[FPSPACE] Discovery reveals Mars is not a dead planet
dstdba at post4.tele.dk
Sat Jan 17 16:22:10 EST 2009
E.P. Grondine epgrondine at hotmail.com
Sat Jan 17 14:53:01 EST 2009
>> If we are looking 40 or 50 years ahead anyway, it's quite likely
>> that Martian settlers will enjoy some partial closed-loop system
>> as well as inexpensive regular cargoes from Earth. But only
>> a true red ZMN ( ie. Zubrinite Mars Nut ) will strive for full
> Excuse me, Jen, but the life support system on ISS is being
> closed right now, and that work is not being done by true red
> ZMNs. As far as the Moon goes, you can be sure that Chinese
> engineers are examining Soviet and American work on this in
> detail for their 2017-2022 Moon proposals and architectures.
> My guess is that this will likely be done by NASA for the Moon
> now that Griffin and Ares 1 are gone, and that we'll see what
> Moon architectures the Direct team is advocating.
> Closed loop systems also play a role in Dr. Aldrin's Mars cycler
> architectures, and he's not a ZMN. But he did play a role in the
> Direct presentation.
Yes, what can be expected 40 years ahead is somewhere in between
to-day's Russian recipe for recycling ISS liquid human waste into
drinking water, and a full-scale biosphere.
If I'm not mistaken zubrinites want some day - sooner rather than
later - to re-enact Independence Day. Some nuts even believe that
human civilization may survive on Mars, if Earth is destroyed by,
say, fragments of comet Schwasmann Wachmann 3. You and I know
that by the time mankind is that well established on Mars, an
advanced CAPS will have been covering both planets for centuries.
>> As this thread is all about the consequences of Martian
>> microbial life, I think Earthlings would be more than
>> willing to pay for voluntary human guinea-pigs testing out
>> the dangers of life out there.
> You haven't offered me one practical reason why people on Earth
> will pay for manned flight by a few people to Mars. Sending
> anything to Mars costs a lot of money.
> There's exploration, scientific interest, but given the costs
> there are robotic alternatives. Once again, it is far more
> likely that Antartica may be satisfying the human urge for
> exploration in the near future, due to its oil and mineral
I agree with zubrinites - and the author of New Worlds - that
Mars is a prime case for terraforming. Even if it will not at
all be possible until the next millennium, we need to press on
now as best we can.
For the sake of brevity I did not mention that I firmly
believe that Phobos or Deimos must have had a permanent
base established, before anyone attempts to land on Mars.
As the moonlets will be free of microbes, and since hopping
from there to Mars will be a piece of cake, the existence of
microbes on Mars is just one more obstacle to the challenge
of departing from the planet.
>> What's odd is that we don't yet have a clue, as to which
>> agenda will eventually determine the location of the first
>> lunar bases.
>> CAPS doesn't warrant a race between nations for best site,
>> but mining polar craters for ice and He3 might do. And
>> that's when the landing of dedicated moontrotters totally
>> cool in regard to plans for their homecoming could make
>> a difference in securing their country the goodies.
> There will be no race, except for leadership in space.
> The degree of international co-operation will depend on many
> things, many of which we can not predict now.
> For example, if JFK had not have been assassinated, it is quite
> likely that international co-operation in space would have begun
> by 1964.
I don't think so. It's characteristic for bureaucracy that it
thrives on mistrust. The fact that the ITER consortium ( uniting
the EU, USA, Russia, China, Japan, Korea, and also India in a
universal effort to solve the world's energy - and CO2 - problems
through nuclear fusion ) was only formed in 2006 speaks volumes,
and reminds you that necessity is the mother of invention.
More information about the FPSPACE