6 ms·

Successful terraforming becomes easy once we can send alot of rockets to a destination? We are emperically terrible at sustainably making our own planet more ho

Successful terraforming becomes easy once we can send alot of rockets to a destination? We are emperically terrible at sustainably making our own planet more hospitable to human life, how is Mars easier? I'm actually bewildered here; just baby me and spell out how the Mars colonization process works if the only significant requisite is being able to move things from point A to point B. Do not dodge by saying we've colonized land on Earth. Remember, the talk was about a method of transportation, not colonization as the title suggested. Optimism is great; don't let it be a means of deception.

mikeash 10y ago
Terraforming isn't necessary. Growing food is probably a necessity, as even this cheap transport isn't that transport, but you can do that in greenhouses. Water is available. Energy is available in the form of either solar or nuclear. Getting the colony to be self-sustaining is hard, but it boils down to getting enough people and infrastructure there that they are able to build everything they need on site.
- goatlover 10y ago
  We have bases on Antarctica, and they're not self sustaining. Consider that Antarctica is far more liveable and closer than Mars.
  - jboggan 10y ago
    Facilities for re-supply are so close and economical there is no incentive to make them self-sustaining. But it could be done.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Nobody has tried to make them self-sustaining. It's not as if people have tried and failed.
    - Alupis 10y ago
      >Nobody has tried to make them self-sustaining. It's not as if people have tried and failed. I'm certain folks have tried on Antarctica (we've had constant human presence there for decades). However, we still failed even under a much more controlled and hospitable environment - Biosphere 2. Biosphere 2[1] failed because of our lack of understanding of our own ecosystems on earth. A minute imbalance led to the entire ecosystem failing. The issue with Mars isn't getting there (or back) - government's have been doing this for more than a decade. The issue with Mars is getting people there, alive... and keeping them alive for the duration of the mission, and then returning them home alive. We're only now starting to explore the effects of microgravity on the human body - and having not figured out how to mitigate some serious issues (such as your eyes losing shape, causing you to go blind[2]), we're not going to be able to seriously consider long duration space travel, let alone inhabit another planet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 [2] http://www.space.com/25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vision.html http://www.space.com/25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vis...
      - mikeash 10y ago
        Why are you certain folks have tried to make a self-sustaining Antarctic colony? I don't see why anyone would bother. You can get supplies from the outside. Activity on the continent transitioned directly from exploration to scientific outposts. Biosphere 2 was in many ways more challenging than Mars. It was intended to be totally self-contained with all water and oxygen recycled. On Mars, water can be found outside, and oxygen can be made from the atmosphere industrially. The transit time to Mars with this system is 3-4 months. Astronauts have already spent far more time in orbit than that. There are negative effects, yes, but blindness isn't one of them (and your link doesn't even list blindness as a potential consequence, just impaired vision). It's possible that the reduced gravity on Mars would continue to cause harm, but I rather doubt that it would be so bad as to make the whole venture impossible. Maybe Martians have bad eyesight and shortened lives, but nobody's doing this for their health anyway.
        Alupis 10y ago
- DerekL 10y ago
  If terraforming is not possible and the Mars colony requires sealed and pressurized buildings, why does it need to be on Mars? Just build it on earth. And if earth runs out of mineable resources, mine asteroids instead, and build your colonies inside those asteroids.
  - wyager 10y ago
    > why does it need to be on Mars? Just build it on earth The point is to make humanity resilient to what would otherwise be an exctinction-level event, such as an engineered superplague, weaponized nanorobotics, or a massive asteroid impact.

mikeash 10y ago

Terraforming isn't necessary. Growing food is probably a necessity, as even this cheap transport isn't that transport, but you can do that in greenhouses. Water is available. Energy is available in the form of either solar or nuclear. Getting the colony to be self-sustaining is hard, but it boils down to getting enough people and infrastructure there that they are able to build everything they need on site.

goatlover 10y ago
We have bases on Antarctica, and they're not self sustaining. Consider that Antarctica is far more liveable and closer than Mars.
- jboggan 10y ago
  Facilities for re-supply are so close and economical there is no incentive to make them self-sustaining. But it could be done.
- mikeash 10y ago
  Nobody has tried to make them self-sustaining. It's not as if people have tried and failed.
  - Alupis 10y ago
    >Nobody has tried to make them self-sustaining. It's not as if people have tried and failed. I'm certain folks have tried on Antarctica (we've had constant human presence there for decades). However, we still failed even under a much more controlled and hospitable environment - Biosphere 2. Biosphere 2[1] failed because of our lack of understanding of our own ecosystems on earth. A minute imbalance led to the entire ecosystem failing. The issue with Mars isn't getting there (or back) - government's have been doing this for more than a decade. The issue with Mars is getting people there, alive... and keeping them alive for the duration of the mission, and then returning them home alive. We're only now starting to explore the effects of microgravity on the human body - and having not figured out how to mitigate some serious issues (such as your eyes losing shape, causing you to go blind[2]), we're not going to be able to seriously consider long duration space travel, let alone inhabit another planet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 [2] http://www.space.com/25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vision.html http://www.space.com/25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vis...
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Why are you certain folks have tried to make a self-sustaining Antarctic colony? I don't see why anyone would bother. You can get supplies from the outside. Activity on the continent transitioned directly from exploration to scientific outposts. Biosphere 2 was in many ways more challenging than Mars. It was intended to be totally self-contained with all water and oxygen recycled. On Mars, water can be found outside, and oxygen can be made from the atmosphere industrially. The transit time to Mars with this system is 3-4 months. Astronauts have already spent far more time in orbit than that. There are negative effects, yes, but blindness isn't one of them (and your link doesn't even list blindness as a potential consequence, just impaired vision). It's possible that the reduced gravity on Mars would continue to cause harm, but I rather doubt that it would be so bad as to make the whole venture impossible. Maybe Martians have bad eyesight and shortened lives, but nobody's doing this for their health anyway.
      - Alupis 10y ago
DerekL 10y ago
If terraforming is not possible and the Mars colony requires sealed and pressurized buildings, why does it need to be on Mars? Just build it on earth. And if earth runs out of mineable resources, mine asteroids instead, and build your colonies inside those asteroids.
- wyager 10y ago
  > why does it need to be on Mars? Just build it on earth The point is to make humanity resilient to what would otherwise be an exctinction-level event, such as an engineered superplague, weaponized nanorobotics, or a massive asteroid impact.