Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Question?Follow

#1 Nov 26 2011 at 11:29 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Do you think we (we like as a species) have the technology and/or capability to put a person (I'm thinking it should be a woman this time) on Mars?

If we do, should we, like would it be technologically or inspirationally or politcally beneficial at this point?

Edit: Today's question was inspired by the rover NASA launched to Mars today.

Edited, Nov 26th 2011 6:32pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#2 Nov 26 2011 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

Anyway, men go to Mars, women go to Venus.

Edited, Nov 26th 2011 12:55pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Nov 26 2011 at 1:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,905 posts
We have had the technology since the 1960's to make a successful mars trip. There and back. It would be very expensive, and without pressure from some sort of cold war space race, there was very little political will to persue it.

The main thing you need for a mars trip is a heavy lift rocket capable of orbiting components of an interplanetary vehicle. It has to be bigger than a moon rocket because of the shere length of the trip. NERVA rockets become a requirement for propulsion, as does an onboard electrical source not dependant on solar energy. You launch your mars base and fuel maker robot to the surface of mars ahead of time, ensure it sets up and starts making fuel for your return trip via hydrogen electrolosys, then you send your people. A biglow Aerospace style transhab module would be an excellent base for both a mars base and a mars spaceship. Maybe use the completed but never launched ISS crew quarters module as the central core of a ship since it would have the rigidity needed to take initial acceleration thrust. Radiation shielding would be required, which would mean orbiting lead panels. the heavy lift rocket could again assist with that, and once the mars trip was over they could be attached to the ISS to provide better shielding.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#4 Nov 26 2011 at 3:32 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
9,372 posts
I don't doubt we could do it if we wanted to.

____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#5 Nov 26 2011 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
Jophiel wrote:
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

I can think of a few women to abandon on Mars, which would be very inspirational indeed!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#6 Nov 26 2011 at 5:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
9,372 posts
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

I can think of a few women to abandon on Mars, which would be very inspirational indeed!


Ann Coulter?
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#7 Nov 26 2011 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,550 posts

We have had the technology since the 1960's to make a successful mars trip. There and back. It would be very expensive, and without pressure from some sort of cold war space race, there was very little political will to persue it.


Yeah, wrong.

Forget "and back" that's a ******* pipe dream.

No one has any clue how to land a craft large enough to support human space travel on Mars. There are multiple, significant, technological challenges. We're trillions of dollars and decades away from having a *theory* of how to do it, never mind being able to execute it. The failure rate of landing smaller craft that have heat and G tolerances that humans would die within is still in the 40% range. What you're talking about is landing a craft that's conservatively 10 times larger significantly more gently, with a method that works 99.9999% of the time.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#8 Nov 26 2011 at 7:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,011 posts
Olorinus wrote:
I don't doubt we could do it if we wanted to.


/agree

The costs and risks are still relatively high and I'm not sure there's any real pressing reason to go at the moment. That being said, if one of these little probe thingies happen to find something resembling life there I bet you could get some cash flowing towards the idea.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#9 Nov 26 2011 at 7:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
Olorinus wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

I can think of a few women to abandon on Mars, which would be very inspirational indeed!


Ann Coulter?


There's one...Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin and Lady Gaga also come to mind.

someproteinguy wrote:
The costs and risks are still relatively high and I'm not sure there's any real pressing reason to go at the moment. That being said, if one of these little probe thingies happen to find something resembling lifeprofit there I bet you could get some cash flowing towards the idea.


FTFY.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#10 Nov 26 2011 at 7:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,011 posts
Debalic wrote:


someproteinguy wrote:
The costs and risks are still relatively high and I'm not sure there's any real pressing reason to go at the moment. That being said, if one of these little probe thingies happen to find something resembling lifeprofit there I bet you could get some cash flowing towards the idea.


FTFY.


Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#11 Nov 26 2011 at 8:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,905 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

We have had the technology since the 1960's to make a successful mars trip. There and back. It would be very expensive, and without pressure from some sort of cold war space race, there was very little political will to persue it.


Yeah, wrong.

Forget "and back" that's a @#%^ing pipe dream.

No one has any clue how to land a craft large enough to support human space travel on Mars. There are multiple, significant, technological challenges. We're trillions of dollars and decades away from having a *theory* of how to do it, never mind being able to execute it. The failure rate of landing smaller craft that have heat and G tolerances that humans would die within is still in the 40% range. What you're talking about is landing a craft that's conservatively 10 times larger significantly more gently, with a method that works 99.9999% of the time.


The failure rate of previous mars expeditions have all been due to human error, Little things like metric vs english units, etc. If you take away those and look only at failures due to hardware design, you are left with a pile of russian failures and a 95% success rate amongst US missions that weren't lsot due to some underpaid lab student swapping a decimal point. The Mars observer being the one I would attribute to hardware failure outside of design paramaters. The polar lander and the climate orbiter were due to crappy design and testing.

Trillions of dollars? Eh, I'll give you 600 billion. Thats roughly 6 times what the entire full on constellation program would have cost. and 10 years to design build and launch if we started right this second wouldn't be unreasonable. Maybe 15. That being said, if there was a large enough pile of cash, and we broke out our existing designs, we could get there today, using existing technology, without any problems,m assuming we had a heavy lift capability. The challenges are not insurmountable by any means. Lets examine them.

1. Can we get there?
Orbital mechanics is a known quantity. given values for thrust, mass, gravitational influence, and the ability to alter course along the way, we could easily get to mars. We have done so with probes. Orbital insertion is nothing new, and assuming someone doesn't horribly botch the numbers again, that part of the process is the easy part.

2. Can we land there?
Sure. Mars has an atmosphere. Less dense than earths, but still significant. Parachutes, albiet larger than required here would work. Soyuz style direct rocket landing was used with great success during the viking missions. Need to land more mass? simply scale them up. You land things in pieces, and then either land robots or humans to attach the pieces together. Robotic telemetry at that range is a known constant, and is quite doable. Aside from the angry martians shooting at our mars probes, there is nothing to prevent using current existing technology to land there. ****, a modified lunar lander with significantly uprated engines could do it. Easily. Its a simple question of thrust to weight ratios. The G forces encountered during landing are determined by the type of rentry method used and the amount of money spent on them. If you could somehow have sat a human on one of the viking probes, that reentry would have been quite survivable. Furthermore G stress has not played a factor in any of the loss of US mars mission hardware. The high G airbag bounce landings were utilized by the rovers simply because it was inexpensive compared to more expensive options such as the so called "sky crane" that will be landing the multi thousand pound large scale "Curiosity" mars rover here in a few months. A rover incidentally that masses about the same as that of oh, lets say a Lunar Lander. We can land **** on mars. Yes, its rocket science, but we have good rocket scientists. A landing craft 10 times larger than that which landed sprit and oppertunity is easily done. Landing it significantly more gently, also easily done. works 99.99999 percent of the time? We'd have to try it to find out for sure, but if we get the math right and do proper flight testing and trial runs, then yes. that too is easy.

3. Can we break orbit once we get there?
Yup. we have rockets that will lift sufficient mass to exit the atmosphere of mars. We know they will work in the martian atmosphere. Fueling them is an issue that needs to be solved, but we could either land fuel ahead of time, or land near known ice deposits and make our own fuel from water using electrolosys. the chemical process works in space, so it should work on mars, and we would know either way before we got there. Thats one of those things that we would need to research further if we didn't simply land the fuel, which has its own risks.

4. Can we make it there in the first place alive? What about cosmic rays, radiation, low light, low gravity?
Not everyone is going to be physically able to make the trip to mars. It would take a dedicated, specially conditioned individual with experiance in microgravity. I hear some countries call them "astronauts" these days. The cosmic radiation issue is a big issue, but one that is solvable by a combination of magnetic shielding and lead plates, possibly combined with strategic placement of water tanks. The effects of a low light environment on humans would be detrimental, but any theoretical mars mission would need some sort of nuclear power source onboard anyways, so electricity and artificial lighting would not be an issue. Low gravity exposure over the duration of a mars mission is a problem, but we have had people in orbit (the russians on MIR and us on the ISS) sufficient in duration to have made it to mars. Addition of a centrifuge module to any theoretical mars ship would help alleviate the detremental effects, though the return trip could have complications. Its another area that would need to be researched further, but not insurmountable. What about food, water, heat and air? The nuclear plant provides sufficeint power for electrolosys and running a Sabatier reaction CO2 reclamation operation. Heat and methane are byproducts, with hydrogen being required as reaction mass. Large water tanks, doubling as radiation shielding would provide hydrogen and oxygen via simple electrolysis. Water would also be recycled. The hardware for such processes has already been flight tested on smaller scales. Psychological isolation effects would be difficult, but given high bandwidth transmission capability, aside from the transmission lag, communications should be easily accompleshed, and as the lag increased, the excitement of nearing the goal of a landing on mars would fill some of that gap. Social effects from people living in close quarters for over a year would also need careful monitoring, but if you build the ship large enough in the first place, possibly using a BA330 transhab module per person to provide sufficeint space, then that too should be manageable. Medical emergancies en route would be problematic, but if one of the crew were a trained physician with access to sufficient medical gear and the rest of the crew was trained to assist, that too should be manageable, especially given that the selection process in the first place would weed out anyone with likely medical issues that would crop up along the way. Possibly with pre removal of appendicies, etc.

We have the structural engineering capability. Once we have a heavy lift rocket, we will be able to place suitible components in orbit to build a mars ship. The basic designs already exist. Transhabs have been flight tested several times now, and both the sundancer modules have been in orbit for over a year now I believe, and are still maintaining pressure, temperature, and air quality. Scaling them up is not a problem. Even building an entirely rigid ship is within our capabilities once we have heavy lift capability again. Add a frame and shielding plates to ISS style cylenders in place of the keel module, strap a reactor and a bunch of water tanks to it, put a command capsule on the front, point it at mars, and sit back and wait for it to get there. Sending a few tanks to orbit mars in advance with water and gasses onboard for a return trip is also easy, though keeping the gasses and liquids in a non frozen state would be somewhat of a challenge unless you incorporated some significant form of climate control. But if you can do it for humans, you can do that for their water.

The lander part is easy. they already launched the damned thing. The failure rate is achievable with sufficeint testing and design, no more of this "faster cheaper hope it is better but it isn't" ********* Theory is already done. hardware designs are already in existance on paper. Its the "find large pots of money to throw at it as a project to make it happen" portion of the equation that remains out of reach.

So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#12 Nov 26 2011 at 9:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Kao wrote:
Orbital insertion

I giggled. I'm also tipsy.
#13 Nov 27 2011 at 2:17 AM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,016 posts
I think we have a few more global wars before we get there; so No. (Don't you watch Star Trek!?)
Quote:

would it be technologically or inspirationally or politcally beneficial at this point?


It would be to whatever country funded it.
Being happy about a RIVAL country making such an achievement assumes that we (as a species) have matured to a point bordering on fairy tales. No; if a country achieved something anything like this all of the other countries would resent it with such bile and disappointment in their own countries it would likely escalate tensions..
Even if we had an international team on it; I don't think most of the worlds public would see passed their own borders.
(in Putin's Russia Mars land on humans)
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#14 Nov 27 2011 at 3:00 AM Rating: Good
Kelvyquayo wrote:
(in Putin's Russia Putin is Mars; also Adonis land on humans)


In Soviet Russia, you correct Bijou.
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#15 Nov 27 2011 at 3:05 AM Rating: Good
is Happy on Friday!
*****
12,443 posts
While I'm both surprised at how much thought Kao has given this and at the same time not at all shocked, I am amazed that this list

Debalic wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

I can think of a few women to abandon on Mars, which would be very inspirational indeed!


Ann Coulter?


There's one...Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin and Lady Gaga also come to mind.


does not include Ke$ha, Rebecca Black, or Justin Bieber
____________________________
Theytak, Siren Server
LOLGAXE IS MY ETERNAL RIVAL!

Reiterpallasch wrote:
Glitterhands wrote:
Am I the only one who clicked on this thread expecting actual baby photos [of Jinte]? o.O

Except if it were baby photos, it would be like looking at before and afters of Michael Jackson. Only instead of turning into a white guy, he changes into a chick!
#16 Nov 27 2011 at 5:44 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,272 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.
____________________________

(V)(;,,;)(V) Why not Zoidberg?
#17 Nov 27 2011 at 6:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars. ~ Kim Stanley Robinson.

That is all.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#18 Nov 27 2011 at 7:06 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,760 posts
Caramel Mars
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#19 Nov 27 2011 at 7:28 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
I was gonna make this post a questions straight to Kaolian, but I didn't want to be exclusionary. Thanks Kao for the thorough resposne.

Kelvy I don't remember you being so pessimistic?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#20 Nov 27 2011 at 7:29 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Caramel Mars

Canadians are from Pluto.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#21 Nov 27 2011 at 7:54 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,760 posts
Elinda wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Caramel Mars

Canadians are from Pluto.
Dark Chocolate Mars.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#22 Nov 27 2011 at 10:12 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
ArexLovesPie wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.

Well we can compare it to time spent at the ISS or other previous space stations. I don't know offhand how long 'nauts stay up there.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#23 Nov 27 2011 at 11:54 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,479 posts
Quote:
Polyakov's second spaceflight, the longest human spaceflight in history, began on January 8, 1994 with the launch of the Soyuz TM-18 mission. He spent approximately 437 days aboard Mir conducting experiments and performing scientific research. During this flight, he completed just over 7,000 orbits of the Earth. On January 9, 1995, after 366 days in space, Polyakov formally broke the spaceflight duration record previously set by Vladimir Titov and Musa Manarov six years earlier.[3] He returned to Earth aboard Soyuz TM-20 on March 22, 1995.[2] Upon landing, Polyakov opted not to be carried the few feet between the Soyuz capsule and a nearby lawn chair, instead walking the short distance. In doing so, he wished to prove that humans could be physically capable of working on the surface of Mars after a long-duration transit phase


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeri_Polyakov

Id say its entirely plausible for a human to make the trip, this guy spent over 600 days in space over 2 trips to Mir.

The most serious threats to the idea are rouge meteors, computer nav errors, a cloaked bird of prey, etc. The stuff that you can't really plan for and stuff that could make a trip real messy.

____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#24 Nov 27 2011 at 1:31 PM Rating: Excellent
$title{308642}
*****
0X317A posts
ArexLovesPie wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.


A test just concluded in Russia where they kept guys in a simulator for a year and a half. They played a lot of Guitar Hero and were still able to email and such (albeit on quite a delay) with the outside world just as they would on a real mission. They're all fine.
____________________________
Since 1 March 2004

Rift Signature
#25 Nov 27 2011 at 8:42 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
Does this mean we need to rely on the Russians for all our future endeavors? That's pretty scary.

I think I'd be fine, though. Give me some slow internet and GTA: San Andreas and I could spend a year locked in there.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#26 Nov 27 2011 at 9:38 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
5,671 posts


Lady Jinte wrote:
While I'm both surprised at how much thought Kao has given this and at the same time not at all shocked, I am amazed that this list

Debalic wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
We probably have the technology to put her there. I wouldn't bet on the technology to bring her back. So I'm going to vote against the inspirational benefits.

I can think of a few women to abandon on Mars, which would be very inspirational indeed!


Ann Coulter?


There's one...Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin and Lady Gaga also come to mind.


does not include Ke$ha, Rebecca Black, or Justin Bieber


Nicki Minaj tops all of those.

Edited, Nov 28th 2011 6:39am by Kuwoobie
____________________________
my Tumblr
Pixelmon Server Info
FFXI-AH Profile
#27 Nov 27 2011 at 11:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
4,306 posts
We have the technology to do it.

It would be very expensive and there is very little value in going. Its only value is in being a goal. What we should really be doing is building orbital spacecraft and getting really good at building things in space. Start mining the moon for materials, build orbital factories etc. Going to Mars gets us almost nothing until we have the technology base to exploit whatever is there. You make something up there profitable and our space tech will go through a boom similar to computers. We are very capable of making very good spaceships given a couple decades of real interest from big corps.

When you can make factories in space and gather materials from celestial bodies there is nowhere you can't go.
#28 Nov 28 2011 at 12:11 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,479 posts
Debalic wrote:
Does this mean we need to rely on the Russians for all our future endeavors? That's pretty scary.


Why is that scary, exploring other planets and space in general is something we should do together with many many nations. We should pool our resources and send humans into space, not russians, or americans, humans. It should be a planetary endeavor, not a race to see who can do it first with the least amount of **** ups.

I think events such as this should not have borders and flags, the exploration of space should be a Human Initiative, not specific countries.



(That and the US, Russia, ESA, and China have been pretty much working from the same program book for the last 20 years already anyway.)
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#29 Nov 28 2011 at 12:13 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,479 posts
Quote:
Going to Mars gets us almost nothing until we have the technology base to exploit whatever is there


Its called mining, and we have been doing it for thousands of years on earth, I think we are pretty good at exploiting stuff here, and since its the same **** in a new town id feel confident in our ability to exploit stuff on mars as well. **** we can get robots to do most of it for us.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#30 Nov 28 2011 at 12:17 AM Rating: Decent
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,176 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
Going to Mars gets us almost nothing until we have the technology base to exploit whatever is there


Its called mining, and we have been doing it for thousands of years on earth, I think we are pretty good at exploiting stuff here, and since its the same sh*t in a new town id feel confident in our ability to exploit stuff on mars as well. sh*t we can get robots to do most of it for us.


The fact that you think we can get robots to do most of the mining for us just shows how little you know about mining.
#31 Nov 28 2011 at 12:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,905 posts
The biggest thing about mining, is what do we really need that would be worth the expense to go get it. Once in space itself, oxygen and water and other required elements for life support become valuable, but only insofar as to support out of space presence. The real draw for space mining would be the rare elements we lack, such as the Helium III on the moon, and theoretically easily accessable elements in the asteroid fields. A giant strike of platinum for example would do very bad things to the jewlry industry, but would be a huge benifit to the manufacturing and electrical industries. Helium III is theoretically ideal for use in a fusion reactor. If we had suitble large quantities of helium III at our disposal right now, combined with the new laser from the national ignition laboratory, we could most likely sustain a working fusion reaction. Building your reactor to work with the rarest isotope on the planet at the moment isn't really a viable solution.

Other than that, the really abundant iron, steel, titanium, etc, we can get on earth, or recycle easier than it would be to get them from space. Then if you do get them, you really have to ahve some way to at least partially refine whatever it is so you aren't shipping back huge piles of worthless materials. That means some form of space smelter, probably on the moon, which introduces temperature variables, material handling issues, scale issues, etc. Once we have one up and running, we can then start producing materials for construction in orbit. That won't happen though until there is an easy way to get material up out of our atmosphere. A space tower or sky hook, some sort of starwars style imposible repulsorlift shuttle, beaming, what have you. Right now it costs roughly (and there are alot of variables here so you can argue the numbers +/- considerably either way) about $3,000 to move 1 ton of material from new york to london. It costs the space program about $10,000,000 to move 1 ton of material about 900 miles into orbit. Until we can get costs down to where it is practical to move large volumes of material up the gravety well, we aren't going to see large scale mining in space unfortunatly.

My money is on the skyhook personally...
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#32 Nov 28 2011 at 7:03 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Debalic wrote:
ArexLovesPie wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.

Well we can compare it to time spent at the ISS or other previous space stations. I don't know offhand how long 'nauts stay up there.

IIRC, it's something like 18 months. Sometimes longer.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#33 Nov 28 2011 at 8:02 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
The biggest thing about mining, is what do we really need that would be worth the expense to go get it.

Unobtanium.

Ya know, in Avatar, did they ever mention what unobtanium was used for?

I guess I'd rather see the governments or international orgs exploring the cosmos, getting things charted and inventoried and what-not, before the corps go in and start staking claims and exploiting resources.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#34 Nov 28 2011 at 8:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
Ya know, in Avatar, did they ever mention what unobtanium was used for?

It's the primary component in MacGuffin manufacturing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#35 Nov 28 2011 at 8:44 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Ya know, in Avatar, did they ever mention what unobtanium was used for?

It's the primary component in MacGuffin manufacturing.

It's for making profits.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#36 Nov 28 2011 at 8:47 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Ya know, in Avatar, did they ever mention what unobtanium was used for?

It's the primary component in MacGuffin manufacturing.

It's for making profits.

I have profits on my x-mas list.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#37 Nov 28 2011 at 4:07 PM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,016 posts
Quote:
something we should do together with many many nations. We should pool our resources and send humans into space, not russians, or americans, humans.


Just like Spain, Britain, and France pulled their resources to explore the new world! I'm sure we can do it!!
It'll be the New Age of Enlightenment; full of peace and harmony; just like the old Age of Enlightenment, right!?
lol
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#38 Nov 28 2011 at 11:27 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,479 posts
Yes and we used to be tribal and war over small pockets of land all the time, then we lived in communities and would war with neighboring communities for land, and so on and so forth. Every time we did we shrunk the amount of land claims. Sometimes we did this through War and taking land by force, other times we took land democratically. I think it is a very very likely chance that when humans do reach the time where we can realistically explore and occupy planets that we will have to become one. We would all need to represent our presence in the universe together.

Essentially Earth is one of (unknown) nations in the (giant ***) universe. Just like Britain, France, and Spain were nations in the (giant *** at the time) world.

that of course requires you to believe that there is other life forms that have reached or surpassed our ability to explore and travel in space. We may never find life anywhere, the % chance that created us is pretty small, but space is pretty big, and even with a small small % of infinite is pretty hard to ignore.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#39 Nov 29 2011 at 12:16 AM Rating: Default
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,016 posts
I'm just saying; the last century was actually the most enlightened, educated, technologically advanced time in history..
and it was also the BLOODIEST.

I am DONE with the delusion that human beings are suddenly going wake up and start singing about sunshine and lolipops. What reason does any truly rational person have to ever think that? I'll tell you the reason: DENIAL.
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#40 Nov 29 2011 at 7:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,042 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
I'm just saying; the last century was actually the most enlightened, educated, technologically advanced time in history..
and it was also the BLOODIEST.

I am DONE with the delusion that human beings are suddenly going wake up and start singing about sunshine and lolipops. What reason does any truly rational person have to ever think that? I'll tell you the reason: DENIAL.

I've been saying for a long time that humans and our "civilization" are a failed path, and the sooner we eliminate ourselves and let the planet come up with something else, the better.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#41 Nov 29 2011 at 7:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,896 posts
Debalic wrote:
Kelvyquayo wrote:
I'm just saying; the last century was actually the most enlightened, educated, technologically advanced time in history..
and it was also the BLOODIEST.

I am DONE with the delusion that human beings are suddenly going wake up and start singing about sunshine and lolipops. What reason does any truly rational person have to ever think that? I'll tell you the reason: DENIAL.

I've been saying for a long time that humans and our "civilization" are a failed path, and the sooner we eliminate ourselves and let the planet come up with something else, the better.
***** that. If we're going, I say we take the planet with us.
#42 Nov 29 2011 at 7:50 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
I'm just saying; the last century was actually the most enlightened, educated, technologically advanced time in history..
and it was also the BLOODIEST.

I am DONE with the delusion that human beings are suddenly going wake up and start singing about sunshine and lolipops. What reason does any truly rational person have to ever think that? I'll tell you the reason: DENIAL.
You're full of **** Kelvy.

If you thought humans were going to 'suddenly wake up' and be a different species you were indeed fooling yourself.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#43 Nov 29 2011 at 8:09 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,760 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
Quote:
something we should do together with many many nations. We should pool our resources and send humans into space, not russians, or americans, humans.


Just like Spain, Britain, and France pulled their resources to explore the new world! I'm sure we can do it!!
It'll be the New Age of Enlightenment; full of peace and harmony; just like the old Age of Enlightenment, right!?
lol
I'm with Kelvy. That's not to say it can't happen or won't, but it sure as **** won't be any time in our lifetime, or likely, our children's lifetime. Sure, nations may agree to work together, but when it comes time to rape the next planet and claim the spoils, they'll all go back to bickering. No, humanity is a ways off from being able to completely work together on this.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#44 Nov 29 2011 at 9:24 AM Rating: Decent
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,016 posts
Quote:
You're full of sh*t Kelvy.

If you thought humans were going to 'suddenly wake up' and be a different species you were indeed fooling yourself.


Indeed I was fooling myself for over half of my life :) in thinking that some great spiritual awakening would happen if I just like.. meditated enough or something..
I think that most people are naturally deluded with their own "or something".

Couple this with my long held belief that we are created beings; I cannot believe that this Creator made a mistake.. that it must all be part of some "plan"; thus causing me to reevaluate my entire belief system; ergo after some heavy study and searching I have concluded that Christianity is the ONLY belief that can possibly make ANY SENSE at ALL.
ALL other beliefs are pointless, ego-serving, placebos bent on catering to the flawed desires that MAKE this world so horrible and spoon-feeding the masses with the horrible lie that we will suddenly start loving each other by some random miracle of fate.

naturally I welcome anyone to adequately attempt to refute that statement, but I am not really trying to turn this into a religious argument.

(ok maybe I am)

Shalom!
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#45 Nov 29 2011 at 11:35 AM Rating: Good
***
3,272 posts
acprog wrote:
ArexLovesPie wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.


A test just concluded in Russia where they kept guys in a simulator for a year and a half. They played a lot of Guitar Hero and were still able to email and such (albeit on quite a delay) with the outside world just as they would on a real mission. They're all fine.


Even though this was tested and seemed to work, there is a difference between doing a test on earth where if something happens they have the added comfort knowing that they unlock the doors and they're standing in liveable breathable space. My concern is how will they fair knowing that there isn't a way out, that literally you will spend however long it takes to get there cramped up in a tiny *** shuttle.
____________________________

(V)(;,,;)(V) Why not Zoidberg?
#46 Nov 29 2011 at 12:27 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
Quote:
You're full of sh*t Kelvy.

If you thought humans were going to 'suddenly wake up' and be a different species you were indeed fooling yourself.


Indeed I was fooling myself for over half of my life :) in thinking that some great spiritual awakening would happen if I just like.. meditated enough or something..
I think that most people are naturally deluded with their own "or something".

Couple this with my long held belief that we are created beings; I cannot believe that this Creator made a mistake.. that it must all be part of some "plan"; thus causing me to reevaluate my entire belief system; ergo after some heavy study and searching I have concluded that Christianity is the ONLY belief that can possibly make ANY SENSE at ALL.
ALL other beliefs are pointless, ego-serving, placebos bent on catering to the flawed desires that MAKE this world so horrible and spoon-feeding the masses with the horrible lie that we will suddenly start loving each other by some random miracle of fate.

naturally I welcome anyone to adequately attempt to refute that statement, but I am not really trying to turn this into a religious argument.

(ok maybe I am)

Shalom!

God! it's like I don't even know you anymore.

Religion is pointless to talk about in the context of space exploration because if it has an bearing at all on the topic it's well beyond our current understanding.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#47 Nov 29 2011 at 12:28 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
ArexLovesPie wrote:
acprog wrote:
ArexLovesPie wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
So, which multiple, significant technological challenge did I miss here?


I don't think finding and training a crew of say 5 people would be able to psychologically handle such a journey. Not unless they can cut the time of travel down significantly. Eight months is a long long time to be confined to a certain space, even if it does allow for ample movement. I have faith in getting to Mars with technology, my faith in humanity is the lacking part.


A test just concluded in Russia where they kept guys in a simulator for a year and a half. They played a lot of Guitar Hero and were still able to email and such (albeit on quite a delay) with the outside world just as they would on a real mission. They're all fine.


Even though this was tested and seemed to work, there is a difference between doing a test on earth where if something happens they have the added comfort knowing that they unlock the doors and they're standing in liveable breathable space. My concern is how will they fair knowing that there isn't a way out, that literally you will spend however long it takes to get there cramped up in a tiny *** shuttle.

Can you hear me Major Tom?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#48 Nov 29 2011 at 12:29 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,540 posts
Started reading a new webcomic the other day where the future is so sh*tty, that after 2/3 of the human population is wiped out after the apocalypse people say "***** it" and stay plugged into virtual reality 24/7. Most of them are going to die of cancer or starvation anyway, so why not?

Edited, Nov 29th 2011 3:38pm by catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#49 Nov 29 2011 at 12:32 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,311 posts
catwho wrote:
Stared reading a new webcomic the other day where the future is so sh*tty, that after 2/3 of the human population is wiped out after the apocalypse people say "***** it" and stay plugged into virtual reality 24/7. Most of them are going to die of cancer or starvation anyway, so why not?

Who maintains the servers?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#50 Nov 29 2011 at 12:35 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Personally, I think the jury is still out on humanity. Relatively speaking, the sample size in years is too small, and the rate of change too great, to really tell where we're going or who we'll be down the road.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#51 Nov 29 2011 at 12:39 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,479 posts
Quote:
My concern is how will they fair knowing that there isn't a way out, that literally you will spend however long it takes to get there cramped up in a tiny *** shuttle.


Ask Russia, they have had several Cosmonauts spend months aboard Mir.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help