137 réponses à ce sujet

[Fortlowe]

I'll say this about finding coal on Mars: If we find coal on Mars, it'll be a much bigger deal than finding an energy source. Coal is a fossil fuel. If it's there Mars One immediately becomes a NASA program and the funding and power problems go away. Not to mention the one way trip deal.

Solar SHOULD be sufficient by now. The conspiracy theorist in me has suspected solar tech has been being purposefully held back since I was in grade school (I built solar cars for my science projects in elementary school for gods sake). The fact of the matter is whether it is by hook or by crook, solar power isn't there yet.

2025 is a ways off. An Italian fellow says he has a working fusion device he's calling an E-Cat. MIT apparently is testing a device as big as a refrigerator that can power a house using photosynthesis.

Maybe vast abundant power is on the horizon. Until it's a reality though, I still think this mission is going off too soon.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 31 décembre 2013 - 07:23 .

[Joy Divison]

^^ As for power conspiracy theories, I think our lack of solar is legit. We can use it, it is just cost-inefficient.

Now, gas-powered automobiles on the other hand...

[ME123insanity]

[quote]Fortlowe wrote...

I'll say this about finding coal on Mars: If we find coal on Mars, it'll be a much bigger deal than finding an energy source. Coal is a fossil fuel. If it's there Mars One immediately becomes a NASA program and the funding and power problems go away. Not to mention the one way trip deal.

Solar SHOULD be sufficient by now. The conspiracy theorist in me has suspected solar tech has been being purposefully held back since I was in grade school (I built solar cars for my science projects in elementary school for gods sake). The fact of the matter is whether it is by hook or by crook, solar power isn't there yet.

2025 is a ways off. An Italian fellow says he has a working fusion device he's calling an E-Cat. MIT apparently is testing a device as big as a refrigerator that can power a house using photosynthesis.

Maybe vast abundant power is on the horizon. Until it's a reality though, I still think this mission is going off too soon.[/quote/]

If you ask me, this mission isn't to soon, it's too late. We went to the moon and back during the sixty's, the sixty's! Now you're saying that were leaving for another planet to soon fifty+ years later?!  President Obama has said himself that he wants human boots on the red planet by 2020! Now why do you think the President would plan something like that if we wouldn't be ready to go by that time? 

Btw... we've had the tech to go to Mars and beyond for decades, the Gov just doesn't want to go 100% public with it.

Modifié par ME123insanity, 31 décembre 2013 - 11:50 .

[ME123insanity]

Modifié par ME123insanity, 31 décembre 2013 - 11:49 .

[Fast Jimmy]

If they can invent virtual reality, where I can sit on a beach and sip a virtual mojito while living on Mars, you can sign me up tomorrow.

[Fortlowe]

Getting there isn't there isn't the problem. Staying there is. The basis of my point is the moon mission. We went there too soon back then, and we haven't gone back since. The moon mission should have happened during the shuttle era. The mars mission shouldn't happen until the fusion era.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 01 janvier 2014 - 01:13 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Fortlowe wrote...

Getting there isn't there isn't the problem. Staying there is. The basis of my point is the moon mission. We went there too soon back then, and we haven't gone back since. The moon mission should have happened during the shuttle era. The mars mission shouldn't happen until the fusion era.

Eh. Traveling to the moon wasn't a matter of energy. Shuttle fuel was not a huge barrier to overcome - it was a matter of, literally, rocket science. Navigation, life support, entry and re-entry... these were all very theoretical sciences until the first moon missions. Just like extra-planetary colonies are right now. The challenges need to be addressed now, not moth-balled until every conceivable challenges is covered before we try tackling the issue. 

Fusion power is a possible amazing venue for making frequent and widespread space travel possible, but there are countless other concerns involved with moving from one planet to the next that aren't solved by power alone, and which are better tackled by experience... even if that experience is painful. 

[Fortlowe]

There is a significant difference in the technology involved in the shuttle mission and that of the moon mission. A sustainable off world colony will absolutely require a power source that is small, indifferent to environment, efficient, renewable, and abundant. Something it is lacking now. Something the moon mission lacked.

Obviously we can travel off world. Staying off world is the problem I'm addressing. Without a power source with the above requirements, we cannot. This is why we went to the moon and never went back. During the shuttle era, there still wasn't the power source, but the tech coupled with the moon's proximity to earth (among other features like low gravity, no atmosphere, and locked orbit) would have made a moon colony a long shot, but feasible.

Frankly, my misgivings are out of concern for these volunteers. They dream of living out their days into ripe old age under the Martian sky. Without a suitable power source, what's going to happen is inside of a year they will be freeze dried inside a compromised habitat that was hastily designed by dreamers and profiteers.

[ME123insanity]

Fortlowe wrote...

Frankly, my misgivings are out of concern for these volunteers. They dream of living out their days into ripe old age under the Martian sky. Without a suitable power source, what's going to happen is inside of a year they will be freeze dried inside a compromised habitat that was hastily designed by dreamers and profiteers.

I don't now what the big deal is about this insuffient power source thing. Solar is efficient enough to power a home if you have enough panels, let alone a settlement. And in elevan years it's only going to get better. If by the time the elevan years is up and a different power source is going to be more efficient I'm sure they will just switch to that instead of solar, so whats the big deal?

I'm sure people like you were saying the same thing you're saying, about the moon landing. Yet the astronauts landed there, and came back safely without anything catastrophic happening. And if people like you are going to sit around and argue that this mission isn't going to work, don't donate to Mars One, all said and done. I don't give a ****.

 

[ME123insanity]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If they can invent virtual reality, where I can sit on a beach and sip a virtual mojito while living on Mars, you can sign me up tomorrow.

Go see if you can join the Secret Astronaut Corps and you may get lucky and get to do that... you might not go to Mars but somewhere else, after all... space is basicly infinite... LOL :happy:

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Irrigation and Cultivation ... can you do them on Mars or not?
I doubt sitting on your chairs in Mars waiting for food is a wise future for any of us.

[Fast Jimmy]

Frankly, my misgivings are out of concern for these volunteers. They dream of living out their days into ripe old age under the Martian sky. Without a suitable power source, what's going to happen is inside of a year they will be freeze dried inside a compromised habitat that was hastily designed by dreamers and profiteers.

Let me be upfront and say if I appeared as saying your concerns are invalid, then I apologize - they are not. People's lives are at stake. And, barring that, their general quality of life is, as well.

Many could die. Many others could live in starvation, or drought, or dire circumstances that stress the mental quality of their livelihood. To be honest, I'm not sure the whole "reality TV" aspect of the Mars mission is, at all, a good idea. In fact, I'd argue it is subjecting the volunteers to a form of psychological torture that we have not even properly begun to understand.

But, while I don't want to sound callous or inhumane... deaths are gong to happen. Poor conditions are going to happen. Bad things ARE GOING TO HAPPEN.

It sounds curel to say. It is pretty abhorent to even think, honestly. But it is true. People will die. If an unexpected gas rupture happens while mining for oxygen, but there is no specialized surgeon to treat someone's, say, nervous system after it takes an huge toll, that will be an unfortunate loss. If an oxygen O-ring corrodes at a faster rate than projected and an entire habitat' said supply becomes poisoned, killing everyone inside, that will be an unfortunate loss. If the sponsor company goes under after some unscrupulous financial events and no supplies, upgrades or support is Vivien to the colonists and they all die, due to being wholly dependent on help from Earth, that will be a TERRIBLE tragedy.

Yet, at the end of the day... every sacrifice made, every lesson paid in blood and every value learned in death will help build the framework for how things are done in the future. As scary, sad and horrific as all that sounds... tens of millions died colonizing the new world. If we can mitigate that to just a few dozen, hundred or thousand to colonize a new planet, then it will still be a resounding success.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 01 janvier 2014 - 06:20 .

[Fortlowe]

The big deal is enormous one hundred mile per hour dust storms that last for weeks. The big deal is radiation shielding. The big deal is daily 100 ℉ temperature swings. The big deal is surviving in a hostile environment when everything goes wrong. And it will. That's not cynicism that's just common sense. 

Tell you what. Here's a link to their own website about Martian weather. If you don't think they are downplaying this issue, then I've a bridge to sell you. Solar panels are fine for robots. Robots can turn off then back on again when the sun comes out. We cannot. Month long dust storms are going to be very serious, ongoing, regular, and inevitable issues, that will require a power source that will function in spite of them.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 01 janvier 2014 - 06:36 .

[Volus Warlord]

Fortlowe wrote...

I'll say this about finding coal on Mars: If we find coal on Mars, it'll be a much bigger deal than finding an energy source. Coal is a fossil fuel. If it's there Mars One immediately becomes a NASA program and the funding and power problems go away. Not to mention the one way trip deal.

Solar SHOULD be sufficient by now. The conspiracy theorist in me has suspected solar tech has been being purposefully held back since I was in grade school (I built solar cars for my science projects in elementary school for gods sake). The fact of the matter is whether it is by hook or by crook, solar power isn't there yet.

2025 is a ways off. An Italian fellow says he has a working fusion device he's calling an E-Cat. MIT apparently is testing a device as big as a refrigerator that can power a house using photosynthesis.

Maybe vast abundant power is on the horizon. Until it's a reality though, I still think this mission is going off too soon.

The gov't has thrown hundreds of billions at solar companies and they've all gone bankrupt. 

[ME123insanity]

Fortlowe wrote...

The big deal is enormous one hundred mile per hour dust storms that last for weeks. The big deal is radiation shielding. The big deal is daily 100 ℉ temperature swings. The big deal is surviving in a hostile environment when everything goes wrong. And it will. That's not cynicism that's just common sense. 

Tell you what. Here's a link to their own website about Martian weather. If you don't think they are downplaying this issue, then I've a bridge to sell you. Solar panels are fine for robots. Robots can turn off then back on again when the sun comes out. We cannot. Month long dust storms are going to be very serious, ongoing, regular, and inevitable issues, that will require a power source that will function in spite of them.

LOL wooow... I respect you're opinion, as silly as most of it is and had hardly anything to do with what I just said, and I don't mean to offend you but, you're a f**king idiot who doesn't need to be involved in this sort of thing! And believe me, I now the risks involved with this... so did Columbus in 1492 that went into the unknown in search of land, along with all the other explorers in human history. If it was such suicide mission to even go to Mars, know one  would even be attemping to do it. Go and live you're own life while the true explorers and believers with the can-do attitude make history forever to be remembered! 

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

ME123insanity wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

The big deal is enormous one hundred mile per hour dust storms that last for weeks. The big deal is radiation shielding. The big deal is daily 100 ℉ temperature swings. The big deal is surviving in a hostile environment when everything goes wrong. And it will. That's not cynicism that's just common sense. 

Tell you what. Here's a link to their own website about Martian weather. If you don't think they are downplaying this issue, then I've a bridge to sell you. Solar panels are fine for robots. Robots can turn off then back on again when the sun comes out. We cannot. Month long dust storms are going to be very serious, ongoing, regular, and inevitable issues, that will require a power source that will function in spite of them.

LOL wooow... I respect you're opinion, as silly as most of it is and had hardly anything to do with what I just said, and I don't mean to offend you but, you're a f**king idiot who doesn't need to be involved in this sort of thing! And believe me, I now the risks involved with this... so did Columbus in 1492 that went into the unknown in search of land, along with all the other explorers in human history. If it was such suicide mission to even go to Mars, know one  would even be attemping to do it. Go and live you're own life while the true explorers and believers with the can-do attitude make history forever to be remembered! 

LOL Miauw... I don't respect you're an opion.

Even if the ships of Columbus were sunk and he had nothing but an small boat, he could get his food from the sea and could survive few days until he reaches a coast.

If something goes wrong on Mars for example air and food supply no one can survive without a doubt. And the space travel to Mars can be more dangerous if something happens to the space transporter. Have ever read/seen stuff about a spaceship that gets a hole in its fuselage?

[Fast Jimmy]

The gov't has thrown hundreds of billions at solar companies and they've all gone bankrupt.

They haven't ALL gone bankrupt, to be fair.

It is just that we waited too long. The technology hasn't advanced at a fast enough page that it is he sole providence of the US anymore, such that Chinese solar companies are able to easy mimick any recent advancements (because barely any breakthroughs haven't happened in the industry for decades) and, at that point, it becomes a simple manufacturing job, which a China will always be able to undercut costs on.

But that might be getting really off topic.

[Joy Divison]

Fortlowe wrote...

Getting there isn't there isn't the problem. Staying there is. The basis of my point is the moon mission. We went there too soon back then, and we haven't gone back since. The moon mission should have happened during the shuttle era. The mars mission shouldn't happen until the fusion era.

Spoken like someone who has zero understanding of historical context.

Why don't you read a newspaper article or two from the 1960s about space travel before you throw history into the scapeheap in your theory crafting.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 01 janvier 2014 - 02:36 .

[Fortlowe]

Joy Divison wrote...

Fortlowe wrote...

Getting there isn't there isn't the problem. Staying there is. The basis of my point is the moon mission. We went there too soon back then, and we haven't gone back since. The moon mission should have happened during the shuttle era. The mars mission shouldn't happen until the fusion era.

Spoken like someone who has zero understanding of historical context.

Why don't you read a newspaper article or two from the 1960s about space travel before you throw history into the scapeheap in your theory crafting.

So we've been back to the moon since Apollo? I must have missed that. <_<

[Fast Jimmy]

^

China has?

Depending on if you view "we" and "us" as the human race and not just individual nations.

[Fortlowe]

I mean a manned mission.

[RedArmyShogun]

The chinese are prepairing one around 2015-17 they because of security arn't being vocal with it. Hell they might could send a mission now and not tell a soul till the film is beamed back to Earth from the Lunar surface. It would be ironic if they found the US flag, given it would have been long since been sun bleached.

[Fortlowe]

Yes, the China mission is fascinating. Perhaps it's the spark that is needed to get the US (and subsequently the rest of the world) seriously involved in space exploration again. Mars One is such a spark. Mars One is a fiasco that will unravel before it lifts off, if we are lucky, or tragedy waiting to happen if it does lift off.

[Fast Jimmy]

Fortlowe wrote...

Yes, the China mission is fascinating. Perhaps it's the spark that is needed to get the US (and subsequently the rest of the world) seriously involved in space exploration again. Mars One is such a spark. Mars One is a fiasco that will unravel before it lifts off, if we are lucky, or tragedy waiting to happen if it does lift off.

...or the most bold step in the history of modern man? A non-governmental group accomplishing the first manned space mission in decades, let alone the first manned space mission to another planet, could revolutionize how the entire concept of space is viewed.

After all, the only long-term success is to get government out of the space business, just like government got out of the exploration business. They should pioneer the way, build the foundation to make the venture cost effective/desireable, then step back and let free market economics take over.

Risks are part of the game. Death is part of the game. The Challenger disaster in the 80's put most space programs on ice for over a decade because of how we view 100% success as the sole barometer of space exploration. A manned colony that is a one way ticket means, by its very nature, everyone on the MarsOne trip will die in space. Will they be from equipment failures or technical problems? Or old age? Either way - death in space has to become normalized, just like death in the New World had to become normalized as well. People die every day driving cars - yet if it is done in space, it is somehow the worst tragedy imaginable.

[RedArmyShogun]

Ehh idk I think they can pull it off provided they get the money, I've been on there news letter from the start. The biggest problem I see if they'll be using robots to construct the first habitate with all the spares and stuff needed for a green house, plus some various sensors and the like to search for things to make it look tempting for more people to get in on it, as to why they picked mars over the moon its as its more in line with earth and has trace amounts of water and ice.  Terraforming is possible on Mars, the moon will always be dome cities or impossible, plus we need to figure out how to make gravitational fields.

The biggest problem I can see is the fact the human crew is counted on with assistance from the drones into expanding the facility into a full fledged base, they even have plans provided the technology pans out for a landing station. Its more risky than what the settlers did in the new world but still possible. But its alot of work and a few hands. A Wheel Station in Earth Orbit would have been better, but saddly a base on mars is cheaper than a habital space station with all the comforts of earth. And Earth Gravity.

Modifié par RedArmyShogun, 01 janvier 2014 - 04:20 .