People On Mars in 2023?

shizz

Pushtrak wrote: »

They go in to that type of stuff: http://mars-one.com/mission/technology

Thanks man. I thought SpaceX might be involved. Elon talked about how he wanted to help the human race colonize Mars, I wonder if he has a big part to play in this or has he plans of his own?

seamus

There are probably as many ethical issues as there are technical ones:

Imagine one of the settlers is struck down with MNS after arriving. Eventually they will be incapable of moving about the colony. What then, do the others look after them? Since they wouldn't be under any jurisdiction, euthanasia is not an issue, however what if the person doesn't want to die? Having a permanently incapacitated person to look after would be a major resource drain for the other 3 people (not to mention a disaster with the loss of skills). The terminally-ill person choosing to live may even put the survival of the other 3 in jeopardy. Do you require them to commit suicide?

Though on the flipside, provided that everyone is thoroughly screened and the equipment properly sterlised before they leave, simple diseases like colds and 'flu wouldn't exist in the colony, not to mention STDs.

Pushtrak

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Of course I'm aware of these benefits, but my point is...would it not be better to have sophisticated robots perform these jobs?

You don't colonize a planet with robots. At least, so say sci-fi movies.

Mickeroo

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Of course I'm aware of these benefits, but my point is...would it not be better to have sophisticated robots perform these jobs?

possibly, but I would imagine a colony of humans would be able to find things out much quicker.

MisterEpicurus

General Relativity wrote: »

This implies that there are two types of Science; one that delivers knowledge and another that ????

It forces us to devolop new technology to get their in the first place. This snowballs and allows us to go further and further.

By that I meant, I don't see the point of using science to satisfy the ego's of people. Knowledge gained through robots seems better to start with and you can still develop the same technology through this method.
I phrased it bad above, I agree... :rolleyes:

MisterEpicurus

Pushtrak wrote: »

You don't colonize a planet with robots. At least, so say sci-fi movies.

Let's be honest - we're not ever going to colonize Mars. It's completely uninhabitable. And where else are we supposed to colonise? We're not going to get to the nearest galaxy even with the best technology. Plus, I'm ignoring all that hocus pocus of wormholes, sounds like bull to me when I read it.

Pushtrak

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Let's be honest - we're not ever going to colonize Mars. It's completely uninhabitable. And where else are we supposed to colonise? We're not going to get to the nearest galaxy even with the best technology. Plus, I'm ignoring all that hocus pocus of wormholes, sounds like bull to me when I read it.

http://mars-one.com/faq-en/22-faq-mission-features/199-why-mars-why-not-another-planet

After the Earth, Mars is the most habitable planet in our solar system. Its soil contains water and it isn't too cold or too hot. There is enough sunlight to charge solar panels and its gravity is 40% that of our Earth's, which is most probably sufficient for the human body to cope with healthily. It has an atmosphere, albeit a thin one, that offers protection from cosmic and the Sun's radiation. An important point is also the day/night rhythm, which is very similar to ours here on Earth: a Mars day is 24 hours and all of 37 minutes.

The only other two celestial bodies close enough are our Moon and Venus. There are far fewer nutrients and vital elements on the Moon, and a Moon day takes, well, a month. It also does not have an atmosphere to form a barrier against radiation. Venus is an veritable purgatory. The average temperature is over 400 degrees, the barometric pressure is that of 90 meters underwater on Earth, and the cherry on top comes in the form of occasional bouts of acid rain. It also has nights that last for 120 days. Humans cannot live on Mars without the help of technology, but compared to Venus it's paradise!

Edit: I'm not going to be on for a while, so will not be able to respond.

Bad Panda

I wonder where they'll film it this time...

shizz

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Let's be honest - we're not ever going to colonize Mars. It's completely uninhabitable. And where else are we supposed to colonise? We're not going to get to the nearest galaxy even with the best technology. Plus, I'm ignoring all that hocus pocus of wormholes, sounds like bull to me when I read it.

It is uninhabitable but the reality is we have the technology now to make it habitable for humans (not talking about changing the environment).

I understand what you are saying but why would we need to go to another Galaxy to find a habitable planet?

Mickeroo

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Let's be honest - we're not ever going to colonize Mars. It's completely uninhabitable. And where else are we supposed to colonise? We're not going to get to the nearest galaxy even with the best technology. Plus, I'm ignoring all that hocus pocus of wormholes, sounds like bull to me when I read it.

I don't really think there's much of a limit to what the human race can achieve provided it manages to survive long enough. A colony on mars seems more possible to me than landing on the moon would have to a person in the 1800s. A research colony though, a fully functioning society would be a much longer way off I'd imagine, realistically you'd have to go down the road of terraforming for that to happen.

hooradiation

seamus wrote: »

Though on the flipside, provided that everyone is thoroughly screened and the equipment properly sterlised before they leave, simple diseases like colds and 'flu wouldn't exist in the colony, not to mention STDs.

Oh, they'll just breed their own variants. Our grandchildren will have to deal with the shame of going to the doctors because they caught the space aids from one of those triple breasted Martian whores.....

brave new world and all that.

MisterEpicurus

Yup - I've no problem agreeing to that post Pushtrak. It merely suggests it's more habitable than any other, not necessarily habitable in any sense. What would be required is terraforming Mars in some way.

So if I was 200lbs, I'd weigh 75lbs on Mars.
An average 11st individual would weigh less than 4st...

And combined with the lack of sunlight (and it isa lack because panels would be required, how many, millions?) doesn't make it sound very habitable to me. Combining this with the length of time it would take to terraform Mars makes it seem ambitious at best. I'm not knowledgeable enough to say if it's unattainable, it just appears to be at the outset.

General Relativity

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

By that I meant, I don't see the point of using science to satisfy the ego's of people. Knowledge gained through robots seems better to start with and you can still develop the same technology through this method.
I phrased it bad above, I agree... :rolleyes:

The whole reason we do anything is because we can, to satisfy ourselves. We're only talking about Mars because we've been to the Moon to satisfy our egos. 'We'll do it, not because it is easy but because it is hard'

We've already been to Mars with robots, 5 times, 2 Russian (that failed) and 3 American. Another US rover is set to land in the next few months. It's time for us to go there.

hardCopy

I'm a bit confused as to why people would go. People usually explore for some sort of gain, e.g. Columbus seeking new spice routes, pilgrims seeking new lands free from persecution in America, prospectors seeking gold in the American West.

If there is no way to live outside a bubble then the first residents will have a worse quality of life than at home, and if they can't return then they can't export, and even if they could export they'd have nothing to spend their money on.

I don't see land being scarce enough for people to want to move there rather than try to reclaim desert or sea here on Earth.

I wonder if Steorn will be involved in fuelling the ships.

I could see the case for it if we found unobtanium there and had a way to retrieve it or if Earth was completely overcrowded.

shizz

hardCopy wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to why people would go. People usually explore for some sort of gain, e.g. Columbus seeking new spice routes, pilgrims seeking new lands free from persecution in America, prospectors seeking gold in the American West.

If there is no way to live outside a bubble then the first residents will have a worse quality of life than at home, and if they can't return then they can't export, and even if they could export they'd have nothing to spend their money on.

I don't see land being scarce enough for people to want to move there rather than try to reclaim desert or sea here on Earth.

I wonder if Steorn will be involved in fuelling the ships.

I could see the case for it if we found unobtanium there and had a way to retrieve it or if Earth was completely overcrowded.

Steorn? Why them?

Also you can't try and fit this sort of exploration with one like Columbus because it's simply for completely different reasons. The safety of our species and the continuation of scientific discovery.

Micky Dolenz

They best get a move on. It's past 1800 now.

MisterEpicurus

shizz wrote: »

The safety of our species and the continuation of scientific discovery.

Don't forget, according to some this world is fine-tuned for existence. Only 2,000 years after the death of Christ and we are already planning potential colonization plans. Shoots their argument in the foot (or maybe nail in the hand). :rolleyes:

BattleCorp

Nah, it'll never happen.

I can't see An Taisce giving planning permission on mars

Sarky

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Of course I'm aware of these benefits, but my point is...would it not be better to have sophisticated robots perform these jobs?

Robots can only do so much. They have to be terribly well-designed to contain tools and laboratory for everything people want them to do. If they break down, you have to send another one. With humans on Mars, they have instant access to results, if something malfunctions they can fix it on the fly, and they can start a new experiment as soon as they've done the old one, no more waiting months or years to send and receive data, no hoping the robot's batteries don't blow up, no abandoning the whole thing if the robot accidentally steers into a chasm and breaks.

Also, being one of the first people to colonise another planet? That would be FREAKING AWESOME.

Capt'n Midnight

seamus wrote: »

There are probably as many ethical issues as there are technical ones:

It's like mountain climbing. If you can't pull the guy up, you cut the rope.

Treat going to Mars as the ultimate extreme sport, risk of premature death is very high.

Diverting money from healthcare means people die. So can't justify a special mission to bring someone back when you can save many more lives back here.


Perhaps they should send terminally ill people on such missions, the lower gravity means less stress and possibly longer life in some cases.

Son Of A Vidic

Pushtrak wrote: »

People On Mars in 2023?

Why not sooner? Sure isn't The Dáil overflowing with an abundance of fully qualified Space Cadets.

Mickeroo

hardCopy wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to why people would go. People usually explore for some sort of gain, e.g. Columbus seeking new spice routes, pilgrims seeking new lands free from persecution in America, prospectors seeking gold in the American West.

Probably posted this in AH before, doesn't directly talk about colonising mars but the reasons are the same in my eyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdwOlk6HIVc

Shane-KornSpace

The day we finally land a person on Mars, I will cry with joy!

Duggy747

I'll feel proud as punch to see that live feed of that first person stepping on Mars. Just gotta stay alive long enough to see it :pac:

Not proud in that I did anything but that others in our species collectively did something so magnificent. That 1st step towards living outside of our planet that will show the tangible start to a new future.

A future I won't be around for unless they perfect the "head in a jar" Futurama thingy-ma-bob.

Things like this are always needed, besides the obvious future of our survival, for the knowledge, medical research and technology that will be learned from it. Think of all the trivial stuff we have today that started it's roots from the space race.

Still, sending people off to permanently live on Mars is a massive risk but with also a potentially massive payoff for the species. No pressure at all, then, for those lucky 4.

Plus, 2023 sounds a bit ambitious, even if around 2020 has always been mentioned as the "Man on Mars" timeline for years now.

MisterEpicurus

Sarky wrote: »

Robots can only do so much. They have to be terribly well-designed to contain tools and laboratory for everything people want them to do. If they break down, you have to send another one. With humans on Mars, they have instant access to results, if something malfunctions they can fix it on the fly, and they can start a new experiment as soon as they've done the old one, no more waiting months or years to send and receive data, no hoping the robot's batteries don't blow up, no abandoning the whole thing if the robot accidentally steers into a chasm and breaks.

Also, being one of the first people to colonise another planet? That would be FREAKING AWESOME.

Of course it would...I just don't think it's going to happen.

Shane-KornSpace wrote: »

The day we finally land a person on Mars, I will cry with joy!

No you won't.

ha ha hello

How proud would you feel if we, as a species, managed to avoid the predictable route of self-annihilation and eventually colonised other planets? Surely the existence of a civilisation is extremely precarious between the time they discover nuclear weapons etc. and the time needed to colonise other planets.. like I'd guess a high percentage would never make it that far. Should be some cool sh'it happening during this millennium!

Phoenix Park

Moon's a loada bollix to be honest. Mars is where its at. I can see myself there some day. I like red chedder, red onions.... I prefer Bournville to Dairy Milk and that has a red wrapper too...it feels natural to be on the Red Planet. If they can get you there, they can get the internet and good stuff there with you too...although i reckon you won't need to "have" the internet in 2023. You just focus on it in your mind...and it appears, like magic!
Sign me up

af_thefragile

Will they set up chippers on Mars so you can gut unlimited supply of deep fried Mars bars there?

Benny_Cake

“This is going to be private enterprise, only private firms are going to contribute. No political mumbo-jumbo, no tax-payer’s money will be involved,” Dr. Hooft said in a statement.

All well and good, but it is just over half a century since the first human went into orbit and the private sector is only now beginning to reach the point where it will be capable of launching manned spacecraft. And that is largely because of contracts from taxpayer-funded space agencies. I have no problem with the idea, in fact I'd find it exciting, but I don't see how 2023 is realistic, particularly since their method of raising the necessary funding seems to be a reality TV show. The first humans on Mars are likely to arrive as part of an international effort. I just hope I'm alive to see it.

Logical Fallacy

Pushtrak wrote: »

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/mars-one-plans-human-colonization-of-mars-by-april-2023/

More @ http://mars-one.com/

So, they're planning on 4 in 2023, and to have 20 up there in 2033. I'm not going to speak on the likelihood of them making the 2023 date, but the point I will make is it seems 10 years on, maybe they ought to be hoping for more than that to be up on Mars?

Being on another planet would be quite an experience, but being one of the early adopters, so to speak, one of those astronauts.. It'd be quite something to adapt to. Going on a one way journey somewhere, well, the precise 4 that would go up would have to be chosen. They will only have each other to "entertain" each other.

A return trip to Mars is a far simpler proposition than keeping 20 people alive up there over a long time.

Both goals are ambitious and will come to nothing.