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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 22 2015, @04:49PM
But if your plan depends upon Unobtainium and Magic Pixie Dust, it is hard to generate enthusiasm for much action.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday September 22 2015, @11:32PM
No, instead we hope to increase funding for scientific research and advances in engineering.
The problems preventing a viable manned mission to Mars, either with a return trip or intention for long-term habitation, are not insurmountable. Unobtainium and magic pixie dust are not needed.
In the case of a return trip, I would still support a manned mission for no other reason than it's one thing to know about a place and another thing entirely to have been to a place. I know all about Angkor Wat, but I would still love to go there myself one day, even if the only thing I return with are pictures and a story or two. Same thing with Mars. In fact, we already have the pictures. It's the sense of adventure. Think about the engineering accomplishments that could be had by designing a craft that could land on another planet and safely return the crew to Earth.
In the case of habitation, it's more complicated. Yet there I also don't see the obstacles as being insurmountable.
In either case, it's all about budget. Scrap the F-35 immediately and redirect the funding to efforts to send a manned mission to Mars. Scrap the drug war immediately and redirect the funding. I could go on. The point is: tell the engineers and scientists to get a crew to Mars and back safely, and throw whatever they need at them. If that happened, it might actually make sense to push kids into STEM careers.