View Poll Results: Would you take a one way trip to Mars

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • Sign me up

    17 31.48%
  • Are you freamin insane?

    37 68.52%
Page 18 of 28 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 276

Thread: One way trip to Mars

  1. #171
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Those who think something is impossible, especially when the theory if not the practicalities have been established, are almost always proven wrong. No one is saying we have the technology to assemble an NPP cruiser and fling one off to Tau Ceti, it is however reasonable to postulate that as we've invented a theoretical mechanism as well as some of the engineering principles behind it that we can hope for more innovation and advances in the decades and centuries ahead. In the meantime the development and manned exploration of the inner solar system is hardly a pipe dream even if Mars isn't the most suitable candidate for mass or long term settlement.

  2. #172
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Mecca
    Last Seen
    01-14-15 @ 07:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,426

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    No, when used in terms of science, "universe" has a specific and limited meaning. It is a sphere expanding outward from a single central point, commonly referred to as the point of the "big bang."

    A common term for infinity is "the cosmos."
    No, actually I think you may be trying to describe a Hubble sphere or something.

    Those are descriptions of parts of the universe.

    By definition the universe is not necessarily limited.

  3. #173
    Discount Philosopher
    specklebang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Last Seen
    06-05-14 @ 08:26 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,524

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    OK, Mars. Name anything a station on Mars can do that a probe can't? Anything at all.

    Scientists stopped sending manned probes in deep oceans 5 decades ago. They don't send manned probes down into ancient ice. We don't send manned probes to the Moon for about 5 decades. All those could be done. Robotic probes do just fine. Why manually steer a machine there when you can remotely steer it from here?

    SO... the reason to send a manned probe to Mars, rather than a robotic one is?
    Mars is a big, rich planet. A great adventure. Unknown possibilities. A stepping stone for future FTL travel. Mars is only 35 million miles away from here.

    In your lifetime, you will drive almost a million miles. By car. So, by rocketship, Mars is just down the road.

  4. #174
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    How about this for an alternative?

    We put a manned station on an asteroid orbiting around the solar system? They then just along for the ride and requiring no fuel once they arrive other than enough to get back?

    There are probably objects passing thru our solar system that could be ridden out of it too. And then for generation after generation, now and forever, they could be transmitting back what they see along the way?

  5. #175
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by specklebang View Post
    Mars is a big, rich planet. A great adventure. Unknown possibilities. A stepping stone for future FTL travel. Mars is only 35 million miles away from here.

    In your lifetime, you will drive almost a million miles. By car. So, by rocketship, Mars is just down the road.
    No, it isn't "just down the road." How is Mar's rich?

    There was a lot of talk and even a couple companies trying to promote mining an asteroid. However, when looked by economists, even if it was made of pure gold and platinum, it doesn't work economically.

    I'll ask it again. What can a manned probe do that a remote probe cannot? For size and survivability issues, a remote probe can have 100 times as much equipment and 1/100th the risks - and can stay there and function virtually indefinitely.

    Do you have any clue of the challenges, prices and size of a spacecraft that has to support a crew and travel for 1 year (there and back) is? What is your budget for this adventure question? Plus big enough for landing and take off fuel too? $1 Trillion? $3 Trillion? More?

    What is rational about not finding out what they might be worth going for and where at least before going there?

  6. #176
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,375

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    OK, Mars. Name anything a station on Mars can do that a probe can't? Anything at all.
    We have NO clue. How about this. What would it take to sustain life? Why don't we discuss that? And THEN we will discuss what potential benefits that would have for the HUMAN RACE?

    1) Energy to Get everything There: What could research into that give us? I don't know? A more efficient energy for Earth?
    2) Renewable Air Source: Gee how could that help us out? Air filtration?
    3) Renewable Water: Well gee? How can we solve our problems with water now?
    4) Renewable food: Holy CRAP batman? What would that be like? A possible gain in the ability to feed a population at low cost and easy regeneration? What could that do for a starving planet?
    5) Medical Technology: Gee? What would gain over being able to use a cheap, renewable, and efficient medical system?
    6) Random: The thousands of other little things we could gain in the process of attempting to grow, let alone sustain, life on another planet could have COUNTLESS impacts on our already rapidly advancing technology. The fact that you don't seem to grasp this is insane. A simple look at history shows that mankind needs a REASON to develop this kind of technology, and it also needs a practical application.

    What can a probe not do that a (and I am going to broaden this because life isn't reserved to humans) life could? Determine if it is possible for life to exist on another rock other than Earth. You can scan. You can measure. You can have every little number crunch you want on the atmopheres...but at the end of the day you cannot actually KNOW what all the little factors that could end life in that kind of environment...unless you put life in that EXACT environment.

    Here is a Science Experiment that could be conducted:

    A small shelter is built on Mars. It houses a few plants (ferns, corn, whatever). They all have their own chambers. All have different environmental factors. All have controlled water and air and all of that. Well what if one plant dies more rapidly than another? Why? What in God's name could we gain from knowing that? Or what if a plant grew better? I mean that simple kind of experiment could be conducted and solve all kinds of human issues.

    Now. Yes. It could all be done by probes. Right? Sure. But that is just one step on a road that could lead us to investigation in human life on another planet. The fact is that a probe isn't ALIVE and therefor is limited in the ability to determine whether or not life is ACTUALLY possible...rather than theoretically impossible/possible.

    The stopped sending manned probes in deep oceans 5 decades ago. They don't send manned probes down into ancient ice. We don't send manned probes to the Moon for about 5 decades. SO... the reason to send a manned probe to Mars, rather than a robotic one is?
    Progress. It would take many technological developments that could assist human life on Earth...to gain that ability. So why try? Because it would benefit mankind.


    Edit:

    I would further add to the last bit...the purpose of those probes. Why would you continue to send humans to a location when the only data you are attempting to gather could be gathered with the same remote probe. I am not advocating...and nor is anyone else here...advocating the end of the use of remote probes. In fact in an attempt to design, build, and execute human life in otherwise impossible environment...it would require the development of more "intelligent" and efficient probes to do that.
    Last edited by blackjack50; 12-12-13 at 03:28 PM.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  7. #177
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    The race to the moon wasn't about science or space. It was about war, specifically missiles of war, national pride in the terror of Communist Russia. We did get to the moon. We brought back a few pounds of rocks. No shortage of rocks on earth.

    A probe could bring us Martian rocks for a fraction of sending people to pick them up and bring them back.

  8. #178
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    We will all be long dead and so will our great grandchildren.

    Remember there is no more space program, Obama killed it.

    There isn't enough private money out there to accomplish this, and if there was you certainly wouldn't want it spent on this.



    Maybe you wouldn't want money spent on this, but I see this as a very worthwhile project and I just might put a little cash into it.

  9. #179
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,375

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    The race to the moon wasn't about science or space. It was about war, specifically missiles of war, national pride in the terror of Communist Russia. We did get to the moon. We brought back a few pounds of rocks. No shortage of rocks on earth.

    A probe could bring us Martian rocks for a fraction of sending people to pick them up and bring them back.
    Gee. So the ONLY thing gained was missile technology? Or did we gain some other important things along the way? It doesn't change that the space race and moon race gained us scientific knowledge we otherwise would not have received.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  10. #180
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: One way trip to Mars

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    We have NO clue. How about this. What would it take to sustain life? Why don't we discuss that? And THEN we will discuss what potential benefits that would have for the HUMAN RACE?

    1) Energy to Get everything There: What could research into that give us? I don't know? A more efficient energy for Earth?
    2) Renewable Air Source: Gee how could that help us out? Air filtration?
    3) Renewable Water: Well gee? How can we solve our problems with water now?
    4) Renewable food: Holy CRAP batman? What would that be like? A possible gain in the ability to feed a population at low cost and easy regeneration? What could that do for a starving planet?
    5) Medical Technology: Gee? What would gain over being able to use a cheap, renewable, and efficient medical system?
    6) Random: The thousands of other little things we could gain in the process of attempting to grow, let alone sustain, life on another planet could have COUNTLESS impacts on our already rapidly advancing technology. The fact that you don't seem to grasp this is insane. A simple look at history shows that mankind needs a REASON to develop this kind of technology, and it also needs a practical application.

    What can a probe not do that a (and I am going to broaden this because life isn't reserved to humans) life could? Determine if it is possible for life to exist on another rock other than Earth. You can scan. You can measure. You can have every little number crunch you want on the atmopheres...but at the end of the day you cannot actually KNOW what all the little factors that could end life in that kind of environment...unless you put life in that EXACT environment.

    Here is a Science Experiment that could be conducted:

    A small shelter is built on Mars. It houses a few plants (ferns, corn, whatever). They all have their own chambers. All have different environmental factors. All have controlled water and air and all of that. Well what if one plant dies more rapidly than another? Why? What in God's name could we gain from knowing that? Or what if a plant grew better? I mean that simple kind of experiment could be conducted and solve all kinds of human issues.

    Now. Yes. It could all be done by probes. Right? Sure. But that is just one step on a road that could lead us to investigation in human life on another planet. The fact is that a probe isn't ALIVE and therefor is limited in the ability to determine whether or not life is ACTUALLY possible...rather than theoretically impossible/possible.



    Progress. It would take many technological developments that could assist human life on Earth...to gain that ability. So why try? Because it would benefit mankind.
    There is exactly NOTHING you name that could not be done right here on Earth. You don't have to spend trillions to go to another planet to experiment with growing corn, recycling air and water, developing new energy systems, medical technology or any of the rest.

    The experiments "in space" were specific. Effects of a no-gravity environment. A station on Mars wouldn't even offer that.

    In fact, all but a couple of things you mention are continuously being advanced anyway. DO you REALLY think there is a shortage of science in regards to growing superior crops?

    The few that are not - if any, can be pursued in trying to learn more about our oceans, of which less than 10% are known. Hell, the entire bottom of the ocean hasn't even been mapped yet.

    If there was merit to your idea, there would be a station on the moon. There isn't. No one in science or astronomy is pushing for one. It would just be a massive money pit sucking money away from legitimate research. A station on the moon would just be an outrageously expensive mobile home you can't leave. And with astronomically expensive and limited delivery and shipping costs. Nothing else. It would offer nothing in research, nor is it "space" because of the gravity.

    Why not a station on the moon rather than Mars, if you think being somewhere else matters? Because it's not as cool and because it would unbelievably astronomically more expensive than the moon?

    Astronomers lost interest in moon bases fast. They are rapidly losing interest in the space station orbiting earth too. It's just a pain in the ass to get to and extremely limited what can be done there.
    Last edited by joko104; 12-12-13 at 03:42 PM.

Page 18 of 28 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •