7 ms·

Humans Will Never Colonize Mars

49 points by spekcular 6y ago

disgruntled101 6y ago
What if we build robots that are remote controlled by humans using tactile feedback? We could have a chassis that can work on mars while being controlled from Earth. Maybe that's one of the idea Elon has with Neuralink. A huge obstacle would be latency I guess
- wernercd 6y ago
  What kind of tactile feedback will you get with a delay of an hour (or however long it takes to communicate over a million miles)? This isn't like flying a drone a scant thousand miles away...
- veliko 6y ago
  Why do you need that? Just send a datacenter with a nuclear power reactor to power it and then improve on the AI of the robots
- elihu 6y ago
  Message delay makes this not feasible from Earth, but it may be a pretty good solution for people living on Mars who need to do some outdoor work (construction, mining, etc..) but don't want to deal with space suits and radiation. Sending a robot in their place sounds pretty good. On the other hand, if AI technology is good enough, you might not need the human operator except for certain complex tasks. Most of the time you might be able to get away with high-level tasks like "dig a hole here" or "load this equipment onto this rover".
  - erik_seaberg 6y ago
    If the tasks look like “we’d like someone to eventually dig out a 3x3 room for an iron smelter across from the mechanic’s workshop,” that’s just Dwarf Fortress minus the booze.
renewiltord 6y ago
I think the only thing that will ultimately determine it is if it is profitable for humans to go there in some sense: money, a chance for a better life for their kids, escape from tyranny. Everything else is a challenge but to colonize you need upside motivation.
- Xplune13 6y ago
  While I somewhat agree to your point, I think it would be naive to think that any other colony will be different than what is going on the Earth itself. It's like moving goalposts instead of solving the issues. Now I agree that "solving the issues" is not an easy thing whatsoever, but expecting different results from other colonies and going someplace else where we hope things would be different is a pretty low motivation for me at least.
  - happyweasel 6y ago
    By becoming distributed, we could get rid of our "single point of failure" by habitating just one planet... which might increase the overall uptime of humanity ;-)
    - cout 6y ago
      Or perhaps it will make things worse, because mutually assured destruction is no longer as significant a threat.
pseingatl 6y ago
Here's a legal code for the Mars Colony, drawn from the best laws from several nations: marslegalcode.org
- bawolff 6y ago
  Damn that's dystopian: > A Citizens' Council of seven members, similar to a Board of Directors, will be popularly elected. The Citizens Council does not, however, manage day to day operations of the Colony. That task is left to a governor, who is appointed by the Council for a single, non-renewable six year term. So a weak elected legeslative body and a strong indirectly elected executive with very few checks on their power. > Under the Code, living and working in the Mars Colony is a privilege, not a right. All those who come to the Mars Colony will be permitted to stay under a license. That license is revocable. Similarly, all real property is held by the Mars Colony and leased to individuals or companies working in the Colony. Misbehavior results in losing the right to remain within the Colony. Fun. If you lose your license do you get a berth on the next shuttle or are you exposed to the elements? This sounds less like the best laws and more like some of the more dystopian laws. Its basically a company town where you are not allowed to own property, don't have rights and are exiled if you step out of line. Luckily the whole thing is bullshit. Nobody is on mars yet and nobody has adopted this. Easy to make laws when you don't yet have power.
  - f6v 6y ago
    > Under the Code, living and working in the Mars Colony is a privilege, not a right. So just like coming to US on a work visa. You loose your job - you’re out immediately.
    - vinay427 6y ago
      Yes, that's how a non-permanent visa works in just about every country. Some offer grace periods, but your residence there is still seen as extending a privilege.
      - f6v 6y ago
bawolff 6y ago
Never is a long time. The atmosphere problem seems tractable by living indoors. I don't think we have any idea what mild gravity does to a person. We have some limited experience with microgravity but nothing with mars-like graviy. Short term plans might be unrealistic, but never is a bit much.
- bobmaxup 6y ago
  I think the point of the article is that the hype is a bit much, with a click bait headline.
- ifdefdebug 6y ago
  The article actually makes a plausible argument that humans might never colonize Mars (post-humans might though in a far-off future).
  - mavhc 6y ago
    No true human? Just have to define colonize and human in a way that makes your argument work.
neolog 6y ago
From one of the papers > Recent observations have been made of the loss of Mars’s atmosphere to space by the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission probe and the Mars Express spacecraft, along with analyses of the abundance of carbon-bearing minerals and the occurrence of CO2 in polar ice from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and the Mars Odyssey spacecraft. These results suggest that there is not enough CO2 remaining on Mars to provide significant greenhouse warming were the gas to be emplaced into the atmosphere; in addition, most of the CO2 gas in these reservoirs is not accessible and thus cannot be readily mobilized. As a result, we conclude that terraforming Mars is not possible using present-day technology. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6.epdf https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6.epdf
- Isinlor 6y ago
  It may be easier to terraform Venus back into Earth like planet it once was. But we will be capable of establish permanent presence across solar system before Venus terraforming could conclude. Even with exponentially growing effort it would have to take centuries.
NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
Never is very long time... If we do not destroy ourselves in next 50 years, it is quite certain without any doubt that we will move from Earth. It does not matter is it 50 or 500 years, technological advances will undoubtedly lead to spread beyond the Earth. Historically, many things were "never" - until we do otherwise. I agree with the author that we need to solve problems here first. EDIT: For example, atmosphere is not a problem, we can have entire planet living in vast network of underground tunnels, powered by nuclear energy. We already know how to bore tunnels. In that ways, also, it would be significantly fewer problems with cosmic rays and solar storms. Anyway, point is, for each problem there will be some solution if we put our minds into it.
- novaRom 6y ago
  But "we" will be something else. Not humans, probably not even biological forms.
  - NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
    Difficult to judge from this point where will future lead us. Biological super humans, cyborgs, collective mind, AI meld mind ... but any "non-human" form can also lead to exponential advance that could entirely change our dreams and goals. We are what we are because of sums of all our needs, dreams, fears, emotions, thoughts and the microbiome (we are unseparately connected to) ... any change in it will completelly change what we do next.
    - ifdefdebug 6y ago
      Yes but if it's going to be "non-humans" or "post-humans" as the article calls it, then the article's title is accurate.
- ThePhysicist 6y ago
  You can't extrapolate the future from the past. It's definitely possible that there are some very hard technological ceilings that we'll hit at some point of our development. The universe (probably) isn't designed to be easily conquerable by humans or any other species, so it's not given that we'll emigrate from our solar system or even Earth. Colonization of other planets in our solar system is probably feasible, but I doubt such a colony could be self-sustaining as modern technology requires incredibly complex supply chains to manufacture. And as long as we don't have any replicator-style technology this won't change. Imagine e.g. how difficult it would be to manufacture a microchip on Mars (or a space suit, which requires complex materials and processes). I think a colony on Mars could not survive on its own for more than a few decades. Colonizing other systems seems even more outlandish and outright in the realm of science-fiction to me. I think we just believe that colonization will be normal in the future because science fiction works regularly tell us this story, so we naturally normalize it.
xvilka 6y ago
It is a good point, but there are far more hospitable places in the Solar system - Europa, Titan, Saturn's rings, without much of Sun's radiation, more heat and water than Mars can ever dream of. Also a bunch of metals to mine.
- cout 6y ago
  I think you meant Europa? It's amusing to read though with Europe listed as an exotic space destination.
- fractionalhare 6y ago
  Triton is a nitrogen saturated, frozen wasteland colder than Pluto. Perhaps you're thinking of Titan? Titan is also an icy hellscape at nearly -200 C, but you can look forward to an ocean of ammonia once you manage to break through the surface. Europa has liquid water, but the average surface temperature is still colder than the worst ever recorded on Earth. The speculative oceans you seek would be encased under miles of solid ice, just like Titan's. Europa is likewise catastrophically radioactive. These places are all extremely small, extremely far away and extremely deadly. They make Mars seem pleasant.
  - xvilka 6y ago
    Right, I mixed both.
- everyone 6y ago
  You're right, Europe is relatively hospitable. We should colonize it.
  - rusk 6y ago
    Maybe it will colonise you!
- gambiting 6y ago
  I'm not sure I'd call Europa more hospitable. Thing that most people don't know about is that Jupiter throws a huge amount of radiation out, and the surface of Europa is basically a radioactive hell. Yes, if you get under the ice you will probably find a warm water ocean you could build stuff in.....but you still have to somehow get to the moon without exposing yourself to lethal amounts of radiation, and of course get under the surface. And then.....we have a perfectly serviceable ocean on Earth? If you want to build an underwater self sustainable colony, start here.
atemerev 6y ago
I don’t know why we should even bother settling on other planets (in the Solar system at least). They only have gravity wells, making the transportation extremely costly, and not much resources. We should build orbital habitats instead, and develop space industry in-place, say, by mining asteroids.
oddmiral 6y ago
Can martians colonize Mars?
- doggodaddo78 6y ago
  Neptunians already tried and went home. Martians are free to give it a go.
  - oddmiral 6y ago
    Mars is for martians! Neptunians - go home!
    - doggodaddo78 6y ago
      Speciest! You're so cancelled!
Gravityloss 6y ago
One alternative is to radically terraform Mars with comets and asteroids. It is a violent process that would destroy colonies if they existed. Also, an artificial magnetic field might be possible. Only colonize after terraforming.
dr_dshiv 6y ago
Freeman Dyson suggested a focus on colonizing the asteroid belt. The main advantage is 1. Purpose (mining) 2. Low-gravity makes it easy to leave. The main barrier, in his opinion, was the genetic engineering of warm blooded plants. For what it's worth, I think we will have cities of 10,000 on the moon because it's only 1 day travel and offers great recreational activities (moonball, moonbiking, etc). Televised sports offers a scalable business model.
simonblack 6y ago
One thing's for sure. The Elon Musks of today who say that we'll be there in a decade or so are telling big fat lies. They want to scam your money.
PicassoCTs 6y ago
All this plans assume a human behaviour model that has been prooven to regularly fail on earth. Yes, there are spartan places on earth(monasteries, poor regions), but even they usually depend via "lifelines" on a continuous surplus on resources from some far away bristling nexus (city) or are permanently stuck in cycles of strife. A colony on mars, would break down with the first generations kids reaching maturity and realizing the remote prison their parents choose is for life. In my mind, the whole colonize mars plan, is nothing but a elites escapism, who refuses to deal with the problems the species causes on earth and the necessary political change that entails. Its in that, very human, not very different from a neanderthal, who wants to escape his tribe, to find new mammoths beyond the horizon. But easy mammoth is extinct now and all there is to do, is to sit on electrically charged rocks and meditate for enlightenment.
- fractionalhare 6y ago
  I sincerely doubt there are many elites seriously considering colonies on Mars. I'm sure they're happy to push their personal brand using the space nostalgic idealism, though.
- simonh 6y ago
  >...who refuses to deal with the problems the species causes on earth The same person advocating most strongly for colonising Mars is, er, also responsible for bootstrapping solar, battery and EV technology, and having a good go at working on traffic congestion specifically to preserve the environment on Earth. In fact that was his first passion, and his interest in Mars originated from an attempt to raise awareness of environmental issues here. He's devoting huge resources, time and energy to solve Earthside problems. So I really don't see where you got this idea that colonising Mars is about abandoning Earth, what did you base that on?
  - sofixa 6y ago
    > The same person advocating most strongly for colonising Mars is, er, also responsible for bootstrapping solar, battery and EV technology, and having a good go at working on traffic congestion specifically to preserve the environment on Earth. Is he? To an extent, but he's also extremely anti-better solutions that didn't originate with one of his companies. He thinks that digging thousands of tunnels for a vehicle per person is better for congestion than digging a significantly smaller amount of tunnels for rapid mass transit, which would cost less and is drastically better for the planet than everybody rolling around in a car, even a Tesla car. Solar has been a steadily growing thing before Tesla was, so i'm not sure you can credit him with anything there.
flightapi321 6y ago
If we can create Artificial General Intelligence in the next 50 years then... 1) We can build Superintelligence using that. 2) We can build Astronaut assistants. 3) We can analyze satellite data at a faster rate. 4) More focus on Cyborgs and uploads. We will not get intelligence explosion until the cost of doing human level work drops below human-level hourly wages. Also, the problem is we are still stuck in a multipolar Nash equilibrium.
elihu 6y ago
> Life in a Martian colony would be miserable, with people forced to live in artificially lit underground bases, or in thickly protected surface stations with severely minimized access to the outdoors. Life in this closed environment, with limited access to the surface, could result in other health issues related to exclusive indoor living, such as depression, boredom from lack of stimulus, an inability to concentrate, poor eyesight, and high blood pressure—not to mention a complete disconnect from nature. I don't know why there's this assumption that living underground has to be in some dank basement with flickering fluorescent tubes, and that this is an absolute unsolvable barrier to Mars settlement. I think we should just accept that if humans go to Mars, they're going to live underground and either go outside rarely or not at all, and just get over it. Maybe it won't be all that bad if it's done the right way. Realistically, a lot of space is going to be needed just for growing food, and that means the population per square foot of usable pressurized habitat floor space might not actually be very high. There may be wide open spaces and the opportunity to go on long walks through pleasant farms. In Oregon near Bend we have a pretty decently large lava tube that's about a mile long, and in some parts it's huge. It's not exactly a pleasant place to imagine living when it's cold inside and lit by flashlight or latern, with walls that look like the inside of a dragon's colon and a floor of featureless sand that plays tricks with depth perception, but if one imagines it well lit with sealed, insulated walls, painted in light colors, or made to mimic the sky, with clusters of apartments and workshops and rows of plants, it actually could be pretty nice. The weirdest thing to get used to would be the one-dimensionality of the cave; it's just one long shaft with no side tunnels. That's what I imagine an early Mars habitat looking like: find a natural lava tube (due to reduced gravity they should in theory be bigger than the ones on Earth), and seal the walls and divide it into large compartments. Install solar panels on the surface, and then move right in. Eventually one could imagine a habitat expanding by digging side tunnels once the right kind of heavy equipment is available, and maybe establish production for native building materials like sulfur-based concrete.
- Udik 6y ago
  If you just want to live underground, isn't it simpler to do it on Earth?
Isinlor 6y ago
I can imagine around 100 000 people visiting Mars by 2100. Currently around 50 000 people attempted eight-thousanders with death rate of around 1-2%. The first recorded successful ascent of an eight-thousander was in 1950. I imagine going to Mars will be something similar towards the end of this century. If we get AI with human like object manipulation and engineering skills before 2050, then I expect prices of basically everything to go down to the cost of impact on other market participants by 2075. Building stuff will be brought down to the impact of raw resources extraction etc. We will may be technologically short of 1M people on Mars by 2075 if we assume no AI. Take nuclear submarines as first order approximation. Currently we seem to have around 500 submarines, although only 1 in 5 seems to be nuclear. So, with the current GDP doubling time of 25 years we could expect 2000 submarines by 2075 and 400 nuclear submarines. For 1M people on Mars we would need an effort comparable to 8000 Ohio-class submarines with the current cost of 16 trillions dollars. In 2000 Bill Gates was worth 60 billion, today Musk is worth some 180 billions. If Musk or other billionaires could keep that rate they still would be short to command it alone, but only by an order of magnitude with ~3 trillion assets. IMO impossible without AI, but possible with AI. But even if it's possible, I think that people will not want to live on Mars in that numbers. It would require around 1 in 10 000 people to migrate to Mars and I don't see the apatite for it. So, IMO it will not happen, not because it will be impossible, but we will not want to do it. Some space exploration timeline from Metaculus [0] a prediction aggregator with established track-record [1]: - When will Starship reach orbit? 50% after 2022 - When will SpaceX's Starship carry a human to orbit? 50% after 2024 - When will SpaceX launch humans around the Moon? 50% after 2026 - NASA lands people on Mars before 2030? 4% - Will SpaceX land anything on Mars by 2030? 80% - SpaceX Lands People on Mars by 2030? 26% - When will the first humans land successfully on Mars? 50% after 2036 - When will the first AGI be first developed and demonstrated? 50% after 2047 - What will be the longest uninterrupted stay in deep space at the end of 2050? 50% less than 650 days - One Million Martian Residents by 2075? 4% [0] https://www.metaculus.com/questions/ https://www.metaculus.com/questions/ [1] https://www.metaculus.com/questions/track-record/ https://www.metaculus.com/questions/track-record/
singularity2001 6y ago
Let's colonize the sahara first and leave the moon to the robots
- tim333 6y ago
  It's kind of colonized already https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuareg_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuareg_people
jaakl 6y ago
Colonizing another place in the solar system makes sense in long run. We eventually need to escape our star and reach others. Not even in thusands, more like in few millions of years to come. Mars would be one baby step. But doing it now would be huge misuse of our resources what we need to keep our current planet alive. Elon needs to hold his ego trip, try to make first Earth to sustainably inhabitable place and then maybe in a century or two come back with the Mars project.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
7e 6y ago
A colony on Mars would be child abuse, even assuming the fetuses gestated normally in that environment. And the resources needed would devastate Earth, the one planet which makes our ideal home.
menotyou 6y ago
I don't believe a word. From the Superman comics I definitely know that when you are on a planet with a tenth of gravitation you become extremely strong. Plus the radiation on the planet will give you superpowers like flying and x-ray view.
Borrible 6y ago
I have said decades ago, what goes out there will no longer be human, one way or the other. Much more opportunities and less risk for robotic AI out there. Lagrange point stations may be feasable again. They were a thing in the '70s. Less hassle with those pesky biological necessities. Of course still problems with radiation, but much thinner shielding needed. And thinner Umbilical/Lifeline to Mutha Oith. Low Life Need Not Apply. Of course much less romance. But who cares, it's business anyway.

49 points by spekcular 6y ago

What if we build robots that are remote controlled by humans using tactile feedback? We could have a chassis that can work on mars while being controlled from Earth. Maybe that's one of the idea Elon has with Neuralink. A huge obstacle would be latency I guess

wernercd 6y ago
What kind of tactile feedback will you get with a delay of an hour (or however long it takes to communicate over a million miles)? This isn't like flying a drone a scant thousand miles away...
veliko 6y ago
Why do you need that? Just send a datacenter with a nuclear power reactor to power it and then improve on the AI of the robots
elihu 6y ago
Message delay makes this not feasible from Earth, but it may be a pretty good solution for people living on Mars who need to do some outdoor work (construction, mining, etc..) but don't want to deal with space suits and radiation. Sending a robot in their place sounds pretty good. On the other hand, if AI technology is good enough, you might not need the human operator except for certain complex tasks. Most of the time you might be able to get away with high-level tasks like "dig a hole here" or "load this equipment onto this rover".
- erik_seaberg 6y ago
  If the tasks look like “we’d like someone to eventually dig out a 3x3 room for an iron smelter across from the mechanic’s workshop,” that’s just Dwarf Fortress minus the booze.

renewiltord 6y ago

I think the only thing that will ultimately determine it is if it is profitable for humans to go there in some sense: money, a chance for a better life for their kids, escape from tyranny. Everything else is a challenge but to colonize you need upside motivation.

Xplune13 6y ago
While I somewhat agree to your point, I think it would be naive to think that any other colony will be different than what is going on the Earth itself. It's like moving goalposts instead of solving the issues. Now I agree that "solving the issues" is not an easy thing whatsoever, but expecting different results from other colonies and going someplace else where we hope things would be different is a pretty low motivation for me at least.
- happyweasel 6y ago
  By becoming distributed, we could get rid of our "single point of failure" by habitating just one planet... which might increase the overall uptime of humanity ;-)
  - cout 6y ago
    Or perhaps it will make things worse, because mutually assured destruction is no longer as significant a threat.

pseingatl 6y ago

Here's a legal code for the Mars Colony, drawn from the best laws from several nations: marslegalcode.org

bawolff 6y ago
Damn that's dystopian: > A Citizens' Council of seven members, similar to a Board of Directors, will be popularly elected. The Citizens Council does not, however, manage day to day operations of the Colony. That task is left to a governor, who is appointed by the Council for a single, non-renewable six year term. So a weak elected legeslative body and a strong indirectly elected executive with very few checks on their power. > Under the Code, living and working in the Mars Colony is a privilege, not a right. All those who come to the Mars Colony will be permitted to stay under a license. That license is revocable. Similarly, all real property is held by the Mars Colony and leased to individuals or companies working in the Colony. Misbehavior results in losing the right to remain within the Colony. Fun. If you lose your license do you get a berth on the next shuttle or are you exposed to the elements? This sounds less like the best laws and more like some of the more dystopian laws. Its basically a company town where you are not allowed to own property, don't have rights and are exiled if you step out of line. Luckily the whole thing is bullshit. Nobody is on mars yet and nobody has adopted this. Easy to make laws when you don't yet have power.
- f6v 6y ago
  > Under the Code, living and working in the Mars Colony is a privilege, not a right. So just like coming to US on a work visa. You loose your job - you’re out immediately.
  - vinay427 6y ago
    Yes, that's how a non-permanent visa works in just about every country. Some offer grace periods, but your residence there is still seen as extending a privilege.
    - f6v 6y ago

bawolff 6y ago

Never is a long time. The atmosphere problem seems tractable by living indoors. I don't think we have any idea what mild gravity does to a person. We have some limited experience with microgravity but nothing with mars-like graviy. Short term plans might be unrealistic, but never is a bit much.

bobmaxup 6y ago
I think the point of the article is that the hype is a bit much, with a click bait headline.
ifdefdebug 6y ago
The article actually makes a plausible argument that humans might never colonize Mars (post-humans might though in a far-off future).
- mavhc 6y ago
  No true human? Just have to define colonize and human in a way that makes your argument work.

neolog 6y ago

From one of the papers > Recent observations have been made of the loss of Mars’s atmosphere to space by the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission probe and the Mars Express spacecraft, along with analyses of the abundance of carbon-bearing minerals and the occurrence of CO2 in polar ice from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and the Mars Odyssey spacecraft. These results suggest that there is not enough CO2 remaining on Mars to provide significant greenhouse warming were the gas to be emplaced into the atmosphere; in addition, most of the CO2 gas in these reservoirs is not accessible and thus cannot be readily mobilized. As a result, we conclude that terraforming Mars is not possible using present-day technology. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6.epdf https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6.epdf

Isinlor 6y ago
It may be easier to terraform Venus back into Earth like planet it once was. But we will be capable of establish permanent presence across solar system before Venus terraforming could conclude. Even with exponentially growing effort it would have to take centuries.

NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago

Never is very long time... If we do not destroy ourselves in next 50 years, it is quite certain without any doubt that we will move from Earth. It does not matter is it 50 or 500 years, technological advances will undoubtedly lead to spread beyond the Earth. Historically, many things were "never" - until we do otherwise. I agree with the author that we need to solve problems here first. EDIT: For example, atmosphere is not a problem, we can have entire planet living in vast network of underground tunnels, powered by nuclear energy. We already know how to bore tunnels. In that ways, also, it would be significantly fewer problems with cosmic rays and solar storms. Anyway, point is, for each problem there will be some solution if we put our minds into it.

novaRom 6y ago
But "we" will be something else. Not humans, probably not even biological forms.
- NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
  Difficult to judge from this point where will future lead us. Biological super humans, cyborgs, collective mind, AI meld mind ... but any "non-human" form can also lead to exponential advance that could entirely change our dreams and goals. We are what we are because of sums of all our needs, dreams, fears, emotions, thoughts and the microbiome (we are unseparately connected to) ... any change in it will completelly change what we do next.
  - ifdefdebug 6y ago
    Yes but if it's going to be "non-humans" or "post-humans" as the article calls it, then the article's title is accurate.
ThePhysicist 6y ago
You can't extrapolate the future from the past. It's definitely possible that there are some very hard technological ceilings that we'll hit at some point of our development. The universe (probably) isn't designed to be easily conquerable by humans or any other species, so it's not given that we'll emigrate from our solar system or even Earth. Colonization of other planets in our solar system is probably feasible, but I doubt such a colony could be self-sustaining as modern technology requires incredibly complex supply chains to manufacture. And as long as we don't have any replicator-style technology this won't change. Imagine e.g. how difficult it would be to manufacture a microchip on Mars (or a space suit, which requires complex materials and processes). I think a colony on Mars could not survive on its own for more than a few decades. Colonizing other systems seems even more outlandish and outright in the realm of science-fiction to me. I think we just believe that colonization will be normal in the future because science fiction works regularly tell us this story, so we naturally normalize it.

xvilka 6y ago

It is a good point, but there are far more hospitable places in the Solar system - Europa, Titan, Saturn's rings, without much of Sun's radiation, more heat and water than Mars can ever dream of. Also a bunch of metals to mine.

cout 6y ago
I think you meant Europa? It's amusing to read though with Europe listed as an exotic space destination.
fractionalhare 6y ago
Triton is a nitrogen saturated, frozen wasteland colder than Pluto. Perhaps you're thinking of Titan? Titan is also an icy hellscape at nearly -200 C, but you can look forward to an ocean of ammonia once you manage to break through the surface. Europa has liquid water, but the average surface temperature is still colder than the worst ever recorded on Earth. The speculative oceans you seek would be encased under miles of solid ice, just like Titan's. Europa is likewise catastrophically radioactive. These places are all extremely small, extremely far away and extremely deadly. They make Mars seem pleasant.
- xvilka 6y ago
  Right, I mixed both.
everyone 6y ago
You're right, Europe is relatively hospitable. We should colonize it.
- rusk 6y ago
  Maybe it will colonise you!
gambiting 6y ago
I'm not sure I'd call Europa more hospitable. Thing that most people don't know about is that Jupiter throws a huge amount of radiation out, and the surface of Europa is basically a radioactive hell. Yes, if you get under the ice you will probably find a warm water ocean you could build stuff in.....but you still have to somehow get to the moon without exposing yourself to lethal amounts of radiation, and of course get under the surface. And then.....we have a perfectly serviceable ocean on Earth? If you want to build an underwater self sustainable colony, start here.

atemerev 6y ago

I don’t know why we should even bother settling on other planets (in the Solar system at least). They only have gravity wells, making the transportation extremely costly, and not much resources. We should build orbital habitats instead, and develop space industry in-place, say, by mining asteroids.

oddmiral 6y ago

Can martians colonize Mars?

doggodaddo78 6y ago
Neptunians already tried and went home. Martians are free to give it a go.
- oddmiral 6y ago
  Mars is for martians! Neptunians - go home!
  - doggodaddo78 6y ago
    Speciest! You're so cancelled!

Gravityloss 6y ago

One alternative is to radically terraform Mars with comets and asteroids. It is a violent process that would destroy colonies if they existed. Also, an artificial magnetic field might be possible. Only colonize after terraforming.

dr_dshiv 6y ago

Freeman Dyson suggested a focus on colonizing the asteroid belt. The main advantage is 1. Purpose (mining) 2. Low-gravity makes it easy to leave. The main barrier, in his opinion, was the genetic engineering of warm blooded plants. For what it's worth, I think we will have cities of 10,000 on the moon because it's only 1 day travel and offers great recreational activities (moonball, moonbiking, etc). Televised sports offers a scalable business model.

simonblack 6y ago

One thing's for sure. The Elon Musks of today who say that we'll be there in a decade or so are telling big fat lies. They want to scam your money.

PicassoCTs 6y ago

All this plans assume a human behaviour model that has been prooven to regularly fail on earth. Yes, there are spartan places on earth(monasteries, poor regions), but even they usually depend via "lifelines" on a continuous surplus on resources from some far away bristling nexus (city) or are permanently stuck in cycles of strife. A colony on mars, would break down with the first generations kids reaching maturity and realizing the remote prison their parents choose is for life. In my mind, the whole colonize mars plan, is nothing but a elites escapism, who refuses to deal with the problems the species causes on earth and the necessary political change that entails. Its in that, very human, not very different from a neanderthal, who wants to escape his tribe, to find new mammoths beyond the horizon. But easy mammoth is extinct now and all there is to do, is to sit on electrically charged rocks and meditate for enlightenment.

fractionalhare 6y ago
I sincerely doubt there are many elites seriously considering colonies on Mars. I'm sure they're happy to push their personal brand using the space nostalgic idealism, though.
simonh 6y ago
>...who refuses to deal with the problems the species causes on earth The same person advocating most strongly for colonising Mars is, er, also responsible for bootstrapping solar, battery and EV technology, and having a good go at working on traffic congestion specifically to preserve the environment on Earth. In fact that was his first passion, and his interest in Mars originated from an attempt to raise awareness of environmental issues here. He's devoting huge resources, time and energy to solve Earthside problems. So I really don't see where you got this idea that colonising Mars is about abandoning Earth, what did you base that on?
- sofixa 6y ago
  > The same person advocating most strongly for colonising Mars is, er, also responsible for bootstrapping solar, battery and EV technology, and having a good go at working on traffic congestion specifically to preserve the environment on Earth. Is he? To an extent, but he's also extremely anti-better solutions that didn't originate with one of his companies. He thinks that digging thousands of tunnels for a vehicle per person is better for congestion than digging a significantly smaller amount of tunnels for rapid mass transit, which would cost less and is drastically better for the planet than everybody rolling around in a car, even a Tesla car. Solar has been a steadily growing thing before Tesla was, so i'm not sure you can credit him with anything there.

flightapi321 6y ago

If we can create Artificial General Intelligence in the next 50 years then... 1) We can build Superintelligence using that. 2) We can build Astronaut assistants. 3) We can analyze satellite data at a faster rate. 4) More focus on Cyborgs and uploads. We will not get intelligence explosion until the cost of doing human level work drops below human-level hourly wages. Also, the problem is we are still stuck in a multipolar Nash equilibrium.

elihu 6y ago

> Life in a Martian colony would be miserable, with people forced to live in artificially lit underground bases, or in thickly protected surface stations with severely minimized access to the outdoors. Life in this closed environment, with limited access to the surface, could result in other health issues related to exclusive indoor living, such as depression, boredom from lack of stimulus, an inability to concentrate, poor eyesight, and high blood pressure—not to mention a complete disconnect from nature. I don't know why there's this assumption that living underground has to be in some dank basement with flickering fluorescent tubes, and that this is an absolute unsolvable barrier to Mars settlement. I think we should just accept that if humans go to Mars, they're going to live underground and either go outside rarely or not at all, and just get over it. Maybe it won't be all that bad if it's done the right way. Realistically, a lot of space is going to be needed just for growing food, and that means the population per square foot of usable pressurized habitat floor space might not actually be very high. There may be wide open spaces and the opportunity to go on long walks through pleasant farms. In Oregon near Bend we have a pretty decently large lava tube that's about a mile long, and in some parts it's huge. It's not exactly a pleasant place to imagine living when it's cold inside and lit by flashlight or latern, with walls that look like the inside of a dragon's colon and a floor of featureless sand that plays tricks with depth perception, but if one imagines it well lit with sealed, insulated walls, painted in light colors, or made to mimic the sky, with clusters of apartments and workshops and rows of plants, it actually could be pretty nice. The weirdest thing to get used to would be the one-dimensionality of the cave; it's just one long shaft with no side tunnels. That's what I imagine an early Mars habitat looking like: find a natural lava tube (due to reduced gravity they should in theory be bigger than the ones on Earth), and seal the walls and divide it into large compartments. Install solar panels on the surface, and then move right in. Eventually one could imagine a habitat expanding by digging side tunnels once the right kind of heavy equipment is available, and maybe establish production for native building materials like sulfur-based concrete.

Udik 6y ago
If you just want to live underground, isn't it simpler to do it on Earth?

Isinlor 6y ago

I can imagine around 100 000 people visiting Mars by 2100. Currently around 50 000 people attempted eight-thousanders with death rate of around 1-2%. The first recorded successful ascent of an eight-thousander was in 1950. I imagine going to Mars will be something similar towards the end of this century. If we get AI with human like object manipulation and engineering skills before 2050, then I expect prices of basically everything to go down to the cost of impact on other market participants by 2075. Building stuff will be brought down to the impact of raw resources extraction etc. We will may be technologically short of 1M people on Mars by 2075 if we assume no AI. Take nuclear submarines as first order approximation. Currently we seem to have around 500 submarines, although only 1 in 5 seems to be nuclear. So, with the current GDP doubling time of 25 years we could expect 2000 submarines by 2075 and 400 nuclear submarines. For 1M people on Mars we would need an effort comparable to 8000 Ohio-class submarines with the current cost of 16 trillions dollars. In 2000 Bill Gates was worth 60 billion, today Musk is worth some 180 billions. If Musk or other billionaires could keep that rate they still would be short to command it alone, but only by an order of magnitude with ~3 trillion assets. IMO impossible without AI, but possible with AI. But even if it's possible, I think that people will not want to live on Mars in that numbers. It would require around 1 in 10 000 people to migrate to Mars and I don't see the apatite for it. So, IMO it will not happen, not because it will be impossible, but we will not want to do it. Some space exploration timeline from Metaculus [0] a prediction aggregator with established track-record [1]: - When will Starship reach orbit? 50% after 2022 - When will SpaceX's Starship carry a human to orbit? 50% after 2024 - When will SpaceX launch humans around the Moon? 50% after 2026 - NASA lands people on Mars before 2030? 4% - Will SpaceX land anything on Mars by 2030? 80% - SpaceX Lands People on Mars by 2030? 26% - When will the first humans land successfully on Mars? 50% after 2036 - When will the first AGI be first developed and demonstrated? 50% after 2047 - What will be the longest uninterrupted stay in deep space at the end of 2050? 50% less than 650 days - One Million Martian Residents by 2075? 4% [0] https://www.metaculus.com/questions/ https://www.metaculus.com/questions/ [1] https://www.metaculus.com/questions/track-record/ https://www.metaculus.com/questions/track-record/

singularity2001 6y ago

Let's colonize the sahara first and leave the moon to the robots

tim333 6y ago
It's kind of colonized already https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuareg_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuareg_people

jaakl 6y ago

Colonizing another place in the solar system makes sense in long run. We eventually need to escape our star and reach others. Not even in thusands, more like in few millions of years to come. Mars would be one baby step. But doing it now would be huge misuse of our resources what we need to keep our current planet alive. Elon needs to hold his ego trip, try to make first Earth to sustainably inhabitable place and then maybe in a century or two come back with the Mars project.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

7e 6y ago

A colony on Mars would be child abuse, even assuming the fetuses gestated normally in that environment. And the resources needed would devastate Earth, the one planet which makes our ideal home.

menotyou 6y ago

I don't believe a word. From the Superman comics I definitely know that when you are on a planet with a tenth of gravitation you become extremely strong. Plus the radiation on the planet will give you superpowers like flying and x-ray view.

Borrible 6y ago

I have said decades ago, what goes out there will no longer be human, one way or the other. Much more opportunities and less risk for robotic AI out there. Lagrange point stations may be feasable again. They were a thing in the '70s. Less hassle with those pesky biological necessities. Of course still problems with radiation, but much thinner shielding needed. And thinner Umbilical/Lifeline to Mutha Oith. Low Life Need Not Apply. Of course much less romance. But who cares, it's business anyway.