How about a ONE-WAY trip to Mars?

[Stuntman]

Get one of the still suits from Dune.

 

[MoodyBlues]

Most of the UK drinks Number 2

Would you like to expand on this a bit?

 

[unnamedny]

Would you like to expand on this a bit?

its not only UK. Its in US in some states too. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/environment/2011-03-03-1Apurewater03_CV_N.htm

 

[MoodyBlues]

its not only UK. Its in US in some states too. From toilets to tap: How we get tap water from sewage - USATODAY.com

I think I saw Mike Rowe do an episode of "Dirty Jobs" about this. But I may be thinking of some other show. So I guess I already knew, but chose to block it out.

 

[argedion]

A Big problem and the main reason it would be a one way trip is fuel. We probably can get them there but once there there is no fuel to get them back and since there is no oil wells on the planet to make rocket fuel then what are they going to do with the ships that accumulate?

 

[MoodyBlues]

A Big problem and the main reason it would be a one way trip is fuel. We probably can get them there but once there there is no fuel to get them back

Good point.

and since there is no oil wells on the planet to make rocket fuel then what are they going to do with the ships that accumulate?

All of this reinforces my belief that this project is doomed to fail, on many levels.

 

[argedion]

All of this reinforces my belief that this project is doomed to fail, on many levels.

Yes first we should get there and do some exploration but we need a way to get back that must be thought out. Cool Idea but still a ways to go with planning and making it a reality

 

[unnamedny]

A Big problem and the main reason it would be a one way trip is fuel. We probably can get them there but once there there is no fuel to get them back and since there is no oil wells on the planet to make rocket fuel then what are they going to do with the ships that accumulate?

It's just a part of the issue.

First of all, to escape Earth's gravitation field you need to reach escape velocity. For the Earth, this speed is 11200 meters per second, or about 25,000 miles per hour. almost 7 miles per second speed. For mars it's twice smaller, but it still needs so much fuel for launch. Have you ever noticed that space shuttles drop side boosters after a few minutes.

Interplanetary vehicles mostly use chemical rockets as well, although a few have used ion thrusters and hall effect thrusters (two different types of electric propulsion) to great success. So in outer space it's not such a huge issue.

 

[davoid]

I remember reading that the asteroid belt lies between earth and mars, and one proposition is to mine the asteroids for water which can be used to produce rocket fuel. Don't ask me how they would do that, but I definitely heard this. So for a more long term proposition, with mining between the two planets, fuel could possibly be transported to Mars eventually.

It would make sense to build an orbiting space station above Mars, from which fuel could be dropped planet-side. I'm making this up as I go along, but the future is exciting even if this particular mission (one-way camping trip) seems a bit grim.

 

[wyndslash]

PLEASE tell me you don't mean drinking water.

well, i think so. we don't have unlimited resources, singapore more so. it gives them some independence from their neighbors. politics and all that.

 

[Hadron]

The asteroid belt lies between Mars and Jupiter, though some are closer in.

 

[davoid]

The asteroid belt lies between Mars and Jupiter, though some are closer in.

You're right. I apparently meant the NEOs (Near Earth Objects) that, as you say, are closer in. NASA talk about them as resources, and apparently Google's CEO Larry Page and film maker James Cameron are backing a project to mine NEOs...

NEOs As Future Resources

Asteroid mining venture backed by James Cameron, Google CEO Larry Page - CBS News

 

[EarlyMon]

I think that for every person who would kill themselves because they couldn't go home, there are far more who wouldn't.

Our history as a species is one of colonization.

If we can solve the technical problems, human colonization away from the Earth is inevitable.

It's in our nature.

 

[MoodyBlues]

I think that for every person who would kill themselves because they couldn't go home, there are far more who wouldn't.

Our history as a species is one of colonization.

If we can solve the technical problems, human colonization away from the Earth is inevitable.

It's in our nature.

I definitely see your point, but THIS colonization would be so totally different from anything humans have done before, I just don't see it working. Perhaps if we found a planet that was much more Earth-like, you know with LIVABLE temperatures and atmosphere and water, it'd be a no-brainer that it could work out. But Mars? I'm not seeing it.

 

[EarlyMon]

I definitely see your point, but THIS colonization would be so totally different from anything humans have done before, I just don't see it working. Perhaps if we found a planet that was much more Earth-like, you know with LIVABLE temperatures and atmosphere and water, it'd be a no-brainer that it could work out. But Mars? I'm not seeing it.

Lots of colonies here on the Earth were thought to be no-brainers but instead, unforeseen adversities hit and entire colonies were wiped out.

Substitute lack of air and water in place of plague or unknown beasts or a competing local populace as expected survival threats to be overcome by technology and determination - and it's much the same situation.

The threats change, the technology changes, but the scenarios really don't.

Colonization is always based on this one bet - I think that with my technology, the risk is acceptable to me, so I'm going for it.

The Polynesians colonized a number of the Pacific islands with exactly that approach. If you look at what they accomplished with their boats (their technology thrown against the survival threat of a raging ocean and unknown waters), the feat is nothing shy of remarkable.

As for isolation and scarce resources - Easter Island comes immediately to mind.

I'm not saying that all colonies will survive. Avoiding tragedy will take technology, skill, willpower and a huge measure of luck.

If a colony does fail, I've no doubt that many will stand back and decide the risks are too high. I'm equally of the opinion that others will be angered or energized by the idea that we were beaten and believe that makes further attempts an imperative - an acceptable proposal to many with the spirit of adventure.

Therefore, I maintain that off-world colonization is inevitable.

 

[Stuntman]

I remember reading that the asteroid belt lies between earth and mars, and one proposition is to mine the asteroids for water which can be used to produce rocket fuel. Don't ask me how they would do that, but I definitely heard this. So for a more long term proposition, with mining between the two planets, fuel could possibly be transported to Mars eventually.

It would make sense to build an orbiting space station above Mars, from which fuel could be dropped planet-side. I'm making this up as I go along, but the future is exciting even if this particular mission (one-way camping trip) seems a bit grim.

There is water on Mars in the form of ice in the polar caps. I would think it would be easier to get water from this ice than to get it from a NEO and then transport it to Mars.

You're right. I apparently meant the NEOs (Near Earth Objects) that, as you say, are closer in. NASA talk about them as resources, and apparently Google's CEO Larry Page and film maker James Cameron are backing a project to mine NEOs...

NEOs As Future Resources

Asteroid mining venture backed by James Cameron, Google CEO Larry Page - CBS News

You would have to find a NEO that has the minerals you need first and it would have to be in a favourable orbit. If anyone were to mine minerals from NEOs, they would most likely rather bring to earth than to Mars.

 

[finndo77]

for more information on colonization, go read a book... if you think books are too long, read some of Robert Heinlein's serials or short stories. many of the things he wrote were about colonization, the moon, venus, mars, even farther away places such as pluto. He even touched on mining asteroids and changing their orbits so as to bring them into a safe stable orbit to use as "jump points" between planets (like a space station, only on an asteroid instead of floating/orbiting in space).

good reads there, most can be done quite quickly. As a lot of his stories are serials, you might want to look into where to start as it does make more sense to read them in order.

 

[MoodyBlues]

for more information on colonization, go read a book... if you think books are too long, read some of Robert Heinlein's serials or short stories.

I used to be big on Heinlein, but haven't read anything of his in many years. Decades, actually. Maybe now would be a good time to start again.

 

[Kamau]

Maybe Uncle Martin would be kind enough to give some a lift back to earth.

 

[Kamau]

And some guys would be willing to stay if she's there.

 

[Thats]

Lots of colonies here on the Earth were thought to be no-brainers but instead, unforeseen adversities hit and entire colonies were wiped out.

Substitute lack of air and water in place of plague or unknown beasts or a competing local populace as expected survival threats to be overcome by technology and determination - and it's much the same situation.

The threats change, the technology changes, but the scenarios really don't.

Colonization is always based on this one bet - I think that with my technology, the risk is acceptable to me, so I'm going for it.

The Polynesians colonized a number of the Pacific islands with exactly that approach. If you look at what they accomplished with their boats (their technology thrown against the survival threat of a raging ocean and unknown waters), the feat is nothing shy of remarkable.

As for isolation and scarce resources - Easter Island comes immediately to mind.

I'm not saying that all colonies will survive. Avoiding tragedy will take technology, skill, willpower and a huge measure of luck.

If a colony does fail, I've no doubt that many will stand back and decide the risks are too high. I'm equally of the opinion that others will be angered or energized by the idea that we were beaten and believe that makes further attempts an imperative - an acceptable proposal to many with the spirit of adventure.

Therefore, I maintain that off-world colonization is inevitable.

I agree with all of your points.

Although I feel that we will try to put put a Moon base before we go to other planets. It makes the most sense, people can actually come back from the Moon, as opposed to how hard it would be to get people back from Mars.

 

[twogbsd]

I agree with all of your points.

Although I feel that we will try to put put a Moon base before we go to other planets. It makes the most sense, people can actually come back from the Moon, as opposed to how hard it would be to get people back from Mars.

One of the main reasons they are attempting to go to Mars is because has an atmosphere, and with some help by us humans, it can over time be terraformed. Not to mention Mars has ice water, similar Earth day, seasons, etc, etc. To my knowledge, the Moon has none of these. I however agree that it would make more sense to build a moon base first, then move on to other planets...

 

[MoodyBlues]

And some guys would be willing to stay if she's there.

And how about a pic of a hunky guy for us gals?

 

[argedion]

And how about a pic of a hunky guy for us gals?

I don't have any pics on the web

 

[MoodyBlues]

And how about a pic of a hunky guy for us gals?

I don't have any pics on the web

:rofl: :congrats: :laugh: