you were one of 'em!

 

[Brickjectivity]

Since the topic has come up (and it almost always does when these discussions emerge), I suppose we should address the investment of space exploration and why it makes sense. In regards to SpaceX specifically, they are a profitable company on their own merit. To reiterate, the only way tax dollars are spent on a mission like this is if the government becomes a customer. Which is probable if SpaceX is successful. With that in mind, it is foolish to say "Well this is a waste" without any real claim to support it because you don't have a horse in the race.

Now, to open up the discussion up a bit and expand to the age old question: is this kind of investment worth it? This is a flawed perspective because it is very difficult to put a dollar amount on innovations related to this. You cannot put a dollar amount on the Moon landing. Who knows how many kids were inspired from that and went on to do wonderful work. There were also many side products to the R&D to such missions that we all benefit from. Your cell phone? A product of space exploration. Want a few more examples? Here you go:

• Aircraft collision-avoidance systems

• Cordless power tools

• Corrosion resistant coatings for bridges

• Digital imaging

• Ear thermometers

• GPS (global positioning satellites)

• Household water filters

• Hydroponic plant-growing systems

• Implantable pacemakers

• Infrared handheld cameras

• Kidney dialysis machines

• LASIK corrective eye surgery

• Memory foam mattresses

• Scratch-resistant sunglasses

• Safety grooving on pavement

• Shoe insoles

• Virtual reality

• Weather forecasting

All of these things came about due to investment in space exploration. Now, imagine if we are successful in establishing a colony on Mars. There is a long list of possible benefits associated with it.

• Technological innovations brought through solving problems on Mars

• Possible mineral resources found on Mars

• Investment of real estate on another planet

• Expand understanding and offer outlet for possible terraforming missions

• Creation of a way station for the mining of asteroids

• Information regarding life's origin and other biological sciences

The list goes on and on. Any of these ideas can spawn into a multi-billion dollar industry and can lead to unprecedented advances in ways we can't see yet. It is for this reason, and many more, that I will always advocate for Mars.

You are leaving out Solar Panels.

We aren't too far behind, to be fair. We have gotten to Mars before. We just haven't been there ourselves. I am confident in the next 5-10 years we could develop a space craft that could land on Mars and then come back home. The biggest problems occur once we actually get to Mars. There is a significant amount of radiation that we would be exposed to. So we would have to develop some sort of structure that we could take with us to shield us from it or we would have to tunnel underground and the use the surface of the planet itself to shield us from it. Another problem that would require a more immediate solution is the creation of energy, ie: heat. In order for us to survive we have to create a significant amount of energy to either harvest the ice, filter the melted ice, and then use the water. Only to purify it again. Or we have to figure out a way to take the oxygen out of the atmosphere and fuse it with hydrogen to create water that way. Finally, we need a way to create a sustainable food source. Unlike on Earth, a drought would cause the price of corn to go up for a bit. On Mars, if we missed a harvest, it could wipe out the colony entirely. These are the problems that I find to be the most challenging so far.

The lower gravity should make underground tunnels a lot more practical than they are here on Earth, particularly if they are able to make concrete tunnels.

 

[Skwim]

Of course you haven't because what you are looking for is a guarantee.

Silly presumption, but no less silly than your SF notion of the possible riches on Mars.

I have outlined it in a post above.
Now, imagine if we are successful in establishing a colony on Mars. There is a long list of possible benefits associated with it.

• Technological innovations brought through solving problems on Mars

• Somewhat possible, but worth the effort and expense? Pretty doubtful.

• Possible mineral resources found on Mars

  Yeah sure. Like it would be cost effective to send empty "ore cars" to Mars. Mine and fill them with ore, and then fly them back to Earth. "Let's see, you wanted a pound of ( name your ore) from Mars . . . . .Yup, that will $5,235,192.25. And no checks please.
• 
  

• Investment of real estate on another planet

  And this will benefit whom? Trump? Teddy Roosevelt’s famous quote “if you build it they will come” just won't work on Mars.

• Expand understanding and offer outlet for possible terraforming missions

  Just how much money do you think there is in the world?

• Creation of a way station for the mining of asteroids

  Even more ridiculous than the idea of mining Mars.

• Information regarding life's origin and other biological sciences

  Or maybe information regarding the origin of god. Or information regarding quantum mechanics. Or information regarding the purpose of male nipples.

Such an endeavor might make sense IF there was enough money to carry it out. But there isn't. Such a grand enterprise would take trillions upon trillions of dollars, and no nation has such capital to shell out. Not the USA. Not Russia. Not even the Chinese, and particularly when there are far more pressing needs that need to be taken care of here on planet Earth. In short, such notions belong right back where they were first concocted, in magazines like Amazing Stories, Galaxy Science Fiction, and Fantastic Universe.


.