/sci/ - Science & Math

Could we make it livable? Sure, in theory.

Logistics, actual value of doing that, and the time required are going to continue getting in the way for the foreseeable future unless if we get crazy good at moving stuff across planets easily and cheaply. There'd also be brand new space politics we'd have to deal with as everyone on earth would want a hot piece of that action.

>>10007600
>moving stuff across planets easily and cheaply
if we can mine asteroids we wont need to worry too much about getting stuff up from earth

>>10007603
You going to do all the manufacturing in space or on mars? Send the materials down to earth and back to space once finished? 'Space mining' doesn't solve problems until there's a huge support network established to make it viable or even remotely helpful. Also there's some pretty serious leaps in terraforming an entire planet and energy storage that we need to figure out.

I think the moon landing proved that if humans are absolutely determined and willing to pay any price, they can do anything. The question is, why should we bother with mars? Is it economically viable? And how soon do you want it done? Doing it now VS doing it 100 years from now is a HUGE difference in terms of technological capabilities and efficiency/cost.

I think, what OP most desires to have answered (and only in a specific favorable way) is will OP get to see and stand on a terraformed mars one day? The answer is no.

>>10007624
Waiting for magical technological solution to a problem rather than working on it is the best way not to solve it.

>>10007624
sorry that was somewhat cruel post.
I suppose if you wanted to you could to see it in your mind. A vision for the future so to speak. If you put enough effort and thought into it and published it somehow I'm sure future generations would be grateful. Science fiction often becomes science fact given enough time. Art mimicking life and life mimicking art and all of that sorta thing.

One of the coolest things I like to think about of a fully terraformed Mars is with 0.4g, earth like atmosphere, and slightly denser atmosphere, human flight might be possible. As in strap on some cardboard wings and start flapping. Would be pretty cool.

>>10007589
You only need ankle weights if you want to go back to earth

>>10007607
I wonder how much clever engineering would be required to making space manufacturing possible? like whats the minimum investment to make an orbital processing facility self sufficient enough to be able to add onto itself

>terraforming
terraforming is un necessary to making a self sustaining colony i think

>>10007624
we need a backup to earth. if we get hit with a large asteroid, or nuclear war happens, or a violent AI gets out of control etc

With 40% god's gravity, would require humans to be fit and athletic and have fun jumping 20 meters, else they'd grow limp and gay and acclimated to mars as earth, and then they'll be like "this is 1g" and martian billy wil look up to his martian daddy and ask "why don't we visit earth daddy?" and martian dad will have to lie to billy and say because its too expensive, when in reality martian billy would be crushed to death by his own weight for suffering 250% normal gravity, and martian memes would just be red wojaks.

Wearing ankle weights would make you learn pretty quick what the difference is between mass and weight. If you wanted to weigh the same on Mars as on Earth you'd have to more than double your mass, and therefore more than double your momentum. You'd get fatigued just from moving about thoughout the day like morbidly obese people do. You'd also run into problems with internal functions that rely on gravity. You can't put ankle weights on your blood cells.

>>10007589
that's an interesting question.

Think of it like asking if we could colonize Antarctica. Back in the 19th century, there was a huge push to explore it. Explorers trekked all over the surface. Eventually, small bases were established for research, and prestige. That is similar to what will happen to Mars.

I think it will never be comparable to Earth, but the scientific discoveries to come out of the red planet will be revolutionary, considering the likelihood of living organisms existing on Mars at some point, completely separately evolved from Earth life.

I think the more interesting question is how it would affect any humans stationed, over generations. There are lots of interesting and informative videos about that subject on Youtube.
>>10007778
It's not that complex, but it's nowhere near easy. Bringing asteroids into Earth or Mars gravity to mine would be insanely lucrative, but getting them there would be very hard. To not cause an extinction on Earth/lose much of the asteroid's mass, it would require a space mining superstructure already in orbit, with airlocks and equipment able to fit and dissect an asteroid. To assemble that would require an insane amount of work.
>>10007624
It's imperative that Mars is at least colonized partially, as the level scientific knowledge held on it is groundbreaking.

>>10007814
>but getting them there would be very hard
not so sure about that https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2013/06/05/can-nasa-really-lasso-an-asteroid/?utm_term=.9bf1cda1a69c

>>10007788
there are a variety of solutions to the bone atrophy etc. you can use a mild centrifuge, and also continual motion elevators to simulate 1g. it only takes a couple hours of earth stresses per day to negate most of the serious effects.

>>10007814
I always thought that we should name mars ships after arctic ships. Endurance, Terror, Erebus, Terra Nova, Fram...

>>10007826
> it only takes a couple hours of earth stresses per day to negate most of the serious effects.
how do we know this?

>>10007822
Sure, moving its orbit wouldn't be so hard, but I am referencing the space station's construction as well.
>>10007826
That would be a pretty cool idea. About the solutions to Mars gravity, the only long term one is genetic engineering/evolution, if there is ever to be a stable self-contained Mars colony.
>>10007835
The ISS, I'd figure.

>>10007835
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6577728_Space_cycle_A_human-powered_centrifuge_that_can_be_used_for_hypergravity_resistance_training

>>10007589
Mars was fun. Earth's better.

>>10007814
Antarctica would have been settled decades ago if all these bullshit treaties were not in the way

>Hurr we have to protect the value of this massive expanse of absolutely fuck all

>>10007994
buddy, you realize Antarctica has a miles-deep ice sheet? In case of you collecting (you)s, high qual bait.

>>10008001
0.4% has no ice coverage and plenty more has a very low depth of coverage. Nice blanket statement asshole.

People are thinking of this the wrong way.

At 40% gravity, Mars would become the Earth's senior retirement planet.

>>10008011
Fuck that, boomers do not get to shit up Mars too.

>>10008008
>hurr just melt the ice
ok

>>10008013
Millennial seniors maybe. The boomers will be long dead.

>>10008022
>Melting ice is impossible

Absolute state of brainlets

>>10007624
>Is it economically viable?
It's not a stupid question, but we can't be held back by this question forever. We benefit from a lot of things that were initially not economically sound/viable at all. The trick is to keep doing it until you get good enough at it to *make* it viable.

>>10008011
>mars becomes the new florida

I was thinking about cryogenic preservation and how growing ice crystals cause cells to literally explode. Ice crystals don't happen in space, only on Earth. If a person was cryogenic frozen in space, wouldn't that prevent the formation of crystals and make it possible to revitalize them later?
>moon become cryogenic preservation habitat/graveyard of mortally ill frozen people

>>10008034
Reminds me of that Galaxy Express 999 episode where everyone who "upgraded" to a robot body left their organic bodies frozen in cold storage on Pluto.

>>10007646
>0.4g, earth like atmosphere, and slightly denser atmosphere, human flight might be possible. As in strap on some cardboard wings and start flapping. Would be pretty cool.

Titan, my dude.
0.14 g
1.45 atm

>>10007589
Just live inside big gravitrons.

>>10007589
A super-heavy lift, fully and rapidly reusable rocket will make this possible. If the BFR is everything that Ol' Musky claims it will be, then we're there baby.

>>10008683
So long the technical specs meet the description, each launch could cost 5x the estimated price and it would be fucking revolutionary.

>>10008024
Amen.

>>10007589
.4g is lower than you'd think. You can't really walk normally. It's just slightly too low. Wearing weights won't help, your inertia will go up so your stride will be unaffected. You'll end up kinda half bouncing along like an asshole. Ol' Musky always papers over that particular issue.

>>10007826
Just so long as we don't use the reddit-tier Iain M. Banks names.

Impossible because more and more scientists are rallying up against the whole concept of "isru". Martian water and ice is out of reach and without those you can't build anything more than small research base that is preferably unmanned to minimize contamination.

>>10008847
>Out of reach

lel k

>>10007589
We deal with it by trowing matter at it, there's an asteroid belt next to Mars.

>>10007778
>we need a backup to earth. if we get hit with a large asteroid, or nuclear war happens, or a violent AI gets out of control etc
if any of these events happened, earth would still be infinitely more livable for humans than mars. that's how inhospitable mars is. somehow mars fags simply don't get it.

>0.4g
all we need is a couple of Americans and BurgerKing to give it a boost to 1g

Are humans too tribalistic for a real world wide push to Mars?

>>10008030
>not realizing you will release pathogens by melting the ice.

Sure anon. We're the brainlets

>>10007864
source says no such thing

Meme planet, colonize Mercury instead with it's 20x the solar energy and same gravity.

>>10009862
maybe then we should work on a centrifuge space habitat instead. also i've seen some crazy ideas for other planets in the solar system (warning triggering speech impediment) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I

>>10007589
Build a rotating station on mars to simulate gravity.

>>10007835
we don’t, no one has spent more than like a year or two in space. imagine growing up there or just half a decade

>>10009011
Asteroids are heavy, and the quantity of asteroids you'd need would be immense.
How much fuel would you need to shift that much matter? Are there even enough asteroids in our solar system to bolster Mars to 1.0 g?

>>10011648
This really needs more research, if it turns out we need need close to or, heck even if we need half earth gravity to function over time then that means you are building huge centrifuge habitats on any planet or jovian moon you want to colonise (Except Venus, but you are building cloud cities there which is even more ridiculous). At which point why bother? It will be cheaper to build large rotating habitats in space and you aren't stuck down a well which means your transport costs are essentially fuck all. I rather suspect this will end up being the case given that our bodies have evolved to work in a very specific gravity since the dawn of fucking time. Especially with things like gestation and infant growth, jello babies meme is likely to be real.

how about venus

>>10012089
No. Stop.

>>10012089
Well you either build giant floating cities in clouds of sulphuric acid or somehow construct underground habitats at a bajillion atmospheres of pressure. Not promising.

>>10012084
not enough energy to accomplish any of this, our society can’t afford to start pouring most of its surplus resources into space with current situation so dependent on extractiona and the grids. You will never see space colonization until population, food and energy; this is generous as im not including ecocide and loss of sustainability of life on Earth. It won’t be for centuries before it could be feasible to have stand-alone self sustaining colonies in space.

I mean what’s the point, people on mars will die anyway.

It’s just an endless cycle of new souls witnessing the universe and then getting cruelly inevitably voided.

God damnit I used to love space ;_;

>>10012104
Good thing that you aren't in charge then you limp wristed cuck. Once launch prices drop, space expansion will explode.

>>10011638
Space is a lot better for that.
Planetes are so 20th century, and I'm not even memeing.

>>10012066
>Are there even enough asteroids in our solar system to bolster Mars to 1.0 g?

If you include the Oort cloud then yes, but if we're just talking about the belt; fuck no. The belt's total mass is less than that of the moon. You'd be lucky to get Mars to 0.5g with it.

>>10007791
This. Movements aside it's not going to make any difference on bones decay and the like.
And there is also the slight little problem of solar eruptions which will kill anyone outside a heavily shielded shelter.

>>10008030
Melting all the Antarctic ice is a good idea
t. Nepalese Nationalist

>>10012199
Prepare for mass migrations from flooded India.

>>10007607
Moon base with lunar mass driver. You only need to get up to mach 7 and you're at escape velocity. With how rich The Moons surface is with things like titanium and iron you can easily set up mining and fabrication operations on the lunar surface then erect orbital ship yards and supply lines quickly and economically.

If we can send at least just one man there RIGHT NOW, why not do it?

>>10012156
>build something very large at very expensive cost
vs
>build something extremely large at super cheap cost

People going to mars will live on mars, not on space. Why the fuck would they go to space to simulate gravity when they can do that back home on mars?

>>10012763
J E L L O B A B Y

Note: I would have posted madmanMusk.png but im shitposting while moving

>>10012117
>Once launch prices drop
Sure thing buddy, it only needs to be cheaper than ships and shit and will cost trillions for building a network in space. Keep dreaming

>>10012558
This really.
Mars is Elon's masturbatory fantasy. It won't be a practical thing until we have a moon base with Low-G manufacturing and launches.

Lmao if you lived on Mars you'd probably kill yourself. This pathetic daydreaming about living on another planet our biology is not at all suited to is so weird, every single person there would be depressed as shit.

>>10008043
The Moon, my dude.
0.16 g
1 atm inside your habitat
3 days away as opposed to 12 years

>>10008778
Even if reusability fails completely BFR will only cost ~$300 million per stack, which is revolutionary even still, due to being 3x cheaper than SLS and with room for improvement after ditching all the reusability hardware. Of course there's no way reusability fails completely like that.

>>10007589
>How will we deal with its 0.4g?
by adapting to it like any living thing

>>10009871
Don't need to unite the world to push for Mars, hell SpaceX is doing it and they're not even a government.

>>10012558
do you think craters on the moon form natural parabolic solar collectors? wouldn't be hard to build a tower in a crater and generate electricity. Even if it only operated on a 28 day cycle, it's be so simple to do it might be worth doing.

>>10013969
You're talking to a collection of NEETS who enjoy nothing more then sitting inside all day, everyday.

>>10008001
>>10008022
Antarctica also has a very boring coastline. Except for the peninsula region, it's just a round blob. Fuck that.

>>10007589
centrifuge habitat on an angle can give us 1g living spaces
we don't need to live on the dirt, we have the technology to tailor our environment how we please, and create completely new environments as we desire them

>>10008847
>scientists
>having power
those cucks are sluts for grant money
if Musk or any other waves a wad in their face, they'll turn their back on everything they previously said with glee

>>10014078
Imagine the sports were gonna invent and play on Martian gravity. We could step out of our 1g habitats and instantly become super human.

>>10009871
we don't need a world government to colonize space
in fact, it would be actively detrimental to humanity to unite, as competition is and has always been the primary motivator for achievement
see: the entire space race

>>10007589
Same as we dealt with flying a man in air, in space, under water, in antartica, etc.

We can't fly, we can't breathe no air, we can't breathe water, we can't live in frozen land.

We instead build planes, rockets, submarines, shelters, to keep ourselves comfortable. Same will happen.

>>10012763
Because contrary to what you're saying it's a lot cheaper and easier to do that in space.
When you put anything in rotation in space, it just goes on. No friction, no more energy required.
If needed, solar energy is constant, not to mention easy to build radiation shields. (the shield doesn't need to rotate too, and there is no need to build it to withstand gravity)
Mars colonization is a myth, nothing more.
Inverting numbers out of fantasy isn't going to make it any more real.

>>10015074
Its cheaper to build a large habitat that simulates gravity in orbit for 1 million people?

Cheaper than on land? Are you crazy? It costs billions to sent any sort of material to space. If the workaround can be built on earth, it will be 10000x cheaper.

We can't colonize Mars because we cannot breathe in space. Let's all stay on Earth and be happy humans.

isnt it obvious?

>>10015193
>t. Ayyy

>>10013961

You think Musk doesn't know that? Getting a Moon base is the most logical next step. If a Mars mission is what gets people excited and allows Musk to continue making steps towards lowering the costs of spaceflight with SpaceX rockets, then so be it.

We would almost certainly make more progress going to Mars by building up the Moon first, then we would by going directly there. A moon base would make so many other things much more doable.

>>10015154
It costs trillions*. Fixed.

>>10007788
>250%
Nice math, bro.

Fuck mars. Really. As far as we know there is nothing of much value on that dustbowl. We should instead focus on asteroid mining and colonization, and for these reasons:
>asteroids are full of precious metalls
There are ones floating around right now that could cover our demand for Iron for at least 2000 years, ones made out of Ice just waiting to get brought down to earth, and ones made of rare and precious metals that are scarce on earth.
>asteroids are easier to colonize
Due to their size, subterranean colonies and domes are much more viable than on Mars. Present day tech could be used to make these rocks spin, creating artificial, earth-like gravity.

>>10015382
That’s Bezos’s job. Elon’s got Mars, Bezos has industrial bases in space and asteroid companies.

Both is better than one

>>10007589
first we need to colonize our moon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtQkz0aRDe8

>>10015405
right we have to start small, if it fails then theres no way in hell we can survive mars. we have to test ourselves to see how we do. in a extreme environment.

>>10007589
>mars
>colony

JELLO BABY
JELLO BABY
JELLO BABY

>>10015405
You can't colonize the moon. You'd have great difficulty with human health colonizing Mars let alone the fucking moon that has nearly no gravity at all. You can build a base, but you'd not want to have children there for a colony. That'd be child abuse.

>>10007589
Been there, done that.
Mars sucks now.
Forget that.

>>10015243
Theres a huge cultural significance in being the first person to land people on Mars, and the impact thats going to have on our collective consciousness kind of outweighs the benefits of having a moonbase first.

>>10015436
Say that when the Chinese have nukes on the moon in their big ass moon base fully staffed with Chinese Jello Babies. Because they will do that.

>>10008048
implying we aren't already living in an Earth-style reservation on Mars and that gravitrons aren't secretly centrifuges for the real Terran master race when they come visit to gawk at the cavemen

>>10007788

Martians have the build of little girls.

>>10015382
>Present day tech could be used to make these rocks spin, creating artificial, earth-like gravity.
You watched the expanse too, I get it.
The physics and engineering behind it though I'm afraid makes very little sense.
To get decent gravity you need to put unrealistic and completely unnecessary amounts of energy on it, and most asteroids would just scatter their matter away.
It makes (very slightly) more sense to build a rotating unit inside a hollow asteroid, while the asteroid itself doesn't, still too much difficulties and work you don't really need to do.

Most cities and people are going to be underground.

>>10015354
200% = 2x
Mars g = 0.4
0.4×2 = 0.8
50% of 0.4 = 0.2
0.4×2 + 0.4×0.5 = 1 earth g

>>10017064
he cute

>>10009870
underrated

>>10009940
This could work. How much more difficult would colonisation be having to worry about the heat on mercury, as opposed to the cold of mars?

>>10015154
Wouldn't building the same size habitat on mars, be the same size as a permanent floating space city? Unless you use caves on Mars, that is.

>>10017050
Would all races adapt to this lifestyle? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

>>10009871
Can you go and see the blackbird in real life? Thats fucking awesome. NZer here.

>>10007788
This is why i love the expanse

> tfw cant take your hot 8 ft tall nigress gf to visit your 30 parents because she would be crushed to death under 1g gravity

>>10017082
chad human, beta belter

>>10014081
> step outside 1g habitats

anon...

>>10015382
t. OPA belter

>>10017076
mars isnt earth, so in this case it might be adapt or die

>>10017074
Very little difference. In both cases you definitely need to go underground, and temperatures there are easy to control.
The real problem could be water, which is supposed to be present on mars but not on mercury, aside from craters where the sun never shines.

>>10017079
Yeah there's a dozen or so in museums around the country. The most intact of them is the Smithsonian in our capital but you can't really tell the difference.

>>10017079
the new Udvar-Hazzy A&S museum is fantastic. I’ve been there three times