Explore Mars now
Pages
- 1
- 2
| Author | Topic: Explore Mars now |
|---|---|
|
Agent
Member # 1993
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 08:03
Profile
Because I know there are many astronomers around (hi ben!) I couldn't withhold the charming site I found recently. You can walk through a Mars base; it's a little bit slow, but interesting. Though I don't see the benefit of exploring planets where CO2 freezes to dry ice - the idea is still good for novels and virtual fantasies. :confused: But why humans ever want to explore Mars? To find a possible repository for nuclear waste maybe? -------------------- ^ö^ I was a cannibal for twenty-five years. For the rest I have been a vegetarian. George Bernard Shaw Posts: 1420 | Registered: Wednesday, October 2 2002 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 08:19
Profile
The trouble with sending nuclear waste off-planet is the unacceptably high risk of a problem at lift-off. The last thing we want is a rocket full of nuclear waste blowing up shortly after take-off and scattering it for miles across the land. :( Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5886
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 09:09
Profile
Well, we could use it for mining purposes. I am not sure about the geology of Mars, but perhaps it is reasonably rich in iron? Of course, we would have to drastically improve our propulsion and landing methods in order to make this feasible, and cost efficient. I can't see this as being worthwhile until the cost of raw materials extracted here is high enough. -------------------- My friend! Do not fear the flames of the demonic legion! Let the flames incinerate your weakness, strip away all neuroses, and transform you into a newly-forged brazen GOD! Then you will show the subhuman supplicants the true meaning of domination and the proper use of POWER! --Daemon Pavidum Posts: 52 | Registered: Friday, June 3 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 09:15
Profile
Mars rich in iron? How deliciously redundant. Now if only you could pretend to be Chinese or something. Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 10:46
Profile
Pretty much any terrestrial planet is rich in iron. Iron is one of the more common elements in the universe, because the iron nucleus is the most stable of all. It is hard to think of anything that might exist on Mars that wouldn't be much cheaper to extract from Earth instead. Keep in mind that we are not actually anywhere near to running out of any substance on Earth; we are just running out of the most economically accessible forms of some stuff. After thinking about colonizing Mars for a couple of terms, in a course I was running once, this is the most plausible scenario I found. A small base is established for purely scientific reasons. With every returning mission it very slowly gets upgraded, until after a few decades or so it has become easier for people to stay there for years on end, than to ship back and forth to Earth more frequently. Gradually the average population of Mars rises, and a small society of long-term Martians develops. Assuming that by this time a very small community can actually be self-sustaining on Mars, some folks end up staying there more or less permanently. Once such a base Martian culture forms, I could envision a long term trend of slow growth. A small but steady influx of immigrants would be drawn to Mars because they liked the emerging Martian culture, whatever it was like. I don't think Mars would export anything much to Earth until it was developed enough to export things like science, software, and financial services. Until then it would be a weird cross between the Wild West and the French Riviera: a harsh frontier to which the travel costs were in the highest luxury range. -------------------- It is not enough to discover how things seem to seem. We must discover how things really seem. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 11:18
Profile
Mars is basically a wash; for a smaller price and to likely greater benefit we could establish permanent colonies in high earth orbit. I mean: nothing we could do on Mars we couldn't do on Earth for less money. Exploration of the planet is definitely worth doing - expand the knowledge base and all that - but colonization? Not really worth the expense. [ Sunday, October 23, 2005 11:19: Message edited by: Belisarius ] Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 1468
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 11:30
Profile
Homepage
Why put nuclear waste on Mars, when we could just blast it into deep space? If the universe is infinite in size, this wouldn't be a problem. And the waste would always be moving away from us. The only possible downside I can think of (other than the rocket exploding upon take-off) is if we find some use for that nuclear waste, we won't have it anymore. Though you could use Mars for dangerous research. That way, if the research lab explodes, or if a dangerous disease breaks out, human losses would be minimal [ Sunday, October 23, 2005 12:14: Message edited by: Eldibs ] -------------------- "We can learn a lot from crayons. Some are short, some are dull, some are sharp, some are tall. Some have funny names and they are all different colors, but they all learn to live in the same box." "Happy is the man that has wisdom and gets discernment. For having wisdom as gain is better than having silver as gain and having wisdom as produce is better than gold itself" Proverbs 3:14-3:15 The horrible part about life is, you'll never get out of it alive. Currently boycotting: AngelFire, GameFAQ's Everybody should go to this site at least once. Posts: 818 | Registered: Tuesday, July 9 2002 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 6136
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 12:16
Profile
I believe that colonization in mars would be quite interesting... but maybe for about 100 years later, it would be cool that our grandsons could go to vacations on mars :D -------------------- Death to my enemies!! Posts: 446 | Registered: Friday, July 22 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 32
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 12:36
Profile
quote:Mars has less gravity than Earth, and is further out in the solar system. This would make it perfect as a future launching site... -------------------- Lt. Sullust Cogito Ergo Sum Polaris Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 15:24
Profile
quote:Interplanetary space has less gravity than either (which allows for a wide range of scientific inquiry), and if we wanted to build a remote exoterran launch site for no better reason than gravity, why not the moon instead? Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00 |
|
The Establishment
Member # 6
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 15:36
Profile
quote:Blasting it into space is probably not a good idea. Over 95% of the theoretical energy content in nuclear fuel still remains after about five years in a reactor core. The problem is the energy content is not of a form suitable for current reactors. However, it is very feasible to process out the small amount of fission fragments or "waste", and put the remainder into a breeder reactor. This converts a lot of the otherwise not useful material into fissile fuel that could power regular reactors. The amount of waste is much less, and although you still get some byproduct, a majority of these have fairly short half-lives and do not require the 10000 year disposal that current fuel does because all of those pesky actinides have been taken out and burned away. Containers built for decades to a few 100 years are well within humanity's ability to manufacture. The reason this is not done now is primarily political and economic. Reprocessing and breeder reactors have been considered a political dirty word for a few decades now, although that is starting to change in the US. The real damper is the fact that enriching uranium ore is quite cheap these days and the reprocessing route is not economical compared to that. So really, nuclear "waste" is a little pesky nowadays, but will most likely be a powerful energy source for future generations if other options get used up and exploited. * * * On Mars: Although it is hard to justify in the near term, there are long term benefits to getting off this rock called Earth. Although a great place, it cannot support our race indefinitely, our growing needs will likely outpace the resources of Earth. So we come to an impass, either stop progress or go elsewhere. Mars just happens to be closest and convenient. Even without outpacing our planet, our species will face inevitable destruction from the cosmos in the form of meteorites and other cosmic disasters. This neglects our own ability to destroy ourselves. The more places we can exist, the more likely we are to survive. So it comes down to a matter of survival; our future requires we go in space. There is no other choice. -------------------- Your flower power is no match for my glower power!! Posts: 3726 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 3364
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 15:53
Profile
Homepage
Bah, Armageddon will happen well before we run out of room on the earth. ;) -------------------- "Even the worst Terror from Hell can be transformed to a testimony from Heaven!" - Rev. David Wood 6\23\05 "Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as you ever can." - John Wesley Posts: 1001 | Registered: Tuesday, August 19 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5991
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 16:29
Profile
Homepage
before having a large and prosperous colony on mars it would take years of terraforming and the costs into that kinda technology would be staggering -------------------- Visit the RIFQ Forums Posts: 462 | Registered: Tuesday, June 21 2005 07:00 |
|
BANNED
Member # 4
|
written Sunday, October 23 2005 20:00
Profile
Homepage
quote:And to think, you people mock the pagans. -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 6393
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 05:02
Profile
In my opinion, there's really no other life form in this solar system (besides Earth) - we need to develop engineering and scientific methods for searching in other solar systems or galaxies. As for mining useful minerals or gasses on other planets in our solar system - it could take decades to figure out how. I don't think we have the capabilities or the technology at this time. -------------------- Poster: 'I love your demos, but I have Windows, what do I do?' Answer: 'Get a Mac?' Posts: 23 | Registered: Friday, October 14 2005 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1993
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 05:57
Profile
To everybody believing at colonization of Mars: Could you explain how I would breathe in an atmosphere with 95% of CO2? Or how to survive -200° F? Mars seems to be too anti-climatic to colonize. Or you had to build immense biospheres ... -------------------- ^ö^ I was a cannibal for twenty-five years. For the rest I have been a vegetarian. George Bernard Shaw Posts: 1420 | Registered: Wednesday, October 2 2002 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 06:13
Profile
Having a hard time understanding the why. Is this for a fresh start at something? Most people can barely manage self-sufficency, and I doubt Mars will provide for human needs. I hope some bureaucrat has the momentary glimpse of reason to see that people are not prepared to do this work. Hell, we can barely survive the Antarctic and that is close! *this message sponsored by dreamweaver* Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 07:03
Profile
Homepage
quote:I know you guys weren't talking about this, but this particular subject just intreges me very much. Infinite in size? No. For as far as I read, the universe isn'r infinite in space. Its just growing with lightspeed. A very long time ago, there was nothing. Only blackness. No light, no nothing. At a certain point the "big bang" occured. Durin this big bang, a huge amount of energy came free, and the universe was born, thereby instantly making all rules of nature, of which humanity now knows of about 4,6%. But how does the universe grow? that's because of light. Light just continues on and on, thereby expanding the universe. That is, untill it collides with something and returns or goes on in another direction. Now I said this, here's one assumption: When light reflects in space and returns to, say, the Earth, were a human, say, me, receives the light and thereby seeing things, I actually just received light, radiation, of times when the universe just came into existence. But then how did matter came into existence? That's kind of a funny story. First, one had only radiation, energy and antimatter. invisble matter. You can't see it, but it is there. This antimatter devides itself in a split second in two part of matter. Now this all happens in the nucleus of the explosion. Thanks to enormous forces in the nucleus energy and radiation are shot into all directions. The forces are of course also working on this two small parts of matter. Usually the two parts of matter will form one piece of matter again after a split second. However, due to the enormous forces working on them, they are shot into different directions before they can turn into antimatter again. This way matter came into existence. So actually, after you think a while about this, what we know as planets, stars, Earth, actually is nothing. Weird thought. -------------------- Thralni's almighty Avernum pages: My webpage, containing scenario's and graphics made by me (And maybe someday the homepage of the almighty chicken gods). Click here for more information on Olga's fortune teller kiosk Olga's fortune teller kiosk has been temporarily closed down, but you can contact the prophet with a PM - Was signed by the prophet of the almighty chicken gods, gods of everything that is a chicken. Work has begun on the Nephilian grammar and vocabulary guide! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 1468
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 07:27
Profile
Homepage
quote:Yes, but since nothing we can make can go faster than the speed of light, the universe would effectively be infinite in size. The universe would expand faster than we could reach the edge, so, by the time we got something to where the edge was, it would be far away. -------------------- "We can learn a lot from crayons. Some are short, some are dull, some are sharp, some are tall. Some have funny names and they are all different colors, but they all learn to live in the same box." "Happy is the man that has wisdom and gets discernment. For having wisdom as gain is better than having silver as gain and having wisdom as produce is better than gold itself" Proverbs 3:14-3:15 The horrible part about life is, you'll never get out of it alive. Currently boycotting: AngelFire, GameFAQ's Everybody should go to this site at least once. Posts: 818 | Registered: Tuesday, July 9 2002 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 17:11
Profile
Homepage
Yeah, they say the universe is actually 3 times the size it looks at this instant. Anyway, the solution to the carbon dioxide and temperature extremes is quite simple: plant a tree! :P Well, it's actually not that simple, but its a thought. For Mars to actually be habitable, it needs a thicker atmosphere more than more oxygen, but it does need some oxygen. What it really needs is more gravity. -------------------- -ben4808 For those who love to spam: CSM Forums RIFQ Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5576
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 17:35
Profile
Homepage
The universe as a whole can expand at any speed, and it may not be logical to try to describe a speed of expansion, but the part of it that we can see is a sphere which expands at light speed as enough time passes for photons from farther and farther away to reach us. A couple of years ago I saw a rather odd theory that the universe is shaped like a dodecahedron. Here's an article I found about it: Dodecahedral Universe Theory -------------------- Überraschung des Dosenöffners! Posts: 627 | Registered: Monday, March 7 2005 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5991
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 17:39
Profile
Homepage
the day we can actually will be able to be colonizing other planets will be when we can stop fighting all these wars over pitiful fueds -------------------- Visit the RIFQ Forums Posts: 462 | Registered: Tuesday, June 21 2005 07:00 |
|
The Establishment
Member # 6
|
written Monday, October 24 2005 18:09
Profile
quote:A few facts: 1) The finite/infinite universe is a long debate. Because of the speed limit for information of the universe, the speed of light, and the fact that the universe is expanding (everywhere in all directions) faster than the speed of light. The universe is "infinite", but growing more and more sparse every moment. 2) As far as we can tell, there was not even blackness, not even space and time itself. 3) The mechanism for expansion of the fabric of spacetime is not because of light. The exact mechanism is not known as to why the universe expands and unfurls. However, light (along with other matter) does contain information, that is spread throughout the universe. 4) Light is generally absorbed and re-emitted. The original photons from the big bang have likely gone through many transitions. The exception may be the microwave background. 5) In the "beginning" there was only radiation, no matter or antimatter. This radiation comes in the form of photons, loose quarks, neutrinos, and high energy leptons. Eventually, the high temperature (caused by the dense collision and interactions of the matter) decreased so that the quarks could congeal into particles we see today called protons among others. Eventually, things got cold enough for primordial fusion to happen which produced much of the helium and some of the lithium. Other elements would have to wait for the construction of nuclear furnances we call stars. Further cooling occurred where elections were able to bind to atoms, gravity formed the stars which formed the heavier elements up to iron, which went on to form planets and other larger stars. Many of these stars formed the heavy elements like lead and uranium through supernovae. This gets us to where we are today. 5) Although the early universe had a lot of "energy" at high density, energy is not in and of itself a tangible thing but is in the form of photon wavelength and kinetic energy of particles. 6) Antimatter is not invisible, it has all the same properties as regular matter except the quarks are flipped and the charges are opposite, among a few other obscure properties. 7) Antimatter cannot divide into two parts of matter alone. This leads to many violation of fundmental physical properties. "According to these conservation laws, particles of a given group cannot be created or destroyed except in pairs, where one of the pair is an ordinary particle and the other is an antiparticle belonging to the same group." Read more on the following link: http://www.answers.com/topic/conservation-law 8) Why there is relatively little antimatter (called CP asymmetry) left is one of the big unresolved problems in physics. 9) The phenomena you are probably referring to is pair-antipair production which occurs all the time. Because of the uncertainty principle, a particle and an antiparticle pair can appear out of the vacuum. Normally this would violate the conservation of energy, however, they exist for such a short time period that the uncertainty principle allows it. Generally, the pair comes back together and reannihilate. This is a curious mechanism responsible for Hawking Radiation and the entropy of black holes; however, as far as we can tell, it is not the phenomena that led to the expansion of spacetime. 10) The statement that matter is actually nothing is a bit of an exaggeration. Particles (or antiparticles) consist of the "energy" in terms of photons and other radiation in the big bang. The nothing refers to the net energy of the universe, which appears to be zero, or very little. It seems the gravitational field and the strange dark energy acts as a "negative energy" to counteract the positive energy we observe in matter and antimatter. -------------------- Your flower power is no match for my glower power!! Posts: 3726 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5389
|
written Tuesday, October 25 2005 03:05
Profile
Why go to Mars? The same reason that the Europeans came to America, except this time without the problems that come with a native population. Also because it's there and unpopulated, while Earth is here and overpopulated. -------------------- Reports of my demise are extremely accurate. And I AM the clone Posts: 102 | Registered: Wednesday, January 12 2005 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1993
|
written Tuesday, October 25 2005 04:03
Profile
quote:It will never have ... unless the planet's masse grows somehow magically. :P But it would be interesting to see if plants could live in a 95% carbon dioxide air. -------------------- ^ö^ I was a cannibal for twenty-five years. For the rest I have been a vegetarian. George Bernard Shaw Posts: 1420 | Registered: Wednesday, October 2 2002 07:00 |
Pages
- 1
- 2