/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9102702
This is the way it happened in the past, but "enriching" doesn't have to be about resources. Think of ISS. People there don't mine or physically procure anything, but they gain knowledge about living without gravity and how humans, plants and materials react to it. Regardless, a large colony on other planet (or moon or in space) would probably need enough resources to sustain the colonists, as people are not so keen to fund such endeavors.

>>9102740
Well, first of all, what type of research can you do on mars that you cannot do on earth. Everyone talks about how it would advance scientific research to build a colony there, but if we are to invest bilions of dollars in this endeavor, it should have practical implecations that would improve the taxpayers life, otherwise, it has no justification.
Second, even if the government would fund it, what would make people migrate to mars? During the colonisation of "the new world", the majority of people migrated to the americas out of the belief that the would gain a lot of wealth. If mars dont have that economic potential, why would people migrate there?

>>9102751
Are you joking? Mars is a whole another planet. That's a pretty vast research material. See, this kind of thinking is why NASA's funding is so shit. It always has to improve taxpayers life (read: I want to stay in my comfort zone). Some people want to broaden their horizons, you know.

>>9102808
Could you give me an exmaple of research that can only be done on mars and improve the average person life?

>>9102808
What advantage does wasting money on mars have to funding research in the life sciences?

>>9102808
Could you give me an exmaple of research that can only be done in our space race and improve the average person life?

>>9102702
Yes, fucktons of metals, just like on earth, but mars has a lower gravity, so it would be much easier to mine those delicious metals

>>9103160
Speak engineering to me you dirty dirty girl~

>>9103173

>>9102751
there will be no shortage of people who want to move to a different planet. that mars one scam got millions of applications I believe

>>9103265
>clang

>>9103651
wrong clang

>>9102702
any "colony" will be research stations and mining operations owned and conducted by corporations.

>>9103143
GPS?

>>9102859
Researching Martian rocks for new minerals formed under vastly different circumstances with purpose of finding new materials to produce shit with.

>>9104476
Thats realy fucking retarded. You could invest the money instead in research grants concerning graphine, and carbon nanotubes, and have much better results than just assuming mars have new matrials we desperately need.

>>9102751
>Well, first of all, what type of research can you do on mars that you cannot do on earth.
If you find the remains of extinct Martian life you will have your unique selling point for going to Mars.

It will have to be extinct though, otherwise it might be illegal to go there.

>>9102702

There won't be colonizing countries. The first mars or lunar colony will be international. It will be an Earth colony.

People may rationalize why they want to go to mars,but at the end of the day, it's mostly irrational. It's the same thing that makes people spend thousands of dollars and risk their lives to struggle up the flanks of K2, surrounded by the corpses of those mad enough to try it before them.

I don't think Elon Musk gives a shit if his plan is the one that makes him the most money. All he has to do is infect enough people with the mind virus of MARS OR BUST,and it will happen. Once enough people are on mars,they'll form their own economy and perhaps engage in some kind of trade with earth, but the main point of it isn't to make people back on earth richer,it's more rich people doing something for reasons that aren't to do with having more money. It's like charity, but of a more esoteric sort.

It worked on me. i'd go to mars in a hearbeat, because i'm infected. It's more to do with religion than reason. It's romantic.

>>9104531
What makes you think that? Do you genuinely think thay the US/China/EU would invest bilions of dollars just so it would be an "earth" coloney?

>>9104559

Do you genuinely think that others countries will allow an other country to possess a land on the moon or on Mars ?

There is a consensus for now that space a good for all humanity. No harmful satellite for humanity but every country can launch (if they have the capabilities of course) a satellite.


But, it won't be an Earth colony for now, it's more a scientific colony.

When Rosetta (the space probe built by the European Space Agency) touched the comet Churyumov, they didn't plant an EU flag and didn't said " it's EU or France property now ".

The flag on the moon was a mistake and it was a different context (cold war " i have a bigger dick than you, russia" ). There is no flag on Mars (but there are flag, even if i think it's stupid, on NASA's Mars rover Curiosity for example).

People don't actually want Mars colonization, what they really want is Mars tourism.

Large scale colonization will never happen if it's not profitable. Nobody wants to spend trillions for a colony if they don't get anything back. Any future space mining will be done with robots

>>9104578
I dont see the problem. Each country would colonize a different part of the planet, same as it was in the 16-17 centuries.

>>9102702
I think it would be more profitable for a country to mine He-3 on Moon and solve our energy crisis.
Though due to international( intergalactical? Interspatial?) Treaties no one country can claim ownership of land on the moon/mars and in turn its resources. So I doubt it'll be an economical boon for the colonising country as the rest would complain about an unfair advantage/monopoly

>>9104873
Treaties are valid as long as they are in the interest of both sides. Once one side does not want to play along he can just do what he wants...

>>9104736
If true reusable spaceflight ever happens, where a rocket can be continuously launched, landed and refueled like an airplane, just about anybody would be able to afford to send any cargo anywhere.

If fuel is the principal expense instead of new rockets, then space travel becomes a $10/kg endeavor instead of a $5,000/kg one.

Prestigious universities would be able to send entire classes of undergrads to Mars for year-long terms, tourists and adventurers will be able to get there as "easily" as Everest or some of the more obscure Pacific islands.

And that's all *without* some quasi-magic system like a space elevator.

>>9104882
And risk the backlash? Probably some countries will show solidarity and try and embargo space goods sold by the country seeking to do it's own thing. But its inevitable some would try to purchase said goods but they'll try to reduce the price so far down it'll not be profitable.

>>9104882
>>9104897
Considering there's exactly three countries on Earth right now that have ever even put a man in orbit, I think the other 189 can go suck a dick

>>9104915
I'd like to see them fight those countries of. Globalization is a thing. It would cripple the 3

>>9104944
>Luxemborg and Mali are just gonna btfo America, Russia and China over muh red dirt
ayy lmao

>>9104953
Hubris will be the death of you all