Professors urge one-way Martian colonization missions
Mars, as seen by the Hubble Space Telescope. Image credit: NASA
For the chance to watch the sun rise over Olympus Mons, or maybe take a stroll across the vast plains of the Vastitas Borealis, would you sign on for a one-way flight to Mars?
It's a question that gives pause to even Dirk Schulze-Makuch, a Washington State University associate professor, who, with colleague Paul Davies, a physicist and cosmologist from Arizona State University, argues for precisely such a one-way manned mission to Mars in an article published this month in the "Journal of Cosmology."
In the article, "To Boldly Go: A One-Way Human Mission to Mars," the authors write that while technically feasible, a manned mission to Mars and back is unlikely to lift off anytime soon largely because it is a hugely expensive proposition, both in terms of financial resources and political will. And because the greatest portion of the expense is tied up in safely returning the crew and spacecraft to earth, they reason that a manned one-way mission would not only cut the costs by several fold, but also mark the beginning of long-term human colonization of the planet.
Mars is by far the most promising for sustained colonization and development, the authors conclude, because it is similar in many respects to Earth and, crucially, possesses a moderate surface gravity, an atmosphere, abundant water and carbon dioxide, together with a range of essential minerals. It is the Earth's second closest planetary neighbor (after Venus) and a trip to Mars takes about six months using the most favorable launch option and current chemical rocket technology.
"We envision that Mars exploration would begin and proceed for a long time on the basis of outbound journeys only," said Schulze-Makuch. "One approach could be to send four astronauts initially, two on each of two space craft, each with a lander and sufficient supplies, to stake a single outpost on Mars. A one-way human mission to Mars would be the first step in establishing a permanent human presence on the planet."
While acknowledging that the mission would necessarily be crewed by volunteers, Schulze-Makuch and Davies stress that they aren't suggesting that astronauts simply be abandoned on the Red Planet for the sake of science. Unlike the Apollo moon missions, they propose a series of missions over time, sufficient to support long-term colonization.
"It would really be little different from the first white settlers of the North American continent, who left Europe with little expectation of return," Davies said of the proposed one-way Martian mission. "Explorers such as Columbus, Frobisher, Scott and Amundsen, while not embarking on their voyages with the intention of staying at their destination, nevertheless took huge personal risks to explore new lands, in the knowledge that there was a significant likelihood that they would perish in the attempt."
The authors propose the astronauts would be re-supplied on a periodic basis from Earth with basic necessities, but otherwise would be expected to become increasingly proficient at harvesting and utilizing resources available on Mars. Eventually they envision that outpost would reach self-sufficiency, and then it could serve as a hub for a greatly expanded colonization program.
The proposed project would begin with the selection of an appropriate site for the colony, preferentially associated with a cave or some other natural shelter, as well as other nearby resources, such as water, minerals and nutrients.
"Mars has natural and quite large lava caves, and some of them are located at a low elevation in close proximity to the former northern ocean, which means that they could harbor ice deposits inside similar to many ice-containing caves on Earth," said Schulze-Makuch."Ice caves would go a long way to solving the needs of a settlement for water and oxygen. Mars has no ozone shield and no magnetospheric shielding, and ice caves would also provide shelter from ionizing and ultraviolet radiation."
The article suggests that, in addition to offering humanity a "lifeboat" in the event of a mega-catastrophe on Earth, a Mars colony would provide a platform for further scientific research. Astrobiologists agree that there is a fair probability that Mars hosts, or once hosted, microbial life, perhaps deep beneath the surface and Davies and Schulze-Makuch suggest a scientific facility on Mars might therefore be a unique opportunity to study an alien life form and a second evolutionary record.
"Mars also conceals a wealth of geological and astronomical data that is almost impossible to access from Earth using robotic probes," the authors write. "A permanent human presence on Mars would open the way to comparative planetology on a scale unimagined by any former generation A Mars base would offer a springboard for human/robotic exploration of the outer solar system and the asteroid belt. And establishing a permanent multicultural and multinational human presence on another world would have major beneficial political and social implications for Earth, and serve as a strong unifying and uplifting theme for all humanity."
Although they believe the strategy of colonizing Mars with one-way missions brings the goal of colonizing another planet technologically and financially within our reach, Schulze-Makuch and Davies acknowledge that such a project would require not only major international cooperation, but a return to the exploration spirit and risk-taking ethos of the great period of the Earth's exploration.
They write that when they raise the idea of a one-way Mars colonization mission among their scientific colleagues, a number express an interest in making the trip.
"Informal surveys conducted after lectures and conference presentations on our proposal, have repeatedly shown that many people are willing to volunteer for a one-way mission, both for reasons of scientific curiosity and in a spirit of adventure and human destiny," they write.
And yes, Schulze-Makuch offered that he too would be prepared to "boldly go" on a one-way mission to the Red Planet. But he hedges just a bit, holding out the single caveat that he would want the launch to wait until his young children have all grown into adults.
More information: The complete article from the 2010 Volume 12 issue of the Journal of Cosmology is available online at http://journalofco … Mars108.html
Provided by Washington State University
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
28 comments
-
Every black hole contains a new universe: A physicist presents a solution to present-day cosmic mysteries,
214 comments
-
New silicon memory chip developed,
16 comments
-
Computing experts unveil superefficient 'inexact' chip,
45 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
41 comments
-
Math behind Theoretical Physics
23 hours ago
-
Do we know whats at the center of galaxies yet?
May 23, 2012
-
Structure of the Milky Way?
May 20, 2012
-
What would it take to terraform Pluto and Charon?
May 19, 2012
-
Whats is volume of mass at the centre of the sun
May 19, 2012
-
Galaxies moving faster than the speed of light?
May 18, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy
More news stories
Organic carbon from Mars, but not biological
Molecules containing large chains of carbon and hydrogen--the building blocks of all life on Earth--have been the targets of missions to Mars from Viking to the present day. While these molecules have previously ...
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
10 hours ago |
4 / 5 (3) |
0
|
Asteroid nudged by sunlight: Most precise measurement of Yarkovsky effect
Scientists on NASA's asteroid sample return mission, Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx), have measured the orbit of their destination asteroid, ...
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
6 hours ago |
4.8 / 5 (6) |
0
|
New mapping of Mars shows western Medusae Fossae formation older than once thought
(Phys.org) -- Recent geologic mapping of the Medusae Fossae Formation on Marsan intensely eroded deposit near the northern edge of the cratered highlandshas revealed a wider distribution of its ...
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
6 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
|
Autopsy of a eruption: Linking crystal growth to volcano seismicity
A forensic approach that links changes deep below a volcano to signals at the surface is described by scientists from the University of Bristol in a paper published today in Science. The research could ultima ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
10 hours ago |
4 / 5 (1) |
0
|
Private supply ship flies by space station in test (Update)
The world's first private supply ship flew tantalizingly close to the International Space Station on Thursday but did not stop, completing a critical test in advance of the actual docking.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
14 hours ago |
4.8 / 5 (8) |
5
Is a classical electrodynamics law incompatible with special relativity?
(Phys.org) -- The laws of classical electromagnetism that were developed in the 19th century are the same laws that scientists use today. They include Maxwell’s four equations along with the Lorentz la ...
HyperSolar shows dirty water no barrier to power world
(Phys.org) -- The Santa Barbara, California, company, HyperSolar, is set to transparently share the ups and downs of its research experiences toward the companys ultimate vision, successfully producing ...
In nanorod crystal growth, nanoparticles seen as artificial atoms
In the growth of crystals, do nanoparticles act as "artificial atoms" forming molecular-type building blocks that can assemble into complex structures? This is the contention of a major but controversial theory ...
First direct observation of oriented attachment in nanocrystal growth
Berkeley Lab researchers have reported the first direct observation of nanoparticles undergoing oriented attachment, the critical step in biomineralization and the growth of nanocrystals. A better understanding ...
Global warming winner: Once rare butterfly thrives
(AP) -- Global warming is rescuing the once-rare brown Argus butterfly, scientists say.
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments
A team of scientists at McMaster University has discovered a drug, thioridazine, successfully kills cancer stem cells in the human while avoiding the toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments.
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 4.1 / 5 (9)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (6)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
It should theoretically be far easier to build a one way ship with dozens or even hundreds of passengers, than to make a two way voyage with just a few passengers.
However, enough basic technology and manufacturing infrastructure must be sent along to give the colony maximum technological retention.
We could always send up more ships, but Mars is a planet, after all, landing a few degrees away from another ship is still tens or scores of miles, and might be too great a distance to travel by foot or rover over rought terrain before cities and infrastructures are made.
If given the opportunity to be part of this, I think I would gladly volunteer at this point in my life.
Well, things change though. If I was married and the wife didn't want to go, no worries, I'll stay put.
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (12)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (9)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (5)
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (3)
It becomes much more practical a few decades from now when computers are fully miniaturized, aeroponics is mastered, and robotic mining and construction and other self-assembling technologies are mastered.
The problem we have right now with a one-way human colony is sustainability. We don't know enough about Mars to know how good the ore deposits and other resources are for construction and advanced technologies, or how to find biology related resources such as nitrogen along with sodium, calcium, potassium, phosphorus and other essential elements and trace elements in life.
We need a few more comprehensive un-manned missions with the ability to take deep core samples and possibly do some decent geology such as seismology to determine what resources are really available on the planet, and how they can be adapted to self-contained environments to support humans, and the robots to help mine resources faster, and build these environments.
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 2.8 / 5 (4)
The risk of returning to Earth with alien micro-organisms is much too high to be allowed until we, i.e. ALL of us, not just NASA and associates, have a complete understanding of what is really there.
but, BUT.....we can't rule out the possibility that we're not wanted.
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
I think they should send 50 or so on the first mission, though, to build a decent-sized base. Like in Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson.
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (9)
If I can take my books and music, so much the better!!!
I'm already working on my ipod Mars exploration mix...
Oct 19, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Go look on the Project Gutenberg site for a story by Alan Edward Nourse called Martyr. He nailed this problem more than 50 years ago.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (6)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.9 / 5 (8)
I want this so bad it hurts like lost love already, and I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling this way.
Start with a reality-TV-show selection process where people can vote for candidates by SMS and the whole thing will probably pay for itself.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
It would also serve to avoid "been there, done that" cutting NASA budget after the flag on Mars is planted, like after Apollo. For once, with a colony to support it would be the easily bored public and not us space enthusiasts that would be screwed.. :p
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (1)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
But if you're going to go to that scale of commitment and expense, then what's the point of having one-way missions? With that level of investment you could do a two-way mission. None of what you've outlined there is trivial.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Mission to Mars itself is not trivial, either. Unless one-way mission means that the astronauts will plant the flag and die on the surface. Long term living on Mars would be even more expensive in the long run, the point is that it would be technically simpler if you dont have to worry about return, and the cost would be stretched over longer time, so lower yearly budgets are feasible.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 3.3 / 5 (3)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
This mission is essential and must be done at some point, when to go for it is the question.
We have the tech now, but it will be very costly.
If we wait, there's always better tech just around the corner. That arrives, and then there's even better tech on the way so you wait some more - You end up never going.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Yup.
Probably a few decades before we get that kind of technology though.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (10)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 2.8 / 5 (4)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
No, you are incorrect.
If we had to go to Mars, HAD to, mind you, we could build NERVA and be on our way. Also a Daedalus (nuclear pulse) style craft is buildable if cost and pollution is not an object. And we have plenty of el bomba grande.
Finally, Vasimr offers hope, in the near term, of a 14 day trip to Mars with a 23 day return mission.
However, I agree with the writers; we should first explore with probes, followed by sending supplies, followed by sending One Way colonists/scientists/engineers.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
Mars Direct, Robert Zubrin et al., had the whole deal worked out for a 2 year exploratory mission to Mars. The rovers confirmed the chemical and physical apparatus would function without issue and provide plenty of fuel in a period of 6 months rather than 2 years.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
_Transit of Earth_ (Sir Arthur Clarke) is even better.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
That gets them home but says nothing about getting there.
The most difficult part of getting TO Mars is getting to Earth Orbit. Once in orbit, you're half way to anyway in the Solar System, to paraphrase Mr. Heinlein.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
I hope one day we do this... but I say send hundreds of ships with bacteria and lichen first to help change the atmosphere wait a hundred years send robots .. send probes and then send humans.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4.4 / 5 (7)
1) We wouldn't stay ON the surface, we'd stay under the surface. The lack of substantial atmosphere makes incomming micrometeorites catastrophically deadly. It'd be like living on a shooting range unless we dug in.
2) We have easily reproducable metamaterials that weigh less than a decal that can provide shielding from specific bands of ionizing radiation. Simple mass production is all that would be needed.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Fissionables are the most valuable materials this civilization has yet created- essential for survival in a pinch, they could not have been stockpiled without that great contrivance, the cold war, to make it necessary. Weve been testing autonomous nuclear-powered vehicles (subs) in extreme environments for decades, in prep for colonization; again, courtesy of the sham threat of attack. USSR/US; 2 sides/1 coin
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (8)
Come on people, even getting to mars right now represents a lethal dose of radiation for a normal human.
There isn't enough gravity either, normal human physiology doesn't do well in low gravity. Normal humans would have to build underground centrifuge-like habitats to escape radiation, meteorites, and have enough "gravity" to survive. There is no way such habitats could be build quickly enough for the first, or probably even second, wave of humans to survive. Plus their performance would be so degraded half way to dying, that they would be using poor judgment and making costly mistakes.
Until robots are developed that can build habitats before humans arrive, there will be no settling off Earth for normal humans.
Or, we bio-engineer some new humans that can survive space. Good luck getting that approved!
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
- radiation shielding (including fuel, water)
- artificial magnetic field
- medication to help repair radiation damage or bone strenght loss
- shorter trip times ( about 2 months are realistic with VASIMR)
- artificial gravity
But also, lets be realistic. We are not going to Mars with current and proposed budgets, and in the times of crisis, I dont have much hope for more money thrown at space exploration. Moon or near-earth asteroids are actually doable with what we have. Lets concentrate on that.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
And QC played a nice bit of switch-the-argument on me - first it was that we couldn't aim everything to land near each other, then it was that we need to develop all of these technologies first.
Question for anyone who has an idea - how much of the ISS life support is coming from systems that would actually be used in a closed-loop environment?
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
OH? That's why the remaining Saturn Vs were scraped and the blueprints, plans and tooling destroyed? We don't need heavy lift capability? We don't need low-cost access to Earth orbit?
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
http://www.nasasp...0/D5.jpg
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Um, every thing mentioned above we don't have yet.
Shielding against the two types of radiation (SPE & GCR)is tricky because we don't fully understand all the issues yet, and GCR can be so energetic that no shielding is possible.
Getting to Mars quickly is the best way, but VASIMR isn't up for the job any time soon, nor do we have a power supply even close to feed it for those speeds, nor can it operate until we have something that can get it into space. Ad Astra was supposed to put a test one on the ISS soon, but I think delays has pushed it past the final shuttle flight.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
http://upload.wik...ycle.svg
As you can see, H2 and CO2 are currently vented overboard. This should be fixed for a truly closed loop system. Or at worst, at least burn it in VASIMR engine..
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
As close as possible to having EVERY single atom lifted, should be stored away, for a future time when we'll actually have something up there worth calling a space station, and the piled-up "waste" will be called a "goldmine".
Suggested reading of the comment: Tank Farm Dynamo, by David Brin - available free on the Internet.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
"Closed loop system" is impractical as the astronauts themselves constantly interject carbon and hydrogen (reacted with oxygen) from their bodies into the system.
I think the preferred "fuel" for a VASIMR is argon. Hydrogen has been mentioned but it is corrosive, difficult to store, and has the lowest molecular weight of any element (more is important for imparting inertia) However, if it is already on the station (in necessary quantity?) then maybe they will build for that.
Oct 20, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Oct 21, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (3)
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
http://buzzaldrin...-cycler/
"The Cycler system alters the philosophy behind a Mars program. It makes possible the dream of regular flights to the Red Planet and a permanent human presence there. That’s the only way we’ll ever succeed in taking mankind’s next giant leap: a subway-in-the-sky between our planet and our future second home."
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
- closer lifeline to earth for remediation of unforseen accidents
- easier to resupply crews and logistics, not cheap, but less expensive than mars
- eventually a selfsustained colony that has mastered living of the land in spaceon has the experience, the know-how and is out of the earths gravity well to launch much more costeffective and higer proballity of succes to colonize mars by real colonists.
Also, once moonmining gets serious, earth can benefit from its returns and you get something of a space economy, mars is a far away to get an early payoff
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
That's the problem. If we are going to wait until its reasonably safe to go to mars - we'll never get there.
Think about it. If you even apply that thinking to your own life - when would you have moved out of your parents house? - never.
It really NEEDS to be a one way trip to mars. Without people of the caliber for a oneway trip - its all just planned failure.
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (3)
Nanotubes in epoxy can get to ridiculous strength to weight ratios. Currently though the longest nanotubes made are a few centimeters long, and you want them bumpy or with chemical binding sites to minimize the amount of epoxy needed. Get the nanotubes up to meters in length, and all other issues are easily managed.
Does this mean that round trips to Mars would be feasible? Sure, but it also means that colonist style missions would be much more cost effective. Plus it allows real people, not just scientists to participate. Growing food, recycling and maintenance are going to be just as important.
Oct 23, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Why? What is the rush?
If same process the Europeans used to explore the world is followed for space, privateers will lead the way and they will want to return to earth with their profit.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Well, their profit would not come from Mars, but from public payments. There is not much to import from Mars.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
So don't delay this
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
you have no way of knowing that.
We've sent a handful of decent orbiters and landers, and you declare there's nothing worth importing from Mars.
The crust of Mars may be packed full of rare earth minerals.
We don't know what ores and minerals are in Mars' crust, because zero geology has been done on Mars.
This is why we need a mission that does seismology surveys with man-made soundings, with at least several tens of stations to study internal structure of Mars at the surface and in it's mantle and core.
candidates for ore deposits would be the hundreds of meters of crust beneath the small and medium sized craters, as these should be filled with melt rock from the crust and remnants of any metal meteorites, which probably would have sorted naturally by density.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
We need a geology survey of the same scale and complexity, which is going to be difficult to do using only remote control robots.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Oh, there may be precious minerals and ores. But importing it to Earth and make a profit? Thats another matter entirely.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 2 / 5 (1)
Depends on how you define "profit".
If you define profit as paper money in a bank account, then perhaps not.
If you define profit as maximizing human technology, then any cost in paper money would be worth it in the long term.
If we have X amount of rare earths here, then our technology and standard of living can never advance beyond that which uses X. But if there is another 0.5X worth of these resources on Mars, then our technology and standard of living could advance to 1.5X.
From that perspective, the entire civilization profits, whether or not anyone makes "dollars" off the endeavour.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Oh really. Where have you been?
http://www.google...ie=UTF-8
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (4)
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
So those "space surveys and rover" missions equals zero geology? *LAUGHS* You're as misinformed as QC.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (2)
As close as the moon is to earth it is only recently significant water has been discovered.
Also, significant mineral deposits have been discovered in Afghanistan.
Mars should have significant deposits of all sorts of minerals, just as the earth has. Especially near all the volcanic regions.
Will they be worth flinging back to earth? Depends upon the cost.
Oct 24, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
It appears other creationists DO know about Martian geology: http://creation.c...-geology
However, I prefer a scientific approach to the geology of Mars as found here:
http://www.lukew.com/marsgeo/
http://en.wikiped..._of_Mars
and illustrated(USGS): http://www.lpi.us...dex.html
Of course, ignorance of the geology of Mars would allow one(QC) to hold the (false) belief that Martian meteorites (on Earth) don't exist - http://www.physor...firstCmt
(all those pesky, measured, elemental abundances, you know)
This is what happens when you try to reconcile creation cosmology and reality. o_O
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (3)
The topic was profit for privateers, and privateers do things in exchange for government money. Without government, Mars mission will not be profitable, because it is going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars, at best.
All space exploration to date with the exception of commercial sattelites was done primarily by public money. Mars mission will be the same, because short-term and medium-term it is a huge waste of money, period.
It could become profitable in a hundred years, but that is science fiction currently.
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
Plenty of exploration was conducted for curiosity, fame and coolness, and not for any economic reason. Space exploration is definitely one of those. Thats why the pinnacle of private-only space "exploration" is commercial communication sattelites.
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 2 / 5 (3)
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Testing a few scoops of dirt, or drilling to a depth of 1 or 2 meters and studying fuzzy satellite photographs with 1km resolution, or a rover's photo of a fault or crater wall is pretty much insignificant compared to what I'm talking about.
Laugh it up, but that's basicly zero geology in terms of what is actually useful for locating the best ore deposits.
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Oct 25, 2010
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
"Byrd reasoned that if he could fly to the South Pole and back in one day in relative comfort and accomplish what the old explorers had taken weeks or months to do that this would gain great publicity for aviation and incidentally for himself. So this was the reason for the South Polar flight. Today we say, oh, everybody flies to the Pole. You go over the Pole when you're on your way to Japan, for example. What's the big deal about flying over a Pole? But in those rickety airplanes of the 1920s it was a very big deal. Flying over the South Pole was a tremendous accomplishment. "
http://www.pbs.or...s04.html
Oct 26, 2010
Rank: not rated yet
Going to apologize for being a douche?