We don't have the technology to sustain long term human habitation on Mars and won't until we achieve cheap efficient interplanetary space travel. And we won't do that until we have a cheap efficient source of energy. And we won't have that until we have helium-3 based fusion power. There is no point in sending a person to Mars until we have those conditions. A rover can pick up rocks and analyze them just as well as a person can. If you want to test long term human habitation, send a crew to the bottom of the ocean for a couple years, or to Antarctica.
So let's send a person with no technology to survive there and with no technology to be recovered or helped if anything goes wrong to the bottom of ocean to study those vents right?
The bottom of the Ocean would be significantly more difficult to survive and we already do Antarctica....just because you lack imagination and curiosity does not sentence the whole species to such limitations. And we actually DO have the technology....that is what we are discussing.
This, again, is untrue. While cheap interplanetary travel would certainly make it easier, we can sustain long-term habitation on Mars by a combination of several things: First, send the gear. Have some of it automated. For instance, an automatic still that can spend months or years generating water (via adsorption from the atmosphere) or electricity or fuel or whatever, storing it up for the arrival of humans. As much as possible, send TOOLS so things can be manufactured on site, thus eliminating the need for boosting everything from Earth. We will have a planet's worth of resources to work with: no need to carry coals to Newcastle. Then, send the humans. They will need enough shelter, fuel and food to survive while they build a more permanent, self-sustaining structure. After that, they will contribute to their own upkeep. Anything that can't be produce on Mars, send from Earth. This would be a lot at the beginning, but less and less as time went on. Might a Mars colony be permanently dependent on at least some level of shipments from Earth? Maybe, just like colonies here on Earth often depended on the mother country for years. But it's certainly doable. Again, that would certainly make everything easier. But it's not a requirement. Well certainly you start with easier-to-access habitats and work your way up. If we can't establish a Moon base, we certainly can't establish a Mars base. But a deep-sea habitat, for instance, will have limited relevance to a Mars mission. The problem in the deep sea is lack of light and massive amounts of pressure. The problem on Mars is the opposite. IMO, it should be Antarctica, then the Moon, then Mars.
Agree. If we can't Moon Base, how can we Mars colonization? The Moon would also serve as a "shakedown" for equipment to be sent to Mars. Better to pick up equipment failure 3 days away than how many months? Medical and dental emergencies too. And never forget, http://sciencefiction.com/2016/07/2...oon-is-a-harsh-mistress-robert-heinlein-1966/ That's why they don't need no guns Moi r > g Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic, regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
I would wait to explore Mars until we discover a unified field theory, thus we can turn energy into matter and we would have faster than light travel.
Moon or Mars colonization and the ocean are too different. One needs pressurizing, the other needs pressure relief. Yes to Moon Base first. Do you remember America's 10 year program to get a man to the Moon and safely returned to Earth. I do. Yes We Can, Mars in 10 years. Do we want to enough? No! Consider, Moon efforts doubled as nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile efforts. Moi r > g Stop Creeping ism Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic, regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
It is a particle! Did you see the reference linked above? Please do. Gravity. If not a force, what is it? A deity? Gravity is as much of a force as electromagnetism or even light. Gravity, another conundrum similar to light. Particle or wave. But in gravitational realms. Whose Science team is looking and trying to prove what ? Moi One of the Graviton faithful Gravitons keep me grounded. PS - Y'got Global Warming beyond recent history faithful. Y'got Mr. Higgs boson faithful and likewise gravitational waves. All with their own, purpose driven "Science" via no one on the team doesn't believe and $$$. So Why Not, Graviton faithful? I'm Jewish, I'm use to being in a faithful extreme minority. Maybe someone should really look for Gravitons. r > g Police State Police share information on innocent civilians. A primitive form of "meta data" storage on us. A copy of this upload is stored by the gov't. Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic, regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
I think I would approach Mars exploration from another angle; instead of sending humans to Mars and back again just for the shits and grins, how about building a self-sustaining space station/vessel, to house like 50-100 humans and equipment, etc., and send it to orbit around Mars? Once in orbit unmanned vessels from Earth can ferry supplies and equipment. The space station will have a lander to ferry humans and supplies to the surface of Mars for the long term project of building a permanent and sustainable post on Mars. Once the post is complete, transfer some of the humans from the space station to Mars, plus at that time continue ferrying humans from Earth...all of them probably a one-way trip. Then the space station has the option to take flight...a one way trip...to wherever it feels like going...
If we can sustain humans on board a ship for months and months, we can sustain them on the planet below. Probably even more easily. That said, an orbital presence can be useful. Then there is the concept of the ship itself being part of the payload -- use it to get there, then land it on the planet, where it can serve as a shelter, power supply and factory while the permanent habitat is built.
Gravity is a one dimensional expression. Look up the inverse square law of gravity. It's a one-dimensional expression. It's not a force, it has no force carriers. It's just an effect of geometry.
No to inverse square law. I detest proving stuff with mathematics, such as Mr. Higgs boson. We all know "gravity happens". No arithmetic is gonna tell me otherwise nor tell me their isn't a Graviton out there. We accept strong forces and weak forces. BTW did you minimally glance at the Wiki link above? Yes / No ?
You have to have flowing water to have life. Life may still exist on Mars underground. And at one point it was a water world like earth.
