If you don't like a project, don't support it.

Anyone seriously interested in this topic will love https://www.isaacarthur.net/

Colonizing Mars or any other planetary surface is pointless. Rotating habitats in space are the ticket. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86JAU3w9mB8 The author has more videos on the subject.


Alternatives to rockets? Mass drivers for the moon, basically a linear induction motor like on a monorail train. For Earth, orbital rings.

I believe Jeff Bezos is taking the correct approach with Blue Origin though I wish he would pick up the pace. The idea is to slowly build up an infrastructure and manufacturing base on the moon. This will have to come before building megastructures like the O'Neil cylinders with internal areas larger than the island of Guam. There is simply no way to lift that much material from Earth. You have to mine the material from the moon and launch it with a mass driver.

Elon Musk has won over a lot of skeptics as far as how cheap we can make rockets. If he keeps up with what he has been doing, he could help get the space-based infrastructure started. Unfortunately, he's infatuated with Mars, misguided though I believe that is. Long-term settlers is one thing but raising children in 1/3 gravity? That's probably pure fantasy short of major genetic engineering.

That would be cool too..the benefit of a planet is that the "rotating habitat in space" business is already taken care of.  I'd but a ticket to a remote orbital colony, too. The fertility and child rearing issue on mars is an angle that doesn't get much play, kudos.

(February 12, 2019 at 11:33 am)Yonadav Wrote: However, in my old age I am starting to sour on space exploration a little bit. In my younger days, I would have been chomping at the bit to strap myself in on top of a missile that was going to be launched into space.

It's funny timing that I saw this just now. I was thinking about this stuff today for the first time in a while. 

I also loved the space stuff when I was a kid. We'd get up early to watch the launches on TV, and knew the names of all the astronauts. Every big cardboard box we got was employed for "astronaut training," and it's a wonder we didn't break any bones. 

Then my first job after college was doing exhibit design for a space museum with a big collection of NASA artifacts. That was great. And the real action was after hours when the bosses went home. We'd stay late and put on the space suits and climb in the capsules. There's a photo somewhere of young me saluting the camera in Gus Grissom's backup suit. And we had a kind of contest going on -- I was first to have sex in our Lunar Module. 

The main thing that impressed me at the time was the high quality of the stuff. I'll never forget the satisfying click that you heard when you plugged the air hose into the valve on the front of the Apollo lunar EVA suit. Compared to the car I was driving in those days, it was like advanced alien technology. That was inspiring. Did you get that sense in your work with satellites? Were they also made to high specs? 

But even then the arguments for why we should spend the money on that instead of preserving and improving earth life seemed weak to me, and given the general decline since then, I agree that (if anybody asked me) I'd vote to pay for universal health insurance and clean water in Flint. 

But what got me thinking today was teaching a class on Nietzsche's idea of human flourishing. The author of the text we are using sees Nietzsche as aiming not for morals but for "health, power, flourishing, splendor, vitality, growth, and so forth." And on the way home it occurred to me that going to the moon was a kind of splendor or vitality. Not because it makes sense, but because it's wonderful. Normally I'm an art-type guy, but the arts are pretty much splendor-free any more. So that feeling of loving space travel because it's really cool came back to me a little bit.

Why not let the rotating habitats compete with the Mars people. Hidden/unexpected flaws are often expressed when competition is allowed.

We need to develop a sustainable pod structure on Earth that is essentially risk free and demonstrate that it can be done before sending people to their deaths on another world.

By pod structure, I mean a living sustainable habitable place where humans can survive without any outside help.

If you don't want to go, don't go.

(February 14, 2019 at 4:51 am)Rahn127 Wrote: We need to develop a sustainable  pod structure on Earth that is essentially risk free and demonstrate that it can be done before sending people to their deaths on another world.

By pod structure, I mean a living sustainable habitable place where humans can survive without any outside help.

Yep, that's what I said in the OP.

Interplanetary RISK FREE travel/colonization.

I presume the advocates of that are British?

(February 14, 2019 at 7:30 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Interplanetary RISK FREE travel/colonization.

I presume the advocates of that are British?

Only provided that the natives of the colonized planets are armed with nothing more than pointy sticks.  Or possibly fruit.

Boru