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 tathra on Tuesday September 22 2015, @02:41PM
the problem with staying on earth is that we know for a fact that it won't last forever. if we do not leave the earth, humanity (not to mention all other life on earth) will go extinct, period. it may not happen for 3-4 billion years (sun entering red giant phase and consuming the earth), though it could also happen tomorrow (large asteroid/comet strike), but we know for absolutely certain that remaining here is a one-way ticket to extinction for all life on earth. we have to leave earth at some point for any of earth's life to survive.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 22 2015, @03:46PM
We could help some of Earth's life to make its way to other worlds by sending out spacecraft laden with bacteria, fungi, algae and so on (as we've done unintentionally). Humans needn't come along.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tathra on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:04PM
no, we don't need to come along, however the entire purpose of life and its instinctual drive is to reproduce and propagate the species. its in every single one of earth's life's drive to survive, but humans are the only ones with the correct anatomy (opposable thumbs, combined with brains capable of abstract thoughts and planning tens or hundreds of steps in advance, and millennia of accumulated knowledge) to accomplish it. it would be pretty stupid, not to mention contrary to our instincts, to build some kind of ark that would only transport simple, basic lifeforms, plus all of our knowledge would be lost without us coming along, and accumulating and propagating knowledge is just as important as propagating the species.
(Score: 3, Informative) by DECbot on Tuesday September 22 2015, @05:48PM
Besides, if we only export the algae and bacteria, we'd likely inadvertently send it through some sort of worm-hole where it will establish itself in some galaxy some billions of years before humans ever descend from trees, evolve into a hateful, vengeful algae-humanoid-bacterial-swarm and return to conquer Earth.
We will never forget, never forgive.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:34PM
What arrogance is it such that you think that humans can and will be immortal?
"Oh noes, our life will come to an end if we don't" is no better reason for believing that we can build vessels that can house entire communities of humans, spiral out of Earth's gravity well, and roam the heavens than it is for believing that we can pray to a god, shuffle off our mortal coil, and go to heaven.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:56PM
What arrogance is it such that you think that humans can and will be immortal?
Well, it may or may not be arrogance. I would say that question is a matter for psychiatrists and psychologists, and if it impacts the person's life in a way they find negative, they can see such professionals and get treated.
But in terms of planning for personal survival, longer life, and longer and better life for one's offspring, I'd say it's completely immaterial. Whether the motivation is arrogance or indigestion or whatever, some people desire to go about the science of figuring out how to live longer and that scientific goal can be pursued whether or not the person pursuing it is afflicted with arrogance or any other personality disorder.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:42PM
The problem with that argument is that it assumes that leaving now is the best way of developing space travel. Since we went to the moon, we've made massive advances in materials science, computers, and so on, all of which have applications to building spacecraft. The earlier story about batteries is another case in point: we can manage far denser batteries now than the lunar lander had, for a fraction of the cost.
You have to do something that spurs demand for technology for the technology to be developed, but there's no compelling evidence that building space craft now will actually make building space craft in 100-200 years easier than if we focussed on other technologies.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday September 22 2015, @05:06PM
there is no such assumption or argument in my post. all i said was "we have to leave earth at some point", not "we have to leave now!" or "we have to leave in the next century". the sooner the better, since there could be a world-wide extinction event tomorrow, but on geological timescales "sooner" is thousands of years, not decades.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 23 2015, @10:27PM
In the next century? You didn't really fully grasp that whole Cosmic Calendar [nationalgeographic.com] thing, did you? Our entire species is like, 25 seconds into the next five months. You say we need to get out of here in the next 1000 years, 10000 years? How about a million years? Do you have any idea how big a thousand million is?