4 ms·
Mars has as much land area as Earth. So 1) we are nowhere near done searching it with robots, and 2) we will never search it completely with robots. We really
by danielweber 14y ago
Mars has as much land area as Earth. So 1) we are nowhere near done searching it with robots, and 2) we will never search it completely with robots.
We really need to have humans on Mars to search for life.
- gojomo 14y agoHow are humans better at searching for life than robots? Humans seem to require much more onsite support infrastructure, including for activities (eating, sleeping, remaining social and sane) that are tangential to most exploration and life-detection experiments. Such an infrastructure also increases the magnitude of Earth-contamination of the Martian environment. I'm all for having humans on Mars so we're a two-planet species... but I don't see boots-on-the-ground as offering a faster/better/more-complete search for life than the same resources sent as robots.
- danielweber 14y agoHow long would would you have to search the rocky mountains with robots to find a dinosaur fossil?
- gojomo 14y agoAssuming terrain-optimized multipedal robots, with stereoscopic vision across a broader range of the light spectrum than human vision: less time than with humans. Such robots should be available in the same timeframe as a human-supporting infrastructure could be delivered to the Martian surface. (In fact, building that infrastructure might require similarly-advanced robotics.)