Johnny Phoenix is on Mars and alive!

[4too]

Achilles Heel 2

Achilles Heel 2



The weak link in this exploration scenario is ... the human one.

So far, ya' got that figured out, by ignoring the dynamics of human behavior, ... presumed a 'given' , or grooming the project as if the politics of people does not exist.

People. Some one else's problem, that is always an option in our survival skill inventory, ( there between the putter and the six iron ).

People. Perhaps that is the Sci Fi part of the equation.

By luck, or social engineering , or most likely the 'pow-ah' of marketing,
the species' destiny to litter the universe with Egg McMuffin wrappers and 3.06 cartridges ... will ... find a way.

Monkey Men 'git' their act, or sh-t, together, and align the little balls in the precise matrix, to field another terraforming of another distant desert.


The real estate potential will be lucrative. Rapturous locution? Location, location, lo...ca...tion.

The property values will be positively astronomical, with white flight exploding into an earth gravity escape velocity. ""Baby we were born to run!"'

What problems tag along, well ...

Congenital social dysfunctions? Some one else's problem.

Hand me the putter, ...

Don't ignore the people problem, ... milk it.
""Baby we were born to run!"'
Exploit the hubris.
Planetary expansion fueled by the 'pow-ah' of marketing!

Mars condos, cultured out of pure sub prime investment excretions.


Will look just like home, glad I made the trip.





4too

 

[Thrawn]

I read about "Mars Direct" as that sort of stuff lights my fire. It seemed interesting and plausable (I know very little about physics or rocket science), espically the part about mixing your own fuel there.

However, 55 billion is not a small price tag. The largest module on the ISS, the Japanese reasearch one cost a mere 1 billion and the lander this thread talks about costs 400 million (I think, but I am too lazy to look it up again).

Add to that the difficulty we have had with getting probes to Mars (less than half have worked) and the fact that there is no escape plan and you have a real road block.

I can see private companies getting to the moon in the next two decades, but, unless we develope a cheaper way to "get orbital" I don't see any humans going to Mars any time soon.

 

[Maphusio]

I read about "Mars Direct" as that sort of stuff lights my fire. It seemed interesting and plausable (I know very little about physics or rocket science), espically the part about mixing your own fuel there.

However, 55 billion is not a small price tag. The largest module on the ISS, the Japanese reasearch one cost a mere 1 billion and the lander this thread talks about costs 400 million (I think, but I am too lazy to look it up again).

Add to that the difficulty we have had with getting probes to Mars (less than half have worked) and the fact that there is no escape plan and you have a real road block.

I can see private companies getting to the moon in the next two decades, but, unless we develope a cheaper way to "get orbital" I don't see any humans going to Mars any time soon.

Mars Direct does have multiple back-ups. Thats the beauty of it. It's all very simple, cheap and could be done today, or when it was initially conceived. I have not seen an argument to date that actually holds water against it.

 

[Ah-Teen]

1. Raise the temperature though pumping greenhouse gases.
Martian atmosphere is 95% carbon dioxide....... Want to add a bunch of gases that are toxic? That and we don't really know how to create global warming.

2. Making Oxygen in the atmosphere by using plants!
The gravity on mars is so low it loses Oxygen because it is not heavy enough. CO2 is.

3.Living on Mars without space suits. Can't because there just isn't enough air pressure. That would get worse if we changed it all to a breathable atmosphere. Because our atmosphere is lighter than the co2 of mars.

Or, the fast way: nuke the hell out of the polar ice-caps. They melt and the steam and gasses cover the atmosphere, raising temperatures pretty quick. Can't imagine a faster and better use for todays nuclear arsenals...

1. Raise the temperature though pumping greenhouse gases.
Martian atmosphere is 95% carbon dioxide....... Want to add a bunch of gases that are toxic? That and we don't really know how to create global warming.

2. Making Oxygen in the atmosphere by using plants!
The gravity on mars is so low it loses Oxygen because it is not heavy enough. CO2 is.

3.Living on Mars without space suits. Can't because there just isn't enough air pressure. That would get worse if we changed it all to a breathable atmosphere. Because our atmosphere is lighter than the co2 of mars.

You didn't bother to read anything I said did you... Mars is too damn small! Make bigger or go home.

 

[Maphusio]

1. Raise the temperature though pumping greenhouse gases.
Martian atmosphere is 95% carbon dioxide....... Want to add a bunch of gases that are toxic? That and we don't really know how to create global warming.

2. Making Oxygen in the atmosphere by using plants!
The gravity on mars is so low it loses Oxygen because it is not heavy enough. CO2 is.

3.Living on Mars without space suits. Can't because there just isn't enough air pressure. That would get worse if we changed it all to a breathable atmosphere. Because our atmosphere is lighter than the co2 of mars.

Or, the fast way: nuke the hell out of the polar ice-caps. They melt and the steam and gasses cover the atmosphere, raising temperatures pretty quick. Can't imagine a faster and better use for todays nuclear arsenals...

1. Raise the temperature though pumping greenhouse gases.
Martian atmosphere is 95% carbon dioxide....... Want to add a bunch of gases that are toxic? That and we don't really know how to create global warming.

2. Making Oxygen in the atmosphere by using plants!
The gravity on mars is so low it loses Oxygen because it is not heavy enough. CO2 is.

3.Living on Mars without space suits. Can't because there just isn't enough air pressure. That would get worse if we changed it all to a breathable atmosphere. Because our atmosphere is lighter than the co2 of mars.

You didn't bother to read anything I said did you... Mars is too damn small! Make bigger or go home.

Curious, how do you come to this conclusion? What proof do we have that Mars needs to have more mass to retain an atmosphere?

 

[Blakut]

There is a balance between the force of gravity and the solar wind that brushes outer layers of atmosphere into space. I learned something about this at university, but i forgot. The idea is that if a planet is not big enough, it will slowly but surely lose its athmosphere, if it even forms one to begin with.

 

[Mad Max RW]

We should have had men walking around Mars in the 70's. Look up the nuclear rocket. They dumped tons of money into a proven technology and mothballed it when the public lost interest in space and protested anything nuclear.

Today NASA has the worst restrictions. They can't use anything that will potentially hurt the environment of Earth or other worlds. Budgets are cut every year, forcing them to build cheaper in not only cost but also in quality. The most important reason, and the one that kills them, is the public doesn't give a shit unless something blows up.

Sending these pathetic little tonka toy robots to Mars isn't gonna tell us shit. They're just trying to keep the last shred of interest from going away and letting the whole damn program get buried forever.

 

[Maphusio]

We should have had men walking around Mars in the 70's. Look up the nuclear rocket. They dumped tons of money into a proven technology and mothballed it when the public lost interest in space and protested anything nuclear.

Today NASA has the worst restrictions. They can't use anything that will potentially hurt the environment of Earth or other worlds. Budgets are cut every year, forcing them to build cheaper in not only cost but also in quality. The most important reason, and the one that kills them, is the public doesn't give a shit unless something blows up.

Sending these pathetic little tonka toy robots to Mars isn't gonna tell us shit. They're just trying to keep the last shred of interest from going away and letting the whole damn program get buried forever.

I agree with you in some areas. NASA will not be dismantled so long as other countries have a space program as well. NASA is also needed to increase the US governments technologies in space.

People have lost interest in the space program because many believe reward comes without risk. A goal is achieved without trying. Kennedy said it best, that we don't do something because its easy but because its hard.

 

[Ah-Teen]

Snip

Snip

Curious, how do you come to this conclusion? What proof do we have that Mars needs to have more mass to retain an atmosphere?

There is a balance between the force of gravity and the solar wind that brushes outer layers of atmosphere into space. I learned something about this at university, but i forgot. The idea is that if a planet is not big enough, it will slowly but surely lose its athmosphere, if it even forms one to begin with.

Yes that is part of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_escape

Solid source articles are awesome btw.

I agree with you in some areas. NASA will not be dismantled so long as other countries have a space program as well. NASA is also needed to increase the US governments technologies in space.

I disagree. The US won't keep it just because other countries have their own. We aren't in that big of competition with them as we were in the cold war and Russia.

We will keep it because US businesses depend on services provided by NASA and R&D coming from. As well as an ego boost.

Slowly private companies are filling in some of the major jobs of NASA. NASA I believe won't ever totally go away, but it's importance will continue to fade.

First men on mars may come in a rocket with the logo of Virgin on it.

 

[ZiggyMeister]

Nice picture, but I don't see any litle green men!

 

[1Trevor1]

Nice picture, but I don't see any litle green men!

they where behind the probe

 

[SuAside]

ready to probe the probe then?

 

[Maphusio]

Snip

Snip

Curious, how do you come to this conclusion? What proof do we have that Mars needs to have more mass to retain an atmosphere?

There is a balance between the force of gravity and the solar wind that brushes outer layers of atmosphere into space. I learned something about this at university, but i forgot. The idea is that if a planet is not big enough, it will slowly but surely lose its athmosphere, if it even forms one to begin with.

Yes that is part of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_escape

Solid source articles are awesome btw.

While we should note that we are talking theory here. Both sides of the argument are just that, theory. Many suggest that the gravity on Mars is sufficient to sustain a livable atmosphere.

Mar's atmosphere is presently 6-7 millibar's, less than one tenth
of ours. Approximately, 3-400,000 billion tons. To have an
atmosphere of one bar the mass of gas needed would be four
million billion tons. (4000 billion tons = 1 mbar).

For plant life on Mars pressures as low as 10mbar would be
adequate, but we want humans to be able to live there, at least
in the near future wearing just 'scuba diving' like pressure
suits.

Other factors, such as rate of rotation and gravity are not a
problem. Mars' surface gravity is 0.38 g and this is adequate for
terraforming. There is no deficiency in the amount of sunlight
that reaches Mars, it may be only 43% of Earth's total but this
is sufficient for photosynthesis, for the plants we do want to
send to Mars.

For human habitation, the minimum partial pressure of oxygen must
be about 130mbar. If the entire atmosphere was to be only oxygen
it is known that long term exposure to pure oxygen at 345 mbar
(a more comfortable pressure) can be tolerated but oxygen is
flammable, a major problem.

With oxygen toxicity a possible problem, 300mbar is a better
alternative, with a buffer gas, for example nitrogen can be used
as there are possible nitrate reservoirs on mars in the
soil/regolith.

It is believed that problems of cosmic radiation can be overcome
with a gas column mass of 390mbar and above. So we could have
partial pressures of oxygen and nitrogen at 195 for each gas,
giving us more oxygen than the absolute minimum, giving us a
buffer gas and of course aiding the blockage of cosmic radiation.
So 390mbar (or 1.56 million billion tons of atmospheric gas)
could be a target value.

I find even the most minute possibility of creating another livable world in this solar system essential to the survival of this one. If there is a chance we can do this, Mars is the most likely candidate.

One also should note that even the Earth's atmosphere is slowly seeping away without our help. The likelihood of creating a livable planet for at least several millennia is plausible, and I think it essential even if we should fail in the end.

Below you will find various links involving studies on this subject, all very interesting reads.

http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Tech/Space/terra.txt
http://www.rfreitas.com/Astro/TerraformSRS1983.htm
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~mfogg/paper1.htm
http://www.redcolony.com/art.php?id=0012131
http://www.futurescience.org/Terraform_Mars/terraform_mars.html

 

[ZiggyMeister]

I don't know if you are aware, but ESA is recruiting future astronauts.

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Astronaut_Selection/SEM3TR0YUFF_0.html[/url]]ESA astronaut recruitment now open

19 May 2008
ESA has today opened applications for talented individuals wishing to become an astronaut in the European Astronaut Corps. There has not been a selection campaign since 1992, so this is a rare opportunity to be at the forefront of ESA’s human spaceflight programmes including future missions to the ISS, the Moon and beyond.

Prospective candidates can now carry out the first step of the application procedure by filling in details online at www.esa.int/astronautselection.

For what I could understand, one of the main goals is to prepare astronauts (pilots and scientists) for future missions to Mars. I don't know the time frame, but I guess they will be working together with NASA.

Damn! If I could I would apply, but I can't

 

[1Trevor1]

ready to probe the probe then?

already did

 

[Maphusio]

I don't know if you are aware, but ESA is recruiting future astronauts.

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Astronaut_Selection/SEM3TR0YUFF_0.html[/url]]ESA astronaut recruitment now open

19 May 2008
ESA has today opened applications for talented individuals wishing to become an astronaut in the European Astronaut Corps. There has not been a selection campaign since 1992, so this is a rare opportunity to be at the forefront of ESA’s human spaceflight programmes including future missions to the ISS, the Moon and beyond.

Prospective candidates can now carry out the first step of the application procedure by filling in details online at www.esa.int/astronautselection.

For what I could understand, one of the main goals is to prepare astronauts (pilots and scientists) for future missions to Mars. I don't know the time frame, but I guess they will be working together with NASA.

Damn! If I could I would apply, but I can't

Uggs ignoring the spammer person, I am right there with you. I'd love to work in that industry. As so many have proven, never say never. It doesn't matter how old you are, so long as you can contribute.

So maybe, after a bit of schooling, I may just land a job at JPL... Maybe next to the attractive girl next to communications from the Phoenix launch!