Mars ETF?

[HFWR]

I am afraid that the Earth is all we have. If we mess it up, we are done.



About Mars scenery and experience, I guess I can imagine it being the same as standing in a place devoid of all animal and plant life, some place like the Sahara, except that it is not hot but a lot colder than Antarctica.



I have not personally experienced the desolateness of Sahara or the cold of Antarctica, but I think I've got it. I would rather much enjoy the scenery on earth like I have had the privilege to.



PS. Following are some photos from Mars.

At least they speak English...

 

[NW-Bound]

They are multilingual, and have been watching our TV. Heck, they even appeared on our TV.

 

[Music Lover]

Again, Mars is cold, dry, and has no oxygen. It lost its atmosphere for several reasons, and what is left is 95% CO2. What is there to colonize with? It's ridiculous.

Even if humans can build some bubble structures up there to contain the air and to grow food (not possible currently with rockets unless someone invents anti-gravity machines for transportation), the same effort can be used to colonize Antarctica, or the Sahara desert a lot cheaper, by 1000 times or perhaps 1 million times.

Totally absurd! People watch too many science fiction movies and tend to believe the cr*p.

There is no valid reason to go to Mars, and even less reason to colonize it. It would cost less to provide clean drinking water to the entire planet than it would to send one manned craft to Mars...something the "dreamers" never think about.

 

[NW-Bound]

I do think spending space probes to explore the planets are worthwhile, as the data helps us learn about our solar system. And once we know how inhospitable the places are, what is the point to send humans?

But if some private enterprise wants to spend its own money on spending people there, and there are volunteers to go, I do not think one can prevent them from doing so although I think the money is better spent on earth.

I would love to see a video of someone like Musk landing on Mars and trying to build a bubble to live in, while wearing a spacesuit. I do not watch these survivor reality shows on TV, but this one on Mars I will watch. The episode would be quite short though.

 

[Lucantes]

I thought this was an short and interesting look at "The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization":
The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization
"The economic viability of colonizing Mars is examined. It is shown, that of all bodies in the solar system other than Earth, Mars is unique in that it has the resources required to support a population of sufficient size to create locally a new branch of human civilization. It is also shown that while Mars may lack any cash material directly exportable to Earth, Mars' orbital elements and other physical parameters gives a unique positional advantage that will allow it to act as a keystone supporting extractive activities in the asteroid belt and elsewhere in the solar system. The potential of relatively near-term types of interplanetary transportation systems is examined, and it is shown that with very modest advances on a historical scale, systems can be put in place that will allow individuals and families to emigrate to Mars at their own discretion."

Not saying everything is 100% and we should be packing our bags for the next flight out, but as he mentions there were many naysayers throughout history when it came to going to a new place on our own planet.

If we imagine that there was a fully functioning colony on Mars (yes, take the mental leap of faith ), that was growing at a very brisk pace, what would be the realistic and practical investment there that you would want to be in on the ground floor of? Maybe just basic products and services (power, water, food, shelter , transportation and clothing/atmosphere suits?) would be a good place to start and grow along with the colony?

 

[CaliforniaMan]

Robots are taking over factory jobs here on earth, and people are seriously thinking there is some reason for sending people to mars? There is just no economically justifiable reason to do it, for science, robots will always be cheaper, much cheaper, and it can be switched off when it is not in use.

Where would the money come from to put people on mars? Many of us remember how exciting it was when we first saw man land on the moon, and also remember how quickly the public lost interest after the USSR abandoned the competition.

And there is simply no economic justification for people on mars, and I doubt that even any competition with even China would make it interesting for the majority of taxpayers who have other things on their minds. There is just not the kind of fear of military technology gap as there was back in the 60s.

And the planetary scientists would much rather spend the limited resources on more robotic scientific missions to more places, rather than have to put everything in the manned mars mission basket.

On the other hand all the talk is probably good for Musk, he can keep his employees working 60 hour weeks imagining that great tomorrow in the sky, while making money launching commercial, military, and scientific payloads paid for by commercial ventures and taxpayers.

I wish we had some magical technology today that would make economical manned interplanetary space travel a reality, bit we simply don't. Yes, we could do it, but the cost using present technology will prevent it.

And in the odd chance that the public somehow demands funding to put man on mars, their excitement will last about as long as it did when we put man on the moon, and we will be back spending money on other things. Colonization of mars will have to wait, for quite a while I think.

 

[dixonge]

Just saw this TED talk last night - answers a lot of the questions asked in this thread...

https://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_p...n_mars_here_s_how_they_ll_survive?language=en

 

[Totoro]

There is no valid reason to go to Mars, and even less reason to colonize it.

One reason which is valid to me: Diversifying humanity.

Now we are all on one planet. Going to more planets and eventually solar systems reduces the odds we'll be wiped out by a localized catastrophy.

 

[NW-Bound]

Strictly speaking, I think there are reasons. But there's currently no means or affordable technology to do so.

I am interested in the links that posters provided above, and will read/watch them later. I am currently in my boondock home, and need to wait till I am back in town to use my high-speed Internet link.

 

[Fermion]

On a recent mission to the ISS, a expandable prototype room was included, funded by a billionaire who has plans for a much bigger "hotel". Perhaps this technology would be what is used on Mars.

Personally I would rather build a big ship in Earth orbit that had the capability to visit the various planets or other interesting things in the solar system. Perhaps with ion drives or solar sail. I do not know if that would be cheaper or more expensive than a manned Mars mission.

 

[CaliforniaMan]

Just saw this TED talk last night - answers a lot of the questions asked in this thread...

https://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_p...n_mars_here_s_how_they_ll_survive?language=en

Pie in the sky. (sorry I couldn't help myself)

Who is going to pay for all of this? No mention of anything about that at all in his talk. When we have infrastructure in need of repair and renewal, people out of work to automation, a huge national debt that needs servicing, military needs, etc. etc. it is hard to argue we need to spend a fortune for a few people to go live on mars because "exploration is in our DNA." Guys like this, that talk the big talk, without any means to walk the big walk, really trouble me.

 

[dixonge]

Pie in the sky. (sorry I couldn't help myself)

Who is going to pay for all of this? No mention of anything about that at all in his talk. When we have infrastructure in need of repair and renewal, people out of work to automation, a huge national debt that needs servicing, military needs, etc. etc. it is hard to argue we need to spend a fortune for a few people to go live on mars because "exploration is in our DNA." Guys like this, that talk the big talk, without any means to walk the big walk, really trouble me.

Infrastructure repair, unemployment and national debt have been suffering *without* a Mars program. It's not for lack of money...

Seems like you may be troubled about the wrong things

 

[NW-Bound]

I thought this was an short and interesting look at "The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization":
The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization

The author talks about transporting 24 people at a time in a "habcraft" using a Saturn V size rocket. The habcraft will provide shelter for the colonists when landed on Mars.

Fine, but where's the equipment, the tools, the food for sustenance? People should read about the Biosphere 2 project on earth that was far larger, and still failed to provide food for a crew of 8. And the Biosphere 2 was on earth, and did not have anywhere the same problem as on Mars with its near-vacuum atmosphere and severe temperature swing.

Not saying everything is 100% and we should be packing our bags for the next flight out, but as he mentions there were many naysayers throughout history when it came to going to a new place on our own planet.

The New World colonists were able to survive with simple tools. They could chop trees to build log homes, burn wood to keep warm (it was also not down to -100F as on Mars). They were able to plant food immediately as the soil was the same as at their former homeland. They could hunt and fish for meat. None of the things that Mother Earth provided is available on Mars. The colonists did not have to wear spacesuits for protection to work outside, and if their home structure was not completely airtight, they would not die.

And most importantly, they were able to gather material for building right from where they stood, and whatever they had to bring from home came on ships which could carry a lot more than the capsules atop interplanetary rockets. Martian colonists would need to bring a whole lot more, and aboard vessels with much less capacity. The margin for errors is a lot smaller, and the penalty for a tiny mistake or equipment failure is death. Space travel has never been that safe, let alone living long-term in it. We could provide them with lots of provision to be safe, but what is the cost of it? How many hundred or thousand of rockets do we need to build?

PS. By the way, the colonists survived with the help of the indigenous Indians, whom we still thank every Thanksgiving. Maybe the Martians will be graceful to help us the same this time?

 

[NW-Bound]

Just saw this TED talk last night - answers a lot of the questions asked in this thread...

https://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_p...n_mars_here_s_how_they_ll_survive?language=en

Yes, as CaliforniaMan said, it's pie in the sky.

The speaker talked about the different pieces of equipment that would be useful, but nothing about how many would be needed, how they could be transported from Earth, what their power source would be, etc...

People talk about growing food in a confined environment all the time, but I like to see them performing it as an experiment similar to the Biosphere 2. It's all talk until they can demonstrate it on earth. Why don't they try to demonstrate the easiest and simplest thing first?

The speaker described Elon Musk as a hero who could do it all. Gee, he sounded so much like a salesman for Musk.

So far, I have not seen enough convincing info that this is feasible. All they say is that it should be possible, but without some more exact figures, it is all hand-waving and calling skeptics non-believers.

 

[dixonge]

Yes, as CaliforniaMan said, it's pie in the sky.

Yeah, you're probably right. Pie in the sky, silly dreamers.

 

[NW-Bound]

Oh, we need dreamers. Without dreaming of the new things, how do we make progress?

But when we try to turn dreams into reality, we need to get more facts, more proofs, before we can write a check.

 

[dixonge]

Oh, we need dreamers. Without dreaming of the new things, how do we make progress?

But when we try to turn dreams into reality, we need to get more facts, more proofs, before we can write a check.

Who is 'we'? Is there a government Mars colonization program that I missed?

 

[Lucantes]

Yeah, you're probably right. Pie in the sky, silly dreamers.

Ha!
Silly really but this just made me LOL, good thing I wasn't drinking milk at the time!


I absolutely believe that humans will be living on another planet or moon at some point in the future, when? I dunno, but I am very happy that someone is at least trying to make the first steps towards making it a reality. I find it especially comforting when they place their own money and time on the table in order to further the effort, and I don't care if their only justification for doing it is completely selfish or self-satisfying. I say: "Go Team Human!"

 

[NW-Bound]

By we, I mean the taxpayers.

If private parties want to do this with their own money, they can go ahead anytime. Why would they need permission?

But the promoters are trying to get gummint's money, which is really "our" money.

 

[RobbieB]

I'll invest in Mars right after I buy the Maserati and the new house with the boat dock on the river.

Yup, you can count on my support -

 

[Music Lover]

I'd be willing to chip in a little bit for a manned flight to Mars...but only if I get to pick a few people to go that don't deserve to be on this planet.

 

[stepford]

Unless you seriously believe in the possibility of terraforming, how is a Mars colony any better "species survival insurance" than a similar colony on the Moon. The logistics of lunar colonization, while daunting, are vastly simpler than those of outfitting/sustaining a Mars colony.

But nobody talks about a Moon colony anymore. Is it just that it's 50 year old technology now and lacks the Elon Coolness Factor?

 

[NW-Bound]

Hey, I was the first to use the phrase "pie in the sky" in this thread, before Californiaman. See post #20.

And by the way, I researched the origin of this phrase, and learned from the Web that

This expression was first recorded in 1911 in a rallying song of a union, the International Workers of the World (or "Wobblies"): "Work and pray, live on hay, you'll get pie in the sky when you die."​

Very interesting! I searched youtube for this song, but have not found it.

PS. I found it. It's "The Preacher and the Slave".

PPS. Further research into the origin of this song revealed even more interesting episodes in American history. The Web is great! I have used this phrase before without understanding the story behind it. Now, I know.

 

[Lucantes]

Unless you seriously believe in the possibility of terraforming, how is a Mars colony any better "species survival insurance" than a similar colony on the Moon. The logistics of lunar colonization, while daunting, are vastly simpler than those of outfitting/sustaining a Mars colony.
But nobody talks about a Moon colony anymore. Is it just that it's 50 year old technology now and lacks the Elon Coolness Factor?

I want a Moon colony also! having one on Mars wouldn't preclude one on the Moon, I want us to be everywhere!
As an aside, I also welcome the Alien/Robot/Spaghetti Monster Overlords!

 

[dixonge]

By we, I mean the taxpayers.

If private parties want to do this with their own money, they can go ahead anytime. Why would they need permission?

But the promoters are trying to get gummint's money, which is really "our" money.

Personally, I'd be fine with funding NASA with a small percentage of the current military budget. But regardless the source, I think Mars would be a lot more valuable than several other expenditure areas. I think we can and should fix infrastructure as well as go to Mars. I have my doubts that we can overcome the military-industrial complex lobbying dollars, however. Don't forget that not all of 'us' agree on how 'our' money is spent in D.C.

Which would leave Space-X. But I'm not sure how they would commercialize this, other than shuttling bored billionaires around.