Colonialisation of the outer solar system

[Kropster]

Apart from the Earth, the rest of the solar system is an extremely, extremely hostile environment for humans and necessitates artificial means of supporting life.

I wouldn't want to rely on machinery to provide for long term survival.

Mars is perhaps the most favourable for colonisation, but has an atmosphere with less than 100th the pressure of Earth and temperatures averaging -60C.... not to mention the intense UV light and radiation.

How long before the air generator and heating packs up?!

[KenG]

Apart from the Earth, the rest of the solar system is an extremely, extremely hostile environment for humans and necessitates artificial means of supporting life.

I wouldn't want to rely on machinery to provide for long term survival.

Mars is perhaps the most favourable for colonisation, but has an atmosphere with less than 100th the pressure of Earth and temperatures averaging -60C.... not to mention the intense UV light and radiation.

How long before the air generator and heating packs up?!

Which is why I say that we are way out of our depth at the moment. We should have pursued establishing a permanent moon base and moon/earth travel should by now be routine, which it certainly isn't. Now we want to skip a whole generation of progress and "let's go to Mars" with technology which isn't much ahead of Apollo 11.

[Scorpius]

Which is why I say that we are way out of our depth at the moment. We should have pursued establishing a permanent moon base and moon/earth travel should by now be routine, which it certainly isn't. Now we want to skip a whole generation of progress and "let's go to Mars" with technology which isn't much ahead of Apollo 11.

+1 - Well said - 100% in agreement - just the point I was trying to make previously...

[DRT]

Which is why I say that we are way out of our depth at the moment. We should have pursued establishing a permanent moon base and moon/earth travel should by now be routine, which it certainly isn't. Now we want to skip a whole generation of progress and "let's go to Mars" with technology which isn't much ahead of Apollo 11.

I couldn't agree more. We have moved beyond the need to blunder our way into places we don't properly understand with no thought for the consequence to us or what we happen find there. We could send hundreds of robots to the planets and moons of the solar system for the price of one manned mission to Mars and would learn much more in the process.

[Scorpius]

I think we should continue with unmanned missions to Mars but make a return, manned mission to the moon our short term priority. “Been there done that” might be ok for a bungee jump or scurrying up Mount Everest but let’s face it folks – landing human beings on the moon & bringing them home just isn’t that simple. We haven’t even tried it in over 40 years but now suddenly we’ve decided we can go over 30 million miles further and be back in time for supper.

And that’s another thing – what ever happened to the concept of sending our fearless heroes somewhere and returning them home safely? From what I understand, a journey to Mars is a suicide mission yet it seems there’s a new generation of Kamikaze astronauts – who aren’t really astronauts at all – perfectly willing to jump aboard. Sounds like some kind of sick reality TV to me & shouldn’t even be allowed. This isn’t science – because as brave as they are, these folks are nothing more than sacrificial lambs.

 https://community.mars-one.com/last_activity/ALL/18/82/ALL/ALL/5/3

It’s ridiculous and nothing more than a publicity stunt IMHO. So the headline reads: We have landed humans on Mars!!! - they’re all dead of course but that’s not the point since - We have landed humans on Mars!!! Sounds like a very hollow victory to me but maybe I’m just old fashioned. As successful as the Space Shuttle program was – the fact is lives were lost - and those missions were supposed to be no big deal – remember?

Let’s take all the money required to even attempt a trip to Mars & “invest it” in a place much closer to home and one that we have some previous level of experience in visiting. You can float around on the ISS turning somersaults & conducting scientific experiments til the cows come home but that’s not taking us anywhere or proving our ability to survive outside the safety of a multi-billion dollar cocoon for any significant length of time.

Please forgive my fervor on this particular subject but at least this time I have tried to be polite... 

[Kropster]

A think a special Mars expedition manned entirely by Estate Agents would have enormous support!

[KenG]

Do the "innovators"not take ANY lessons from history? The transition from sail to steam was dangerous, so too was the attempt to establish a civil aviation network, so why can't the various space agencies pool resources, establish a Moon base and develop space flight to the point where accidents are rare and success is commonplace. Why on earth (pun) are we pushing to land humans on Mars? What are they going to do when they get there that robots can't do? The idea of a one way ticket to Mars is so stupid it defies belief, why do people sign up to this sort of thing?

[Scorpius]

Ok, so the original intent of this thread was to discuss the idea we may someday send humans to one or more planets and/or moons in the outer solar system and the conceptual technologies we might use to survive once we get there. It was clearly intended as a lighthearted “what if” scenario but seems to have transitioned into a more reality-based debate on how we might best accomplish such things - or if we should even try – and for the record, I personally believe we should try.

So assuming we as a species ultimately commit ourselves to the goal of exploring the solar system ourselves - as opposed to building machines to do it for us - at some point we’re going to need to make some solid commitments – both financially and philosophically - and start laying the groundwork to turn our collective dream into a reality.

For many, it appears Mars should be the stepping stone while others (including myself) favor focusing on the moon as a proving ground before striking out for Mars. But either way, sending humans to Mars is where we seemed to have placed the bar and we will certainly need to get there first before venturing any further out.

So, I’ve been doing some reading and there are basically two plans to make it happen. The first – which I consider to be a joke - is Mars One. This is being orchestrated by a private, for profit company whose main goal at this point is to raise money – and lots of it. I would encourage anyone who believes this might actually result in a manned mission to Mars, to visit their website and look at what they’re proposing and the individuals behind it. Sure – most of them have impressive credentials in their field but none of them has ever been in responsible charge of launching any type of object into space.  There’s just one astronaut & his claim to fame is the fact he’s spent some time aboard the ISS. However, there are several who‘s experience lies in marketing, web design, art, and other fields completely unrelated to space travel. They basically admit they know nothing about space flight when they say they won’t be building any space craft but will instead outsource those tasks to other companies. In a nutshell - it’s a scam! All they’re really interested in is raising money and they’re using everyone’s fascination with Mars to do it.

The “Team”

http://www.mars-one.com/about-mars-one/team

The “Advisors”

http://www.mars-one.com/about-mars-one/advisers

The “Ambassadors”

http://www.mars-one.com/about-mars-one/ambassadors

The second and most believable plan involves NASA - an agency with lots of experience in space flight. The problem I have with NASA’s plan is they want to tow an asteroid into orbit around the moon and pretend it’s Mars. So you want to highjack an asteroid and move it closer to the earth? Somehow that just seems fundamentally wrong since there’s always the potential they could miscalculate or outright lose control of said asteroid and send it barreling into the moon or even worse - into the earth itself! Why do we need to tow an asteroid to the moon when the moon is already sitting right there in a stable orbit that has lasted for eons? I’m  just an average guy of average intelligence but to intentionally bring another body in close proximity to the earth and moon has got to be the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasas-journey-to-mars

So that’s it – the best we’ve come up with so far to get us to Mars. If this is the best we can do then maybe we should just leave well enough alone before we end up sending someone on a suicide mission to Mars or destroying the only habitable world we can definitely say exists in our solar system.

[Stub Mandrel]

Do the "innovators"not take ANY lessons from history? The transition from sail to steam was dangerous, so too was the attempt to establish a civil aviation network, so why can't the various space agencies pool resources, establish a Moon base and develop space flight to the point where accidents are rare and success is commonplace. Why on earth (pun) are we pushing to land humans on Mars? What are they going to do when they get there that robots can't do? The idea of a one way ticket to Mars is so stupid it defies belief, why do people sign up to this sort of thing?

Money. NASA are under huge pressure - they even have to plead for the money to extend the New Horizons mission to a Kuiper Belt Object. They have to show maximum bang for buck.

Personally, if I had a life-limiting illness, I'd consider a one-way trip.

[furball]

Option 3 (possibly) SpaceX...

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/08/how-and-why-spacex-will-colonize-mars.html

(if you've a few hours to spend reading through it...)

Lance

[Kropster]

Mars is no more habitable than the Moon.

The only habitable planet is Earth.

Everything else is at best bearable under extremely artificial conditions using machines to assist...... and we all know what their long term reliability is like!

[KenG]

Mars is no more habitable than the Moon.

The only habitable planet is Earth.

Everything else is at best bearable under extremely artificial conditions using machines to assist...... and we all know what their long term reliability is like![/quote

At the moment - yes to everything you've said, but we're looking to the future when everything we recognise today will be redundant, so imagination everyone..........life on Mars 2115?

[Kropster]

I'd still want to be able to walk around outside without a spacesuit, whatever machinery we come up with.

I can only thing that those big glass domes from sci-fi would make it bearable and less claustrophobic.

[nameunknown]

I'm tempted to say - "just say go!" . Mercury has ample solar power, Venus is OK for wind power, but not good for astronomy, On Mars you get loo bleach instead of water for free, Jupiter is a bit of a problem with the over-loud "radio 4", Saturrn has a moon with an endeless supply of Zippo fuel but somewhat cloudy skies, Uranus and Neptune are a bit "Milton Kynes" and Pluto looks great for "Call of Chutulu" fans.

Like Vampyres and Astronomers, I guess I'm just waiting for night...

P

[LukeSkywatcher]

If humankind is to survive the death of our Sun then we need to get pretty far away. The inner planets will be consumed by the Sun with ease. The outer planets may survive but us humans cant survive on gas giants because they dont have much if any surface,not to mention the temps,weather and crushing pressure.

I know this is all a bit science fiction right now and may always be, but we need to concentrate our efforts on designing sub light speed generational space craft. I say sub light speed because AFAIK light speed is impossible, but 99.9% of it is doable...........apparently.

The one single purpose/goal of any species of life on this planet is to survive,reproduce and ensure its survival.

Ill now step down from my Darwinian soapbox. 

[DRT]

I think technology is the least of our problems in terms of any sort of long-term colonisation or space travel that would by necessitate the creation of a new form of society and social structure in a far away place. Human beings are not good at living in harmony over long periods of time, particularly when their survival is threatened in any way. My guess is that if we colonised a far away world with enough people to create a self-sustaining society we would simply be creating an environment where the worst traits of human nature (greed, supremacy, genocide, etc) would eventually flourish and destroy it.

So, unless we can come up with a way of ensuring that such places can be quickly and easily supported, governed and policed by civilised and stable societies on Earth these missions would probably descend into chaos. But even then, all we would be doing is waiting on a declaration of independance.

Sorry if that is all a bit depressing, but I have yet to see any evidence that the human race is trustworthy enough to do this sort of stuff.

[Stub Mandrel]

Sorry if that is all a bit depressing, but I have yet to see any evidence that the human race is trustworthy enough to do this sort of stuff.

Perhaps that is the answer to the Fermi Paradox? Any civilisation advanced enough to colonise space has the common sense not to do it...

[Floater]

I find it interesting how this thread has developed. (Chris, where are you? Come back in, please?) Things appeared to be going off-track and I backed off a bit. But I've been watching.

There seem to be two distinct lines of response to the OP.

One is imagining and dreaming of new technologies - whether it be in relation to how we get to these alien worlds or how we try to survive in such climes if we get there. And, of course, predicting our technological ability in the future can only be guesswork, however educated our guesses may be. Think of the 'unknown unknowns'.

The other line of response is discussing and judging our ability - even, our 'right' - to undertake such ventures, emotionally, morally and spiritually. And it's important that I emphasise (not just for the Mods) that I most certainly do not mean anything related to any religion. I mean, perhaps, our wisdom. Or apparent lack of it.

I've always thought that humans (described as a 'plague on the Earth' by David Attenborough!) have not been able to match their technological achievements with a similar advancement in any spiritual or holistic sense. We act in ways that evince ancient, deep-seated, primitive drivers. Ignorant, in the true sense of the word.

And I think any imagining of off-Earth colonisation must include these human traits/frailties in the mix - whether the 'new world' is a solar system object or a place to which we could go only by utilising an ion-driven sail or via a black-hole slingshot effect.

We must dream of new technologies and new humans, in tandem.

Maybe a symbiotic marrying of the two?

[Davey-T]

Watched Quatermass and the pit last night, made sometime in the sixties I guess and the army general said  "We'll have men on the Moon in ten years and Mars in fifteen" he was nearly right.

Dave

[DRT]

I've always thought that humans (described as a 'plague on the Earth' by David Attenborough!) have not been able to match their technological achievements with a similar advancement in any spiritual or holistic sense. We act in ways that evince ancient, deep-seated, primitive drivers. Ignorant, in the true sense of the word.

This is precisely where I am coming from, Gordon. My belief is that our ability to master tools and technology has resulted in us living in societies, social structures and environments that the instinctive and primitive side of our species struggles to cope with. It is why we have the physical diseases we suffer from and also, I believe, the principle cause of mental illness. We are living in a totally unnatural state. Pushing that further into living in a big tin can with only a few other people millions of miles from home and always just seconds from disaster is unlikely to improve the situation and our ability to cope. If anyone can bring themselves to watch a few episodes of Big Brother they will see exactly what I mean

[Davey-T]

How about an autonomous space ship loaded with human embryos that would only start to develop once a suitable home planet was found, they could then be cared for by robots until they were old enough to fend for themselves.

It wouldn't matter how long it took to arrive, thousands even millions of years, sounds like a Sci Fi book plot to me

Dave

[KenG]

Why should the speed of light be a limiting factor? There will undoubtably be ways around it - dematerialising and being recreated at a given point in space? - just an idea, but why be constrained by the present? Whatever you can think of will happen. Mars will be colonised - initially with primitive technology - but in fifty years time there'll be a thriving, self-supporting community there, and as I've already said, they'll be creating mouldable structures on site and will be increasing independent of Earth. So to get back to the original thread, what are the possibilities/difficulties of establishing colonies beyond Mars? Not only physically, but politically?

[Davey-T]

The biggest fly in the ointment is radiation, we can't even go to Mars with current radiation protection technology.

Dave

[DRT]

I think it would be useful to understand what contributors understand collonisation to mean. Is it the establishment of a permanent research centre that is continually re-supplied from Earth and with inhabitants who have the option of returning home or is it a large group of people sent on a one-way trip with the intention of permanent settlement and the establishment of the various trappings of modern society such as schools, hospitals, families, places of work, agriculture, manufacturing, etc?

I can see how the first of those could be accomplished with technology that is probably only a few decades from our grasp, but the other option feels completely unattainable to me.

Politics is a very interesting dimension in all of this. Most modern societies struggle to maintain a coherent political agenda for more than four or five years. We find it almost impossible to take the difficult decisions to invest in our own infrastructure because the time it takes to complete the work exceeds the timescale of the political mandate to invest in it. What will happen when our friends on Pluto ask us to fund and embark upon a fifty year project to build a dome big enough to house their burgeoning population? Who is going to be brave enough to sign that cheque?

For what it's worth I do think that humans will put permanent bases on bodies in our solar system before it all blows up into a cloud of gas. But if we want to do that we need to start with baby steps, not giant leaps. Moonbase Alpha would be a good start. You could get there and back in a few days, the facility we build could be huge and the lessons learned would allow us to avoid disasters trying to do things like sending people to Mars (yet).

[Scorpius]

Very soon – representatives from a benevolent alien civilization, similar to us but vastly more intelligent, will visit the earth and inform us it was they who brought our ancient ancestors here many thousands of years ago. They will reveal to us - they’ve been closely monitoring our progress ever since and have saved us from total annihilation by natural forces, malevolent alien races and ourselves countless times over the millennia.

Their technology will be far beyond anything in our wildest dreams and they will offer to share it with us under one condition. The condition? We must destroy every weapon of mass destruction that exists on planet earth and all bloodshed, wars and personal conflicts must cease for 100 years.

And if we’re able to do this thing? They promise to return and provide us with the knowledge, tools and technologies that will allow us to travel far beyond the Milky Way and colonize pristine worlds rich in all the resources we could ever want or need. However, if we fail to meet the challenge, they vow to stop protecting us and leave us to fend for ourselves against all the evil and destructive forces which exist throughout the universe.

Self-indulgent fantasy? Maybe so - but if not, who among us believes we could learn to settle our differences and live together in peace and harmony for 100 years? We’ve never managed such a thing up until now but what might the future hold for a civilization - any civilization - who could accomplish such a worthy goal?