SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Ed Regis writes in the New York Times that today we an witnessing an outburst of enthusiasm over the literally outlandish notion that in the relatively near future, some of us are going to be living, working, thriving and dying on Mars. But unfortunately Mars mania reflects an excessively optimistic view of what it actually takes to travel to and live on Mars, papering over many of the harsh realities and bitter truths that underlie the dream. "First, there is the tedious business of getting there. Using current technology and conventional chemical rockets, a trip to Mars would be a grueling, eight- to nine-month-long nightmare for the crew," writes Regis. "Tears, sweat, urine and perhaps even solid waste will be recycled, your personal space is reduced to the size of an SUV., and you and your crewmates are floating around sideways, upside down and at other nauseating angles." According to Regis every source of interpersonal conflict, and emotional and psychological stress that we experience in ordinary, day-to-day life on Earth will be magnified exponentially by restriction to a tiny, hermetically sealed, pressure-cooker capsule hurtling through deep space and to top it off, despite these constraints, the crew must operate within an exceptionally slim margin of error with continuous threats of equipment failures, computer malfunctions, power interruptions and software glitches.
But getting there is the easy part says Regis. "Mars is a dead, cold, barren planet on which no living thing is known to have evolved, and which harbors no breathable air or oxygen, no liquid water and no sources of food, nor conditions favorable for producing any. For these and other reasons it would be accurate to call Mars a veritable hell for living things, were it not for the fact that the planet's average surface temperature is minus 81 degrees Fahrenheit." These are only a few of the many serious challenges that must be overcome before anyone can put human beings on Mars and expect them to live for more than five minutes says Regis. "The notion that we can start colonizing Mars within the next 10 years or so is an overoptimistic, delusory idea that falls just short of being a joke."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by RedBear on Tuesday September 22 2015, @10:32AM
To paraphrase a pretty good speech: "We choose to go to Maaahhs not because it will be easy, but because it will be haaahhd."
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 22 2015, @02:30PM
Yes. And TFA underestimates the durability of humans. People live in cells all the time. They survive. People live in Antarctica and survive. Maybe the should bring a small puppy tho
(Score: 2) by broggyr on Tuesday September 22 2015, @03:24PM
Taking that puppy out for a walk would be interesting...
Taking things out of context since 1972.
(Score: 2) by scruffybeard on Tuesday September 22 2015, @02:39PM
Lewis and Clark only had a vague idea of where they were going, or what they would find. There is something to be said for doing something just because you can. You never know what you might learn along the way.
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Tuesday September 22 2015, @08:14PM
Lewis and Clark knew that Earth was a survivable planet, where you could live off the land.
Its thinking like this that is going to get a lot of people killed. But that's ok, they will be volunteers, we will raise statues to them, name Mars stations after them, and assuage our collective guilt for sending them there.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 22 2015, @08:47PM
Yes, it's okay, because they are volunteers. If we were cowardly like you want us to be, we would never take risks and make amazing discoveries. Fuck this perfect safety bullshit.
(Score: 2) by scruffybeard on Wednesday September 23 2015, @12:04PM
I never said we should send people on a suicide mission, nor do I think we should launch next week. We know that with the right technology and some hard work we can make Mars survivable for months or even years at a time. There are very few things worth doing that are 100% safe. But those risks can be mitigated with some imagination and ingenuity.
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Wednesday September 23 2015, @06:31PM
TFA isn't about never going to Mars, its about not going NOW.
We have hardly any of the technology needed to make Mars habitable for month or years. We need to make large habitable shelters, orders of magnitude larger than the ridiculously claustrophobic proposals for International Space Station sized habitats. Any one sent to Mars with current or near future technology is on a suicide mission no matter how many bows and bells you wrap that package in.
We should be looking at building on the moon, under ground perhaps, but even that technology isn't even remotely available for anything except a strictly short term lab smaller than the ISS. But at least return from the moon is possible.
You see people jumping on this thread talking about mining asteroids tunneling into Mars and all sorts of nonsense suggestions. People watch and read so much Science Fiction that they have lost all concept of actual capabilities. We can't even bore a tunnel under down town Seattle and people propose, with a straight face, to build underground cities on mars, and write off the lives it will cost saying "nobody said it wold be easy".
If the best we can com up with to get into space is a chemical rocket, we've got no business sending people to Mars any time soon.
Maybe in 200 years at the current rate of technological development. We need one or two MAJOR technological breakthroughs in lift and propulsion and landing capabilities to make mars anything but a suicide mission.
Imagination and ingenuity my ass.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:18PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings