First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply We are going to Mars!
21029 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/21/17 , edited 3/21/17

neotag wrote:


brunswicker wrote:

I am not immensely knowledgable about space exploration, but I think one of the coolest things humanity has ever done was that we sent people to the moon. To me, that is far more inspiring and brings me far more happiness, wonder, and pride than any number of probes or rovers. I'm not sure how feasible the Mars 2030 goal is, but I understand the feeling behind it. Whether or not one think NASA should be focused on pure gathering of knowledge (probes and rovers) or inspiring people and creating awe (manned mission) is a matter of opinion.


The problem with that is we had no idea what to do after and the space program ground to a halt for decages. If we go to mars with no way to harvest local water the same will happen with mars. We still don't have a moon base because we never planned what to do after we got to the moon. We now know there is ice at the northern moon poles if we could sample it and see how deep that ice goes we could build a perma moon base. If we knew that then we could of landed near it and sampled the ice and have built a base decages ago. We need to send rovers and stuff so when we go we can have a mission beyond put a flag there.


Hm, I didn't know that. But at the same time, the original article states that the law passed also requires NASA, "extend human presence, including potential human habitation on another celestial body and a thriving space economy in the 21st Century.” I see no reason why probes and manned missions can't go together, provided there is funding. Apparently, the President's proposed budget for NASA cuts some funding for programs it deems to "Earth-centric" that are designed to monitor climate change. Putting aside whether or not that's a good idea, perhaps that means a greater proportion of NASA funding will go towards Mars-centric missions?
10297 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Abyss
Offline
Posted 3/21/17

neotag wrote:

You do know desert soil is some of the richest soil in existance right. It's just thin because a lack of plant life. The sahara desert is baren because of the sun and winds more then the soil. If you could calm the winds and add water the sahara would become some of the richest farm land ever known. Same with mars as far as we know intoduce life(microphse worms and such), water, and contain from the atmosphere and there really should be no reason it couldn't grow plants. Now maintaining that plant life outside would require thicking the atmosphere and createing a stronger green house effect


That requires a bit more knowledge than basic Geology skills you learn in High School though. I learned that in my 2nd Geology course. You also need to add in the size. Terraforming a 1km^2 plot of Martian land compared to the entire Sahara desert... The scale is a weeeee bit different.

Still, when it comes to geology... there are very, very few people I would trust on this site. You seem knowledgeable and Ninjitsuko (Shoutout to my bro) knows the most of any other person I have talked to on the boards about it. As far as I am aware I am the only person on the boards with a BS in Geology and deep into his Masters though.
neotag 
1838 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 3/21/17 , edited 3/21/17

Dark_Alma wrote:


neotag wrote:

You do know desert soil is some of the richest soil in existance right. It's just thin because a lack of plant life. The sahara desert is baren because of the sun and winds more then the soil. If you could calm the winds and add water the sahara would become some of the richest farm land ever known. Same with mars as far as we know intoduce life(microphse worms and such), water, and contain from the atmosphere and there really should be no reason it couldn't grow plants. Now maintaining that plant life outside would require thicking the atmosphere and createing a stronger green house effect


That requires a bit more knowledge than basic Geology skills you learn in High School though. I learned that in my 2nd Geology course. You also need to add in the size. Terraforming a 1km^2 plot of Martian land compared to the entire Sahara desert... The scale is a weeeee bit different.

Still, when it comes to geology... there are very, very few people I would trust on this site. You seem knowledgeable and Ninjitsuko (Shoutout to my bro) knows the most of any other person I have talked to on the boards about it. As far as I am aware I am the only person on the boards with a BS in Geology and deep into his Masters though.


Science is a passion of mine, but math has always been a road block. That block translated to issues learning scientific formulas and I never had the ability to gain a formal knowledge. I used to want to be a biochemist back in the day. But yes It much more in-depth for various reasons. But teraforming both on earth and on mars is possible. I honestly imagine sealed skyscraper farms on mars to process soil and grow plants that can adapt.
22005 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 3/21/17

neotag wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


Dark_Alma wrote:


neotag wrote:

NASA doesn't want A Pointless symbolic manned mission to mars. They want to continue looking for water on mars. Why? So when they do go to mars they can build a long lasting mars base. This is the same shit a Texas GOP senator did to the "Europa flyby mission". NASA wanted to do a flyby mission with Europa up to 160 passes to do a in depth map and atmosphere readings. John Culberson GOP out of Texas wrote into law that they had to have a rover and had to do a follow up mission by a certain date. Making NASA have to divert resources from other missions as to follow the new law. Trumps doing the same here he's forcing NASA to stop mission based on scientific evidence, and divert resources to at this time a pointless symbolic manned mission to mars. We get there great now what we can't resupply the base so once the waters gone the base is abandoned.


That is my main issue with what just happened. A landing on Mars is great, however, currently it serves no purpose other than "WE DID IT FIRST!" Having to land humans, then having them take off makes it incredibly more expensive. I would prefer to have more rovers land until we can find a source of water (in any form). We can then create fuel on the planet, we can possibly terraform, and landing will then make sense.

Currently the most we can do is land some astronauts, look at pretty rocks *SIGN ME UP* and... well that's it. There really isn't much more humans are good for there. Robots could take a sample, and send it back. This would be vastly cheaper and easier, as well as no risk of loosing 2+ human lives. The only thing the robots cant really do is take deep cores (gear too expensive to fly there) and get good scale images of structures in the strata.

As for Europa, that made me so sad. I was hyped for some HQ images of it. There was a lot I would love to learn about it!


If we can't terraform the Sahara Desert what makes you think we can terraform mars? 70% of the Earth is water and we still have water shortages. Literally the only point of going to Mars is for science and to say "FIRST".


You do know desert soil is some of the richest soil in existance right. It's just thin because a lack of plant life. The sahara desert is baren because of the sun and winds more then the soil. If you could calm the winds and add water the sahara would become some of the richest farm land ever known. Same with mars as far as we know intoduce life(microphse worms and such), water, and contain from the atmosphere and there really should be no reason it couldn't grow plants. Now maintaining that plant life outside would require thicking the atmosphere and createing a stronger green house effect


The winds are due to a lack of plant life. All you need to do is add water and we can't seem to do even that. Once we can turn the Sahara green then and only then can we think of terraforming mars.

Fun fact: Gadaffi was working on a plan to have the Mediterranean flood into the inner parts of libya and try to use it to get more rain and crops.
Posted 3/21/17
Lets blow up Mars.
6916 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Online
Posted 3/21/17
All that clay will be mine.
11816 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 3/22/17

Dark_Alma wrote:

http://www.space.com/34351-obama-says-america-will-send-people-to-mars.html

October 11, 2016: Obama "We will send people to Mars by 2030."

Sorry. Obama beat him to it. Trump is just following suite.


I wanted to add to this since its not much of a secret that OP probably made this thread in large part to toot Trump's horn.



Not that giving politicians credit for things that happened while they were in office regardless of whether or not they actually contributed to it is anything new, but still.
28264 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 3/22/17
Posted 3/22/17

MonoDreams wrote:

GG, taxpayers money well spent, going to a red, barren dust planet.


Better to insure the survival of the species than waste it on welfare and foreign aid.

24238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M
Offline
Posted 3/22/17
Oh let's just send more robots.

I'm not sure I see the point in colonizing mars just yet. What about terraforming land right here on Earth? We're going to need more land and food by (I think) 2042 to accommodate the 9.8 possibly 10 billion people that will be here.

Going to Mars will not solve that problem. Asteroid mining might, but Mars terraforming ... not so much.
6630 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/22/17
at some point we will probably have little choice but to start expanding into space sure we should also focus on keeping life sustainable for us on earth but i do think its also a good idea to start putting effort into expansion outside of earth as well also could for example use space mining to not only supply earth but also help supply colonies plus for example im guessing could get water and such out of comets.
25754 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Online
Posted 3/22/17
Hmm, I don't think I agree with developing Earth further. A big problem we face is technology replacing labor. Leaving very simple, labor-intensive markets on Earth might be necessary for stable society.

It makes more sense to develop colonies on Mars, or on space stations, and just explore how we can extend human habitat beyond our planet. We need to create that demand so labor can start transitioning to the higher tech markets.

The difficulty of living in space should create a lot of jobs. Not just for people leaving Earth, but for people on Earth since we'll need to send supplies. "Waiting" is going to be our slow death - we need to force the demand to encourage the transformation of our economy to support space technology, habitation, and trade.

I'll try to study it more, but I do think that expanding a middle class of engineers/scientists working on space programs would lead to a very lean, prosperous economy with a clear, long-term future in expanding human civilization.
2418 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / The margins
Offline
Posted 3/22/17 , edited 3/22/17
You can't force society like this. We went to the moon because the mix of rockets and ideology made it an ideal symbol of victory for American society. That doesn't exist anymore: not only is the ideological basis lacking (going to Mars doesn't signify the success of the West as opposed to some other thing like communism), but we also have other technological projects to choose from (nuclear strategy chose space and rockets for us in the '60s). It's true that figuring out how to go to Mars would bring about certain technological advancements, but such advancements don't have to come from space stunts. There are better scientific directions to invest in right now. Besides, we don't currently possess the right mood to do something like go to Mars.

If anything, it was worse for Obama to talk about going to Mars than it is for Trump to do so. If Obama says it, people are more likely to take it seriously even if it is stupid (and expending effort on going to Mars right now is stupid), but if Trump says it, it automatically has a big neon sign flashing "STUPID" above it.
1666 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
42 / M / the Netherlands
Offline
Posted 3/22/17
Mars, that's a nice trip to go!!
Cenric 
12734 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/22/17
If this is a good reason for Trump to support NASA then so be it. While this does not change much that's exactly what I'm happy about compared to some possible alternative scenarios. Space is an extreme version of a long term investment which is certainly something we need, besides it's more than interesting. As for whether a manned mission to Mars is the next logical step? I'm not the one to comment on that. Now it would be good if the same kind of attention was given to other important areas of research and technology. We still need to live on Earth for the time being and that isn't going to change anytime soon.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.