[QUOTE=hypno-toad;43599513]Ironically Venus is actually one of the better colony candidates, probably trumping mars and the moon. It's high upper atmosphere is comprised of breathable air, it has a similar temperature, has 24/7 sunlight, and because of the extremely dense lower atmosphere it's possible to have air or helium Aerostat structures remain floating in the upper atmosphere indefinitely (presuming you have a durable balloon)... though water would be an issue.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and North Korea is the richest country with the best quality of life on this planet.
[QUOTE=Killer900;43600495]Even then there's still a lot of places and things that humans can go/do where robots simply cannot. Unless we were to have robots rivaling those seen in iRobot, which won't be happening for a [I]long[/I] time, if ever.[/QUOTE]
I'd argue that rovers can go a lot further than humans can, since rovers don't need a steady supply of power to heat a spacesuit and oxygen. If their battery dies they can just shut everything down until the solar panels recharge it. Humans on the other hand would have to stay relatively close to their settlement.
I think we should build a base on the moon first and then send our men/women to mars from the moon. The moon would be like the staging area.
[QUOTE=Rich209;43600745]I think we should build a base on the moon first and then send our men/women to mars from the moon. The moon would be like the staging area.[/QUOTE]
Then you waste fuel putting them on the moon. Way easier to base it out of orbit. The moon is pretty worthless really.
[QUOTE=Porkychop~;43600684]The Moon is substantially closer to Earth than Mars is, [I]that does not mean it takes substantially more fuel to get to Mars than to the moon.[/I] It takes more, mind you, but the difference is far less than you are assuming.
Also, the moon is quite a bad colonization location in the first place, it has very little of the things a civilization would need to survive on its own (things that Mars has plenty of), and is incredibly dry. It also doesn't make sense to go there to get ready for Mars, because there are places on Earth much more similar to Mars that you could train on for much less money.[/QUOTE]
I feel like the biggest problem with a Mars colony is the distance
It'll have to be a lot more self sufficient than a moon colony because at the very least it'll take hundreds of days to get there, whereas you can send stuff back and forth from the Earth to the moon in a couple of days
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43599258]Putting a permanent colony on the moon is a lot easier, and would allow for a base of operations for other colonization attempts.[/QUOTE]
Then the borg invade. Resistance is futile
[QUOTE=Jund;43600785]you can send stuff back and forth from the Earth to the moon in a couple of days[/QUOTE]
Only reason a moon colony would have for existing. The moon is one of those places we would use for some top secret or overly dangerous biological research lab, since it's pretty easy to isolate any issues there, I mean, not like your rabid space chimps can survive the lunar surface, so.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;43600738]I'd argue that rovers can go a lot further than humans can, since rovers don't need a steady supply of power to heat a spacesuit and oxygen. If their battery dies they can just shut everything down until the solar panels recharge it. Humans on the other hand would have to stay relatively close to their settlement.[/QUOTE]True, however we would eventually branch out from the main base camp and set up surrounding camps as time went on, maybe even create a sort of tram system to shorten the time it takes to get from one area to another.
[QUOTE=draugur;43600755]Then you waste fuel putting them on the moon. Way easier to base it out of orbit. The moon is pretty worthless really.[/QUOTE]You're still wasting fuel putting them into orbit though, are you not? Also, how far out would the orbiting space-station be? How long would it take to construct this station? Would it be easier or harder to make an orbiting space-station or one with a semi-solid foundation like on the Moon? There also still a lot of science to be done in regards to the Moon too, lots of things we can still learn and apply to other situations in the future.
[QUOTE=draugur;43600755]Then you waste fuel putting them on the moon. Way easier to base it out of orbit. The moon is pretty worthless really.[/QUOTE]
The word "worthless" is honestly pretty worthless when it comes to space
Why did we put man on the moon? In relative terms it was a massive waste of money and a huge risk for very little knowledge that we couldn't have gotten from rovers
It's because we could
[QUOTE=Jund;43600785]I feel like the biggest problem with a Mars colony is the distance
It'll have to be a lot more self sufficient than a moon colony because at the very least it'll take hundreds of days to get there, whereas you can send stuff back and forth from the Earth to the moon in a couple of days[/QUOTE]
I don't think its reasonable for a [I]colony[/I] to have to be sent huge rocketloads of food, water, and oxygen all the time, because then the colony loses all value for the purpose of providing redundancy in case something were to happen to the earth (it's also expensive).
So in any case simple necessities will have to come down to closed-loop life support and in-situ resource utilization. Mars is superior in all aspects regarding this because of its characteristics and resources.
Equipment will have to be shipped in at first, but any emergency equipment would be months away any way you cut it because of the prep work that goes into putting [I]anything[/I] into space (right now, anyway).
[QUOTE=Porkychop~;43600905]I don't think its reasonable for a [I]colony[/I] to have to be sent huge rocketloads of food, water, and oxygen all the time, because then the colony loses all value for the purpose of providing redundancy in case something were to happen to the earth (it's also expensive).
So in any case simple necessities will have to come down to closed-loop life support and in-situ resource utilization. Mars is superior in all aspects regarding this because of its characteristics and resources.
Equipment will have to be shipped in at first, but any emergency equipment would be months away any way you cut it because of the prep work that goes into putting [I]anything[/I] into space (right now, anyway).[/QUOTE]
Unless we have a way to terraform an area of Mars with equipment that can be sent over efficiently, a Mars colony won't be much different from a moon colony
And if something on Mars goes wrong then too bad everyone there is dead rip
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43599258]Putting a permanent colony on the moon is a lot easier, and would allow for a base of operations for other colonization attempts.[/QUOTE]
you can run Mar's atmosphere through a compressor and grow plants with it.
[QUOTE=Jund;43600957]Unless we have a way to terraform an area of Mars with equipment that can be sent over efficiently, a Mars colony won't be much different from a moon colony
And if something on Mars goes wrong then too bad everyone there is dead rip[/QUOTE]
I don't think you know what you are talking about.
A Mars colony would be very different from a moon colony. The insulation requirements would be different, the radiation shielding requirements would be different (the moon needs more), the power sources chosen and habitation options would be different, the resources available to the colonists and the equipment you would need to exploit them would be drastically different. The list goes on. Water, rocket fuel, and oxygen are all available on Mars in huge quantities, and are easy to extract or synthesize. On the moon they are scarce or locked away in rocks where they can only be had through the use of very energy intensive processes.
Also, I think you are forgetting that the moon is a harsh mistress, if something goes wrong there you are dead just as well as on mars.
Going to mars is a great way for putin to put russia to work, and get the attention off of him trying to remake the ussr 2.0
[QUOTE=LarparNar;43599624]
[24/7 light]
This isn't. A venusian day is around 116.75 Earth days, which means 116.75 days in sun then 116.75 days in shade.
[/QUOTE]
IIRC, at the surface, the sheer heat coming off the rocks and atmosphere gives off light.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/YRrGQbD.jpg[/img]
I'm pretty sure most of the old Soviet photos are doctored to be brighter for viewing, though.
Mars is prime because it has a vast water supply that can be purified just below it's surface
[QUOTE=Porkychop~;43601133]I don't think you know what you are talking about.
A Mars colony would be very different from a moon colony. The insulation requirements would be different, the radiation shielding requirements would be different (the moon needs more), the power sources chosen and habitation options would be different, the resources available to the colonists and the equipment you would need to exploit them would be drastically different. The list goes on. Water, rocket fuel, and oxygen are all available on Mars in huge quantities, and are easy to extract or synthesize. On the moon they are scarce or locked away in rocks where they can only be had through the use of very energy intensive processes.
Also, I think you are forgetting that the moon is a harsh mistress, if something goes wrong there you are dead just as well as on mars.[/QUOTE]
It's all theoretically possible, but logistically unfeasible for the next several decades.
The most the moon will get is a few bases for tourism and such, and it'll remain mostly Earth reliant.
It won't be so small on Mars. The distance itself demands self-sufficiency, as well as people who are willing to live and die there. They won't be able to hop back onto a spaceship because they miss their pet dog. They'll be true Martians. We'll need thousands of scientific and technical experts willing to give up their life on Earth.
And the Martians will need food and power. You can't just fly geothermal power plants and farms to Mars and plop them down. That requires people who'll grow the food, and people to build and work geothermal power plants. You say stuff is "easy" because we've been doing it for years on Earth, but Martians will start with nothing. "Simply extracting fuel and metals" is something that requires humongous buildings and hundreds of people on Earth alone. I'm talking in the hundreds of square miles of land we'll need for all this. You'll need enough that it'll satisfy everyone living there, as well as backups in case something goes wrong so thousands aren't stranded on a rock without necessary resources for months. And this doesn't even begin to chip the mountain of problems a Mars colony will face.
Mars One is an experiment with a few dozen people, not an actual colony. In comparison to this, a few bases on the moon with a constant flow of resources from Earth doesn't sound like a complete fantasy.
So no, I don't think you know what you're talking about.
I would totally leave Earth to go colonize Mars if they figured out how to connect me to the internet there with Earth-like latency.
In short it'll either be self-sufficient on a massive scale or tiny and reliant on Earth, which won't be much different from a moon colony.
[QUOTE=Jund;43601462]In short it'll either be self-sufficient on a massive scale or tiny and reliant on Earth, which won't be much different from a moon colony.[/QUOTE]
Sorry for breaking your automerge.
[QUOTE=Levelog;43601484]Sorry for breaking your automerge.[/QUOTE]
You ruined my life ;~;
[QUOTE=Jund;43601489]You ruined my life ;~;[/QUOTE]
Blame my love for the Internet.
A Mars colony would be seriously cool, we all think that. But we don't really have an immediate need for one.
[QUOTE=Mesothere;43601507]A Mars colony would be seriously cool, we all think that. But we don't really have an immediate need for one.[/QUOTE]
I highly doubt there'll be one that I can travel back and forth from before I kick the bucket, so I'd much rather have moon tourism instead
[QUOTE=Mesothere;43601507]A Mars colony would be seriously cool, we all think that. But we don't really have an immediate need for one.[/QUOTE]So tell me then, when would we need one? Better to do it sooner rather than later.
Wait a minute, I thought terraforming was straight up science fiction and not possible.
Ah yes, here is my thread.
I've spent a greater portion of my young adult life (25 now) contemplating whether I would leave for Mars and help establish a colony, or not. Not to say I have some government offer or private insight into a seat to the Red Planet, but I have always considered it.
It's a heavy choice to make, as you will likely never come back. Stuck in a 3-6mo. journey through space in a small air-tight tin can. Only to land on an inhospitable planet where no man has ever set foot before. Then to build and establish a residence there? Insane. Some say you'd almost have to be crazy to undertake the feat. Yet i've swayed back and forth for the last 10ish years on what i'd do.
Imagine my excitement over [url=http://www.mars-one.com/]MarsOne[/url]? I've spent my life reading books on mars, idolizing movies such as Mission to Mars and Red Planet. Now the chance is finally here! [sp]Except I haven't applied.[/sp] :v: I just don't trust their model. Call it a funny feeling in the back of my head.
Anywho;
There are drawbacks to both Mars and Moon bases. Whereas on the Moon there is no oxygen, or atmosphere for that matter. The surface temperatures fluctuate wildly depending on the 'time of day' you are there and radiation is a fairly decent concern for Astronauts bringing in contaminated material into the station/base (recycled through air systems/ambient space). You do however, have a strong chance of coming home. With Earth a mere three-day journey at best. The Moon has something going against it though, while it may be close it is still quite an expensive endeavor to send and receive from the moon. The costs to launch a kilo and a half (a few thousand lbs) into orbit are astronomical. Never mind getting it to the moon and down to the surface. Anyone played Kerbal Space Program? If not, give it a whirl. Might help conceptualize the fuel requirements, and then you add on to the fact that at current; SpaceX has broken world records with the cheapest '[i]Space Fare[/i]' at $1,000 USD / Lbs. I weigh near nothing and it'd still cost about $150,000 to put me in [u][i]orbit[/i][/u]. Naked.
Mars however, the colonists are going to stay there, using Martian (or stuff from home) soil, and martian resources. There are no in-between journeys and so the costs are much less in that respect. The actual task to establish a colony however, are weighed much heavier in personal risk than they are financial. In order to start a Colony, there have been a world of suggestions.
Some as far fetched as sending giant '[i]Greenhouse Gas[/i]' machines that would suck up Martian soil, process it, then spew out Methane and CO2 to thicken the atmosphere. after several decades they would send mirror arrays into orbit to heat the atmosphere up and regulate it more through the night as the Atmosphere continues to thicken. After a century they would send algae, moss, lichen, and other hardened vegetation that could survive in a hostile, albeit pressurized, environment. These would slowly turn the Atmosphere from a CO2 and Methane rich composition to an Oxygen and CO2 mixture. From here more machines would be either shipped in with the Colonists or another means would be devised to regulate the Nitrogen and Xenon levels into the Martian Atmosphere. All in all, they'd planned to have Mars Terraformed in under 500 years.
There was a book series where the Author worked with NASA to detail how a Colony project, not of the terraforming kind (at least at first) would go down. It entailed bringing a giant dome, in pieces, to mars. There it would be assembled by machines and later Man. And I believe MarsOne wants to send large habitation/supply modules to the surface, years in advance. Allow machines to conduct a basic-setup of the base and then send humans in small teams every two years (Mars Launch Window) until they reach the 'residency capacity'. so to speak.
Watch all of this thread be accounted for, and then some mars colonist goes mad from loneliness and kills everyone
[QUOTE=Squad1993;43601659]Wait a minute, I thought terraforming was straight up science fiction and not possible.[/QUOTE]Well it's a theatrical process that we haven't tried yet. The main issue with Mars right now is the lack of a thick atmosphere, similar to Earth's. Mars' atmosphere is very thin and provides little protection from the Sun's deadly solar winds, which stripped the atmosphere away long ago when it was believed to have been full and thick. The core of the planet has also stopped convecting, leaving the planet essentially dead.
In order to terraform the planet we need to both restore the atmosphere and reheat the planet. Several methods of reheating the planet and restoring the atmosphere have been proposed, ranging from things like setting up giant space mirrors to redirect the Sun's light onto the planet's poles to help warm it up and melt the ice sheets in order to induce a greenhouse effect, to using spaceborne lasers to redirect small asteroids to slam into the surface where the impact energy would be released as heat. Reheating the planet would restart the core and allow it to begin convecting again, in turn bringing back the magnetic field to protect the atmosphere from the Sun. Thus allowing things like liquid water to flow across the planet, creating rivers and oceans. It's all theoretical of course! And those are also only 2 proposed theories, there's a whole lot more on the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars"]wikipedia page[/URL].
Like a lot of things science-fiction, they always seem to end up becoming science-fact eventually. A bunch of work needs to be done to accomplish a feat such as this, it probably won't happen in our lifetimes, and even if it did we would be very old by then, but it's definitely possible. (The planet's gravity is also less than that of Earth's which is a whole 'nother issue to think about, since we don't know what prolonged exposure to gravity less than that of Earth's would do to a creature like us, already accustomed to the Earth's gravity.)
Wasn't there some kickstarter about going to mars?
And I think it was big on FP
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
