Astronomy Mission to Mars

Will we see a manned Mars mission within 10 years

  • Total voters
    61

Remove this Banner Ad

Pessimistic said:
It's still our best shot

I would have thought Hawking would know better
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree, but i think he is speaking from a philosophical perspective. This population growth will not be sustainable in the next 100 years, there will be natural disasters, famines, wars and mass suffering of everyone other than the elites.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

We went to the moon 50 years ago and we haven't gone back since. 100 years is way too ambitious. But the population of the earth will be around 12 billion with half of the population predicted to be living in Africa and majority in the sub-saharan Africa. There is a clear imbalance right there, unless we invest in 3rd world countries with more education and science and teach family planning we have no hope.
 
Yeah you'd guess Hawkings not talking about sending all mankind somewhere else

Just some selected elites

Maybe we can do a hitch hikers trick on them
 
Total Power said:
It's not gonna happen anyway, like you said. This planet is our best shot and we better not **** it up the way we been doing so far.
Click to expand...
But for me that's the impetus that will push us out. Sure some people stay as the dump of a house falls around their ears, but most people move houses. Similar concept. Disposable society , disposable planet
 
GreyCrow said:
But for me that's the impetus that will push us out. Sure some people stay as the dump of a house falls around their ears, but most people move houses. Similar concept. Disposable society , disposable planet
Click to expand...

Well yes but you have to take into consideration that Mars is not habitable as of now. Even if we build a rocket for example and take a few million people there, we would need to farm, we need clean drinking water, we would also need to find sources for energy. Then Mars has no atmosphere, everything has to be indoors, so what will be the future like for the million there?
 
Total Power said:
Well yes but you have to take into consideration that Mars is not habitable as of now. Even if we build a rocket for example and take a few million people there, we would need to farm, we need clean drinking water, we would also need to find sources for energy. Then Mars has no atmosphere, everything has to be indoors, so what will be the future like for the million there?
Click to expand...
Everything you say is true. That's why the best minds are working on it as we sit here pontificating :) They are obstacles not barriers
 
Total Power said:
Yeah i agree, but 100 years?
Click to expand...
Gotta set a timetable, may as well put up 100 years.

They are currently testing and evaluating the psychological conditions to be faced ,though personally Mars v Cave in California brings a whole different mindset. (maybe look back on pioneer letters back to England etc)

They are working on water solutions for arid regions. Soil and farming isn't that big an issue, its controlling and maintaining that will be the biggest factors. There needs to be a near Dictatorship for the first 100 years.

It will be the mining royalties that could pave the way for the start and continuation. ie imagine the invention and rapid escalation if you gave Rio Tinto or BHP or Glencore Exstrata the exclusive rights.
 
GreyCrow said:
Gotta set a timetable, may as well put up 100 years.

They are currently testing and evaluating the psychological conditions to be faced ,though personally Mars v Cave in California brings a whole different mindset. (maybe look back on pioneer letters back to England etc)

They are working on water solutions for arid regions. Soil and farming isn't that big an issue, its controlling and maintaining that will be the biggest factors. There needs to be a near Dictatorship for the first 100 years.

It will be the mining royalties that could pave the way for the start and continuation. ie imagine the invention and rapid escalation if you gave Rio Tinto or BHP or Glencore Exstrata the exclusive rights.
Click to expand...

More elitist stuff there too you are suggesting? oh my! so only the rich are going there then? :D .So that means people like us, dont stand a chance.

The biggest challenge is Radiation though. Once exposed you will die of cancer. A small hole in the suit is enough to kill you. Then comes food supply. To construct artificial farmland indoors will require hundreds of miles worth construction for lets say half a million people. And then you would need portable heater at night which would mean massive power supply issues. I just dont see where the money will come from for that? all governments are running massive deficits, its not like war will no longer be on the horizon. Every country is increasing their military budget. How will we fund it?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

GreyCrow said:
Everything you say is true. That's why the best minds are working on it as we sit here pontificating :) They are obstacles not barriers
Click to expand...

The best minds would be a thousand maybe a million times more productive making sure the earth remains habitable.

I'm not saying don't explore. But stop selling snake oil
 
Pessimistic said:
The best minds would be a thousand maybe a million times more productive making sure the earth remains habitable.

I'm not saying don't explore. But stop selling snake oil
Click to expand...
Well said, these elitists are destroying our own planet, what hope do we have in another? i mean taking these mining companies there? how about Apple?
 
GreyCrow said:
But for me that's the impetus that will push us out. Sure some people stay as the dump of a house falls around their ears, but most people move houses. Similar concept. Disposable society , disposable planet
Click to expand...

A ship and a lifeboat is the best analogy. In my maritime training they impressed over and over that saving your ship is the best lifeboat

Degradation of this planet would hypothetically push us out...... To a place magnitudes more degraded?

The same techniques that could make Mars habitable could be used to far better effect in the degraded parts of earth. When would the penny drop?
 
Pessimistic said:
The best minds would be a thousand maybe a million times more productive making sure the earth remains habitable.

I'm not saying don't explore. But stop selling snake oil
Click to expand...

How are you going to inhibit capitalism?

You can't save the earth otherwise.

IMO, we are doomed. Maybe a couple of thousand years tops.
 
The soviets had more than their fair share of environmental problems

The way mankind carries on is one thing. The pure practicalities of making a dead planet habitable are another
 
I don't think there'll be a manned Mars mission in my lifetime, not least because of the way Trump and his ilk are going after science.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
 
Getting a manned mission to Mars is one thing, it can be done.
Sustaining a human colony on Mars is in a different league completely.
So many things can go wrong in such a harsh environment that all life in the colony could be snuffed out before help could arrive.
 
The fastest speed an astronaut has achieved is 11 km/s, which means a trip to Mars would be >2 months at minimum :$

What we need is an engine that combines the fuel burn rate of a rocket engine with the exhaust velocity of an ion thruster:

Thrust (Newtons) = Fuel burn rate (kg/s) x exhaust velocity (m/s)
 
Exactly. I think the short term focus should be on a moon base and developing better technology for a Mars trip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top