Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

If it was built, would be go?

Page 4 of 4 [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

17 Jan 2012, 2:58 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

In the manner I specified, and that in which Dr. Robert Zubrin and others of the Mars Society have specified in depth, Mars is capable of habitability in that it will allow for a purely technological civilization. Sorry, but nature loving hippies won't be able to live out on the planitia for very long without their EVA gear. Still, you have the gear to live, you put sandbags on your habitat or bury it, and you have protection from radiation. You have an atmosphere from which CO2 can be extracted and permafrost and "geo"thermal wells from which water can be taken along with heat to run Faraday induction generators for power. For cold: insulation and heating. It's not beyond our current means any more than sending humans to the Moon is beyond our current means, and it costs less fuel to go to Mars too since you don't need fuel to decelerate as you do for the Moon. Both the Moon and Mars can be colonized now, but Mars would be easier, especially with agriculture since it has a nearly 24 hour day, most of the radiation is blocked by the atmosphere that Mars has and the Moon doesn't, and only for certain times of the year and at certain latitudes would artificial lighting be necessary on Mars whereas for half of a Lunar "day" it would be required.


Sort of like Antarctica except we can't afford it.

We would be better off manning the Dark Side of the Moon. The Moon is close enough so it can be supported and we can get useful result from their in short order. Build lots of telescopes on the Dark Side. Better than building telescopes in the Andes.

ruveyn

ruveyn



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

17 Jan 2012, 3:01 pm

ruveyn wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:

In the manner I specified, and that in which Dr. Robert Zubrin and others of the Mars Society have specified in depth, Mars is capable of habitability in that it will allow for a purely technological civilization. Sorry, but nature loving hippies won't be able to live out on the planitia for very long without their EVA gear. Still, you have the gear to live, you put sandbags on your habitat or bury it, and you have protection from radiation. You have an atmosphere from which CO2 can be extracted and permafrost and "geo"thermal wells from which water can be taken along with heat to run Faraday induction generators for power. For cold: insulation and heating. It's not beyond our current means any more than sending humans to the Moon is beyond our current means, and it costs less fuel to go to Mars too since you don't need fuel to decelerate as you do for the Moon. Both the Moon and Mars can be colonized now, but Mars would be easier, especially with agriculture since it has a nearly 24 hour day, most of the radiation is blocked by the atmosphere that Mars has and the Moon doesn't, and only for certain times of the year and at certain latitudes would artificial lighting be necessary on Mars whereas for half of a Lunar "day" it would be required.


Sort of like Antarctica except we can't afford it.

We would be better off manning the Dark Side of the Moon. The Moon is close enough so it can be supported and we can get useful result from their in short order. Build lots of telescopes on the Dark Side. Better than building telescopes in the Andes.

ruveyn

ruveyn


For astronomical observatories the Moon is a wonderful place, for a second home for humankind Mars is superior to the Moon. The part about Mars being a lot further away from the Earth than the Moon is particularly appealing to me, especially with so many wackos on Earth acting like Lunatics even more than the Lunar colonists would.