Bid to colonize Mars wins high-profile backing

Dec 10, 2013 by Robert Macpherson
Mars One CEO Bas Lansdorp holds a press conference in New York on April 22, 2013

A Dutch entrepreneur's bold quest to colonize Mars won high-profile support Tuesday from a US aerospace giant, although the timetable for putting humans on the red planet has been pushed back two years.

Mars One chief executive Bas Lansdorp said Lockheed Martin would, for $250,000, produce a "mission concept study" for an unmanned Martian lander that would precede the $6 billion manned mission.

Britain's Surrey Satellite Technology will meanwhile turn out a similar study, for 60,000 euros ($80,000), for a satellite that would hover in orbit over the lander and relay data and images back to Earth.

Plans call for the unmanned lander to reach Mars in 2018.

But as for the ultimate goal of putting humans on Mars, Lansdorp told reporters in Washington that "our first humans will land in 2025"—two years later than he announced earlier this year.

The first four earthlings-turned-Martians would be joined every two years by additional groups of four or more astronauts—all on one-way tickets to space's next frontier, he said.

Some 200,000 people have already applied to go to Mars, Lansdorp said, and they will learn by the end of this year whether they have passed the first-round selection process.

Lockheed Martin, which made $2.65 billion in fiscal 2011, mostly from defense contracts, built NASA's Phoenix robotic spacecraft that landed on Mars in 2008 in search of evidence of water.

Ed Sedivy, the company's chief engineer for civilian space projects, said the Mars One lander would likely look like Phoenix on the outside, albeit with a carpet of thin solar paneling running off its side.

Inside, however, it would be fitted with the latest space electronics, said Sedivy, who was previously Lockheed Martin's point man for the Phoenix mission.

Although Lansdorp opened his press conference by saying "Lockheed Martin will build the first Mars lander" for Mars One, Sedivy said it had been contracted so far only for the concept study.

Besides conducting experiments, including a search for possible ways of creating water on Mars' surface, the lander will carry letters from youngsters on Earth to welcome the first Martian colonists, Lansdorp said.

He also envisioned a camera dangling from a balloon several hundred meters above the that would beam images back to Earth in real time.

Lansdorp expects it will cost $6 billion to put the first humans on Mars, where they will be expected to star in the galaxy's first interplanetary reality TV show.

He expects a big chunk of funding to come from "sponsors and partners" such as universities with experiments they'd like to see piggy-backing onto the mission.

A range of potential pitfalls might prevent Mars One from becoming a reality, including an inability to return to Earth, the small living quarters and the lack of food and water on Mars.

That assumes, of course, that radiation endured by its astronauts during the trip is not lethal, and that their spacecraft will be able to negotiate a volatile landing onto the harsh Martian landscape.

The project has garnered plenty of skeptics, but its supporters include Dutch Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft, who won the 1999 prize for physics and appears in a video for Mars One on the Indiegogo crowd-funding website.

The world's space agencies have only managed to send unmanned robotic rovers to Mars so far, the latest being NASA's $2.5 billion Curiosity rover, which touched down in August 2012.

If it succeeds, Mars One would be the first private-sector initiative, manned or unmanned, to explore another planet.

Explore further: Space Cadets line up for one-way Mars trip

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Dutch reality show seeks one-way astronauts for Mars

Apr 22, 2013

Are you crazy enough to sign up for a one-way trip to Mars? Applications are now being accepted by the makers of a Dutch reality show that says it will deliver the first humans to the Red Planet in 10 years.

Space Cadets line up for one-way Mars trip

Sep 09, 2013

More than 200,000 people from 140 countries have applied to go to Mars and never return, the group behind an ambitious venture to colonize the inhospitable red planet said Monday.

Dutch reality show to offer one-way tickets to Mars

Aug 12, 2012

As the world marvels at the latest US Mars landing, a Dutch start-up is aiming to beat NASA at its own game by sending the first humans to the red planet -- and film all as a reality show.

Recommended for you

Observing the onset of a magnetic substorm

1 hour ago

Magnetic substorms, the disruptions in geomagnetic activity that cause brightening of aurora, may sometimes be driven by a different process than generally thought, a new study in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Ph ...

We are all made of stars

3 hours ago

Astronomers spend most of their time contemplating the universe, quite comfortable in the knowledge that we are just a speck among billions of planets, stars and galaxies. But last week, the Australian astronomical ...

ESA video: The ATV-5 Georges Lemaitre loading process

4 hours ago

This time-lapse video shows the ATV-5 Georges Lemaitre loading process and its integration on the Ariane 5 launcher before its transfer and launch to the International Space Station from Europe's Spaceport in Kourou, French ...

Titan's subsurface reservoirs modify methane rainfall

6 hours ago

(Phys.org) —The international Cassini mission has revealed hundreds of lakes and seas spread across the icy surface of Saturn's moon Titan, mostly in its polar regions. These lakes are filled not with water ...

User comments : 57

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

jalmy
2.1 / 5 (14) Dec 10, 2013
Colonizing Mars would be an epic waste of time and money. There is nothing there for us. A moon colony could at least yield sustainable He3. It's just stupid. Colonize the moon and the oceans, at least you could gain something from it.
GSwift7
2.8 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2013
Okay, so let's take a best case scenario look at this.

Curiosity cost 2.5 billion. To support humans living on Mars more than a few hours, you're going to need several landers, maybe a dozen, as heavy as Curiosity. I figure one or two containing the habitat, at least. One with some kind of motorized tractor/transport vehicle. One or two with essential tools and equipment. One or two just for water storage, processing and recycling. Not sure how long 2000 lbs of food can last, and that depends on how many people will be there, but figure on a year supply of food at the least. One communication satellite in geosynchronous orbit. Some kind of power supply system (that's going to be the clincher I think. Long term continous power on Mars is a bitch).

There's no way they pull this off for less than 10 billion, but 20 is probably closer to the truth.
GSwift7
4.8 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2013
Colonizing Mars would be an epic waste of time and money


Yes, and no.

I think on short time scales, it is probably a waste of time and money, and not a very effective or efficient short term goal for colonization.

On longer time scales, Mars is probably the most easily sustainable location off Earth (emphasis on long time scales, and permanent residents).

For now, we should be looking at installing basic infrastructure to facilitate access to space and reduce risks. (for example, some kind of basic gps system around the moon, or any other location where we would like to operate with some regularity.)

Creating some technology standards would also save time, money and perhaps lives. Standard docking mechanisms and protocols, universal fuel and power ports, standardized space suit parts, etc. Some legal questions need to be ironed out as well.
Maggnus
4.5 / 5 (4) Dec 10, 2013
A doubtful dream I think, yet I truly hope it comes to fruition.
Tacso
3.2 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2013
The surface area of Mars is comparable with Antarctica and Antarctica is way more accessible and habitable. Why not to colonize the Antarctica first?
QuixoteJ
1.3 / 5 (10) Dec 10, 2013
20 sentences each followed by double carriage returns... seriously? I think Robert Macpherson should probably write an article on proper use of paragraphs. There is help for CRHD, Robert.

Way to make an article unreadable for anyone hoping that it is going to be organized into main ideas supported by multiple sentences! Ugh.
Zephir_fan
Dec 10, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
goracle
3 / 5 (4) Dec 10, 2013
Okay, so let's take a best case scenario look at this.

Curiosity cost 2.5 billion. To support humans living on Mars more than a few hours, you're going to need several landers, maybe a dozen, as heavy as Curiosity. I figure one or two containing the habitat, at least. One with some kind of motorized tractor/transport vehicle. One or two with essential tools and equipment. One or two just for water storage, processing and recycling. Not sure how long 2000 lbs of food can last, and that depends on how many people will be there, but figure on a year supply of food at the least. One communication satellite in geosynchronous orbit. Some kind of power supply system (that's going to be the clincher I think. Long term continous power on Mars is a bitch).

There's no way they pull this off for less than 10 billion, but 20 is probably closer to the truth.

That's not counting failure of a delivery and a hurried replacement.
goracle
4.2 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2013
Colonizing Mars would be an epic waste of time and money. There is nothing there for us. A moon colony could at least yield sustainable He3. It's just stupid. Colonize the moon and the oceans, at least you could gain something from it.

What Mars has that Luna does not:
1) Daylight cycle close to Earth's (the moon's day and night are each two weeks long)
2) Surface gravity closer to that of Earth
3) Water ice that isn't only at the poles
4) Potential for long term terraforming
5) Potential for discovery of past life
6) Atmosphere for partial protection from radiation, micrometeoroids
7) Natural satellites to act as orbital ports of call
8) Observation point not close to earth (much longer baseline)
goracle
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2013
The surface area of Mars is comparable with Antarctica and Antarctica is way more accessible and habitable. Why not to colonize the Antarctica first?

The surface area of Mars is actually closer to the land surface area of Earth, not just Antarctica. Your argument/rhetorical question is based on erroneous information.

Antarctica: 14,000,000 km²
Earth (land): 148,940,000 km2 land (29.2 % of 5.1×10^8 km2 total)
Mars: 144,798,500 km²
freeiam
1 / 5 (15) Dec 10, 2013
Sending people on a one way trip to Mars is inhumane and shouldn't be allowed.
People that sign into this cannot know the consequences and are either naive or insane (maybe both when they are young) and must be protected against themselves.
The fame will fade away soon enough when they recognize that it is suicide in total isolation; that is, if they reach Mars and land safely, which is improbable.
Zephir_fan
Dec 10, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
rmk948
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2013
"Sending people on a one way trip to Mars is inhumane and shouldn't be allowed.
People that sign into this cannot know the consequences and are either naive or insane (maybe both when they are young) and must be protected against themselves."

In the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries, millions of Europeans migrated to North America, South America and Australia with little more of a clue about what they were getting into. Granted, there was plenty of air and water in those places, but the risks were still real. How far do we go to protect people against themselves? Ban skydiving? Bungee jumping? Mountain climbing?

freeiam
1.3 / 5 (10) Dec 10, 2013

In the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries, millions of Europeans migrated to North America, South America and Australia with little more of a clue about what they were getting into. Granted, there was plenty of air and water in those places, but the risks were still real. How far do we go to protect people against themselves? Ban skydiving? Bungee jumping? Mountain climbing?

Most migration was out of necessity and risks (of starvation for example) were high when you stayed or not, in this case you won't starve if you stay, it's a decadent endeavor. The risks of some 'sports' is real but isn't the issue. It's that you cannot go outside and breath air and swim and run, all is gone. You have to live in confined quarters for the rest of your life (and die a horrible death otherwise). It's hard to imagine that if you never experienced it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (10) Dec 10, 2013
Sending people on a one way trip to Mars is inhumane and shouldn't be allowed.
People that sign into this cannot know the consequences and are either naive or insane (maybe both when they are young) and must be protected against themselves.
The fame will fade away soon enough when they recognize that it is suicide in total isolation; that is, if they reach Mars and land safely, which is improbable.
Yeah its not up to you. Its up to them. Mind your own business.

Chances are that routine travel to and from the planet will begin to happen in 20 - 30 years so they will be probably be able to retire rich back here on earth doing speaking tours and tv guest spots.
ryggesogn2
3.4 / 5 (14) Dec 10, 2013
If free people with their own money want to go to Mars, why should any govt stop them?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2013
It's that you cannot go outside and breath air and swim and run, all is gone. You have to live in confined quarters for the rest of your live (and die a horrible death otherwise). It's hard to imagine that if you never experienced it.
Here you go. Make yourself really sad.

"As of mid-2011, Mount Everest has claimed the lives of over 216 known mountain climbers. The area above 26,000 feet is called "the Death Zone", where breathing fresh oxygen from canisters is necessary for all but the most experienced climbers. The atmospheric pressure is about a third of that at sea level, meaning there is about one third the amount of oxygen to breathe. The air is so thin recovery of bodies has proven impossible. Given this, many victims lay where they took their last breath."
http://sometimes-...everest/

-Hey - free gear!
freeiam
1 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2013
Yeah its not up to you. Its up to them. Mind your own business.

Chances are that routine travel to and from the planet will begin to happen in 20 - 30 years so they will be probably be able to retire rich back here on earth doing speaking tours and tv guest spots.

It pains me to see people die in a horrible way without any gain or necessity.
Maybe your not interested in that but I am.
You might be right about a possible return later on, but 15 years on Mars isn't survivable with the current state of technology and the Mars One setup.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2013
It pains me to see people die in a horrible way without any gain or necessity.
Maybe your not interested in that but I am
Maybe youre just interested in trying to tell other people what to do? More sadness for you:

"Paul Walker honored by thousands of fans at car rally in Los Angeles
''Many of the mourners drove to the scene in modified Porches, Corvettes and even Toyota Camrys. A sign in the rear window of one white Honda Accord read, "Race in Paradise Paul Walker... "I think he represents a lot of us," fan Andrew Kellogg said of Walker, as he slowly made his way to the memorial... "He had the same mantra we all live by: We enjoy the kind of lifestyle we have with the cars and the kind of passion we all have for them," Kellogg said."
http://www.nydail....1541714

-A trip to mars by brave adventurers would be extremely meaningful to millions of people, except for those who would rather sit in their tea cozys and knit.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2013
I mean sit and knit tea cozys... by the fire... until they die like eleanor rigby and rot for 2 weeks before anybody finds them. You know what I mean. And their little chow dog gnaws off their nose because it cant reach the kibble.

This pains me.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (13) Dec 10, 2013
Has anyone other than me noticed that Physorg is ignoring the problems with Obamacare?

Why is it that PHYSORG has become nothing but a mouth piece of Obama?
Zephir_fan
Dec 10, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Mimath224
3.5 / 5 (12) Dec 10, 2013
Human beings enjoy all sorts of 'risk factors' and whatever one thinks there will be some who see this as the 'ultimate risk' and will want to go down down in history as the first. Others will view that Earth has too many problems anyway and will be glad for an opportunity to escape. Yet others will see this as the first step to colonizing the SS. I am convinced it will happen...I only wish I were younger ha!
Sinister1811
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2013
Let's hope they can survive there. But long term doesn't look very likely.
goracle
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2013
Has anyone other than me noticed that Physorg is ignoring the problems with Obamacare?

Why is it that PHYSORG has become nothing but a mouth piece of Obama?

Freethinking or free-associating? Or is it free-of-focusing?
Sanescience
2.2 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2013
A sustainable colony on Mars will have the ability to construct long-lived underground centrifugal large open air-like green houses for habitation and some food production. Only a significant layer of regolith will provide protection from radiation and meteorites and artificial gravity will be needed to maintain physical health.

Will have the energy and technology to operate remote-control devices and industry to extract raw resources from the planet, refine them, to maintain current habitats and significant surpluses to construct new habitats, support research, culture, and provide for retirement and medical needs.

To prevent toxic dust contamination from the surface a proper human colonist on Mars should rarely need to leave a habitat. The idea of manually maintaining a "town" on the surface of Mars is just naive. Operating virtual endpoint robotic devices will be the primary work activity of Martians.
AkiBola
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2013
Paying someone a very small amount to do a study is high profile support? Amazing. Now don't misunderstand, I have no doubt that Lockheed-Martin would willingly take all the money that Mars One throws its way for its Kevorkian Mission To Mars.
GSwift7
3.8 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2013
That's not counting failure of a delivery and a hurried replacement


Yeah, exactly.

As my post said, I was starting with the absurd assumption of a perfect "best case scenario". In the real world, it is very difficult to get to Mars, and there's no reason to expect 100% success rates in the near future. You can't do much of a TV show without people actually going there, but you can't send people there until you establish a bare bones infrastructure to keep them alive for at least one TV season. I doubt that advertising on just one year of broadcasting (and the associated merchandising) could repay the cost of the mission. They're going to need continued supply and support missions as long as the people stay alive too, so there's an ongoing cost in addition to the one-time setup cost.

Given enough money, it is technically possible, but financially it seems like only a fool would expect to make money from this. The cost is just too high to recover.
rockwolf1000
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2013
20 sentences each followed by double carriage returns... seriously? I think Robert Macpherson should probably write an article on proper use of paragraphs. There is help for CRHD, Robert.

Way to make an article unreadable for anyone hoping that it is going to be organized into main ideas supported by multiple sentences! Ugh.


I have absolutely no issues reading this article.

I fail to see how cramming the sentences closer together facilitates ease of reading.

Can you understand this with all these evil spaces?
Modernmystic
2 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2013
We're not ready yet....yet.
rockwolf1000
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2013
Sending people on a one way trip to Mars is inhumane and shouldn't be allowed.
People that sign into this cannot know the consequences and are either naive or insane (maybe both when they are young) and must be protected against themselves.
The fame will fade away soon enough when they recognize that it is suicide in total isolation; that is, if they reach Mars and land safely, which is improbable.


F@#$ Off and mind your own business. A__hole!

I can't figure out how some people think it's their place to dictate to others how to live one's life. Why don't you concern yourself with your own pitiful and unremarkable life?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2013
To prevent toxic dust contamination from the surface a proper human colonist on Mars should rarely need to leave a habitat. The idea of manually maintaining a "town" on the surface of Mars is just naive. Operating virtual endpoint robotic devices will be the primary work activity
Nuclear-powered robotic earth borers could be sent ahead to prepare underground habitats and serve as raw material processors and later as power sources.

Some think that such machines have been at work under the surface of this planet for a few gens, creating vast self-sustaining refuges until off-world colonies can be established.

Nuclear explosives could also quickly produce habitable cavities re the gnome shot, operation plowshare.
http://en.wikiped...ct_Gnome

Domes full of engineered, radiation-resistant crops could be erected on the surface.
Zephir_fan
Dec 11, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2013
Lots of fantastical stuff out there, some more outlandish than others
http://beforeitsn...304.html
http://en.wikiped...lce_Base
http://rationalwi...y_theory
[cubic miles of space - where did they put all the dirt?]

http://projectcam...ses.html
http://beforeitsn...916.html
[tunnel boring vibrations?]

-Etc. The logic behind such an operation is the idea that civilization-ending events are inevitable, and that totally autonomous underground cities would be a stopgap measure until off-world colonies could be established.

And it has been technologically possible for 50 years.

"Built a quarter-mile into the mountain and seven levels deep, the 95-acre Iron Mountain facility has 220 vaults ranging in size from 200 to 40,000 cf"
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2013
"The footprint of the [Yucca mountain waste repository] is 1km wide x 6.5km long and comprises some 50 storage tunnels or 'emplacement drifts' for a total of some 56 miles or 90km of 5.5m to 7.6m diameter tunneling."

-in comparison to the millions of cubic feet of conventional mines excavated.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2013
The radiation paper among the 5 NASA released Monday shows that radiation is less of a problem. Even a solar wind/CME peak many orders of magnitude larger gives just ~ 10 % more flux behind a reasonable shield. Cosmic rays is the constant problem, but gives only ~ 5 % more cancer deaths for a 2 year Mars mission. Compare with death increase from particle pollution in cities, 2-3 times that, and today ~ 50 % of all people could have a vacation on Mars for their health. =D

The problem is colonization & pregnancies.

@jalmy: "A moon colony could at least yield sustainable He3. It's just stupid."

"Sustainable He3" is just stupid, for now He3 is rare so not sustainable. But mostly He3 fusion needs 100 times better confinement than the one we are hard pressed to make today and it will net _less_ energy. (See Wikipedia.) It is a generic scifi MacGuffin, which says it all.

If we can do fusion, the D+T cycle with lithium and even the D+D cycle is a realistic (i.e. "sustainable") goal.
freeiam
1 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2013

F@#$ Off and mind your own business. A__hole!

I can't figure out how some people think it's their place to dictate to others how to live one's life. Why don't you concern yourself with your own pitiful and unremarkable life?


It seems politeness isn't a strongpoint for you.
You also didn't understand my comment.
I'am all for going to Mars, doing it the right way, and not on a immoral suicide mission Truman Show style. I'am not against risk taking but sending people to a certain death isn't acceptable and can be seen as murder or suicide depending on the perspective; both by the way against the law.
I might point out to you that lack of consideration for others is the trademark of a psychopath.
Did you apply for Mars One? Success with that.
freeiam
1 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2013
I mean sit and knit tea cozys... by the fire... until they die like eleanor rigby and rot for 2 weeks before anybody finds them. You know what I mean. And their little chow dog gnaws off their nose because it cant reach the kibble.

This pains me.


It's disturbing that you think in this way. As I said I'm not against risk taking and going to Mars.
(See my other comment(s).)
freeiam
1.3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2013
The radiation paper among the 5 NASA released Monday shows that radiation is less of a problem. .
...

It's also possible to create an artificial magnetic field to protect the spacecrafts and colony domes.
freeiam
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2013

... and artificial gravity will be needed to maintain physical health.


1/3 of the gravity on Earth is more than enough. (Otherwise a child should develop problems growing up.)
Q-Star
4 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2013
@ Otto

Lots of fantastical stuff out there, some more outlandish than others


Thanks much for that Otto (me being sarcastic). Ya have caused me to be scolded by my co-workers for wasting an hour of my time reading and laughing at those links.

-Etc. The logic behind such an operation is the idea that civilization-ending events are inevitable, and that totally autonomous underground cities would be a stopgap measure until off-world colonies could be established.


Thanks much for that Otto (this me being sincere). It was worth the scolding. HA!
obama_socks
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2013
Human beings enjoy all sorts of 'risk factors' and whatever one thinks there will be some who see this as the 'ultimate risk' and will want to go down down in history as the first. Others will view that Earth has too many problems anyway and will be glad for an opportunity to escape. Yet others will see this as the first step to colonizing the SS. I am convinced it will happen...I only wish I were younger ha!
-Mimath224 -

Out of ~200,000 volunteerts for this program, there will many culled depending on their status as to health, intelligence, psychological factors, age, reaction time and alertness, and whether or not they have or want to have children.

Since we have to start somewhere, it may as well be Mars. Older couples who've already had grown children and are fit for the trip should be given first preference.

What difference does it make where they die...Earth or Mars? They will be performing a service and, hopefully, they will enjoy the trip and their life on Mars.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Dec 12, 2013
Thanks much for that Otto (this me being sincere)
So are you still being sarcastic or what? The military has been creating underground facilities and storing arms and vital materials for centuries. These were common in the civil war and the world wars.

The Viet cong had hundreds of miles of tunnels with field hospitals and munitions dumps. Hitler took much of his manufacturing underground. And of course there is NORAD. Both sides had command bunkers designed to support 1000s for months during a nuclear war. Even Hittites did this.

Scrape away all the alien conspiracy nonsense from those websites and you can see the potential for underground facilities on a massive scale. Nuclear power made it possible, and fissiles were created in such amounts that hundreds of tons could have been diverted toward such projects.

And if there exist in this world people truly concerned about the future of civilization, then one can imagine that this what they would need to do to ensure survival.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2013
The radiation paper among the 5 NASA released Monday shows that radiation is less of a problem. .
...

It's also possible to create an artificial magnetic field to protect the spacecrafts and colony domes.
From what? Radiation and impacts? NO it's not.
freeiam
1 / 5 (5) Dec 12, 2013
The radiation paper among the 5 NASA released Monday shows that radiation is less of a problem. .
...

It's also possible to create an artificial magnetic field to protect the spacecrafts and colony domes.
From what? Radiation and impacts? NO it's not.


From magnets: http://physicswor...acecraft .
And 'yes it is'.
freeiam
1 / 5 (6) Dec 12, 2013
...
Since we have to start somewhere, it may as well be Mars. Older couples who've already had grown children and are fit for the trip should be given first preference.

What difference does it make where they die...Earth or Mars? They will be performing a service and, hopefully, they will enjoy the trip and their life on Mars.


Sounds cynical, what difference does it make. Earth and Mars are similar in every aspect?
What happens when you step outside the tin shell of a few cubic meters in a wasteland that spans the entire planet, with no water and 200 C below zero without air, plants and animals?
Right, it's the same.
It's not that you can try again, it's game over without a retry (whatever your beliefs are).
Mars One reminds me of this tragedy: "39 members of the Heaven's Gate cult had committed mass suicide, believing their souls would be transported to a spaceship trailing the Hale-Bopp comet."
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2013
The radiation paper among the 5 NASA released Monday shows that radiation is less of a problem. .
...

It's also possible to create an artificial magnetic field to protect the spacecrafts and colony domes.
From what? Radiation and impacts? NO it's not.


From magnets: http://physicswor...acecraft .
And 'yes it is'.
You missed this part:

"Some of this is in the form of very high energy particles arriving from deep space..."

There is all sorts of radiation which is not affected by magnetic fields; high energy cosmic rays, x rays, gamma rays, etc. Also micrometeroids. Although here is a more recent article which is interesting
http://www.aviati...&p=2

11791
1 / 5 (4) Dec 12, 2013
Can you use a 3D printer to make an air mask? why would any normal person want to live in something the size of an African hut and nothing but red sand for scenery?
Shamuss
1.4 / 5 (5) Dec 12, 2013
prediction: reality show season 1 = big hit, lots of viewers and ad revenue. season 2 = limited interest in watching people sit around their tiny habitats all day, reduced ad revenue. season 3 canceled, zero ad revenue and no money to resupply the martians. 1 year later the show is back on and the world gets to watch cannabalism, record viewership and ad revenue through the roof... network executives laughing all the way to the bank- "Thanks Suckers!, oh and sorry you had to die horrible deaths... but our christmas bonus' have never been higher!"
rockwolf1000
5 / 5 (1) Dec 12, 2013


It seems politeness isn't a strongpoint for you.

I might point out to you that lack of consideration for others is the trademark of a psychopath.
Did you apply for Mars One? Success with that.

Actually I've plum run out of politeness towards people who want to dictate how to live my life and I've had it with the safety Nazi's such as yourself. In my opinion a trademark of a psychopath is a desire to dominate and control others. That description fits you perfectly. Perhaps you and I should go for a drive in the country so I may show you what the term "inhumane" really means. I didn't apply as I like fishing and outdoors too much here on earth. But if you were to say; "everyone who wants to go on a one way trip to Mars with no guarantees, line up here" you would most certainly be trampled to death by the mob of people rushing to get in. And that is their choice and I would never interfere with that unlike psychopaths such as yourself who wish to dominate and control.
geokstr
1 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2013
The military has been creating underground facilities and storing arms and vital materials for centuries.

I'm pretty sure that the warehouse they put the Ark of the Covenant in was one of those.
freeiam
1 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2013
"You missed this part:

"Some of this is in the form of very high energy particles arriving from deep space..."

"There is all sorts of radiation which is not affected by magnetic fields; high energy cosmic rays, x rays, gamma rays, etc. Also micrometeroids. Although here is a more recent article which is interesting
http://www.aviati...&p=2""


Thanks but I didn't miss any part. I didn't say it was a 'perfect' protection (it almost never is).
I've seen more recent articles about this, just posted the first link I could find to make my point clear.
freeiam
1 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2013
...In my opinion a trademark of a psychopath is a desire to dominate and control others. ...


Your opinion is wrong, as is your interpretation of my comments.
rockwolf1000
not rated yet Dec 13, 2013
...In my opinion a trademark of a psychopath is a desire to dominate and control others. ...


Your opinion is wrong, as is your interpretation of my comments.

Proof?
Your comments are interpreted wrong only in your own silly mind.
rockwolf1000
not rated yet Dec 13, 2013
...In my opinion a trademark of a psychopath is a desire to dominate and control others. ...


Your opinion is wrong, as is your interpretation of my comments.

People like you are no different than the Taliban. You desire to control and oppress other people. The Taliban is made up of psychopaths, thus the description fits you perfectly.
Protoplasmix
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2013
In terms of stellar distances, Mars isn't all that much higher than Everest. Quite a difference in communications, though. Looking forward to 2025 :)
---
Ghost, I appreciated your insight into the mining too, thanks (yes, sincerely).
---
I even tried "noumenon's hidey-holes"
—Zephir_fan
Way TMI. Where has noumenon been anyway?
Zephir_fan
Dec 13, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Newbeak
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 15, 2013
A way to protect people going to Mars from radiation would be crucial,especially if they were young enough to procreate.There aren't going to be any cancer clinics at their destination! Probably the only way to do it will be to corral an asteroid,and strap rockets on on it.The astronauts would be safe from radiation in it's interior.
jalmy
1 / 5 (1) Dec 16, 2013
What Mars has that Luna does not:
1) Daylight cycle close to Earth's (the moon's day and night are each two weeks long)
2) Surface gravity closer to that of Earth
3) Water ice that isn't only at the poles
4) Potential for long term terraforming
5) Potential for discovery of past life
6) Atmosphere for partial protection from radiation, micrometeoroids
7) Natural satellites to act as orbital ports of call
8) Observation point not close to earth (much longer baseline)


The practicality of it from a monetary and technological standpoint is 50-100 years out also. The time for this is not now. I am not saying we should never go to Mars, I am saying we should not go to Mars now. We at the very least need the engine technology to make a one-way trip in 1 month or less.
Newbeak
1 / 5 (1) Dec 16, 2013
They're working on it right now: http://www.newsci...ars.html
goracle
5 / 5 (1) Dec 16, 2013
Some think that such machines have been at work under the surface of this planet for a few gens, creating vast self-sustaining refuges until off-world colonies can be established.


Cool. When you have time would you post a link? I'd really like to learn more about that. I tried googling it without getting back many things to look at, maybe I'm not smart enough to know the best words to use. I even tried "noumenon's hidey-holes".

I don't want to know what a search for "noumenon's hidey-holes' would return....
goracle
5 / 5 (1) Dec 16, 2013
The military has been creating underground facilities and storing arms and vital materials for centuries.

I'm pretty sure that the warehouse they put the Ark of the Covenant in was one of those.

So that explains the fedora I saw on top of that crate!