Space colonisation

[Boerseun]

There might be another solution to overpopulation.

 

It seems as if when countries cross a certain threshold of development, their birthrates start to fall. For instance, in France and Australia in particular, it's becoming more and more of a problem to replace their ageing population with young people to do the work. And in some countries it's so bad (or good, depending on your point of view) that they are actually experiencing a decline in numbers. Then they start to drop their immigration requirements in an effort to attract labourers from foreign countries.

So, it seems as if overpopulation is a threat waiting for us in the not-too-distant future, the solution would be in developing the Third World. It might be a natural defence against high mortality in undeveloped places - have big families! Then, as a country goes through the whole developmental cycle from a peasant society to a consumer society, family structures and sizes will change to cope with the new realities. But that's a different thought for a different thread, I suppose.

Coming back to this thread, I think the only justifiable reason in the short term for space exploration would be the expansion of our scientific knowledge. And that can be done cheaper and easier with robots!

[GAHD]

The One Hope I Have For Space Colonization, Is That Human Greed Knows No Bounds. We'll Get There, If Only Because Something looks Shiny.

[Stargazer]

To the point - I haven't had a real chance to look into the details of the Aurora program yet (Norway has decided not to participate as of yet, mostly beause we have no manned space flight programme) but I think it eventually will have to happen. But sadly, at the current stage, we have fewer launches into space than in many years and we are even struggling to maintain a single manned space station so a space settlement is probably many decades away. That is the pessimistic view, of course. If the current plans materialize we might see it happen sooner.

I'm worried that it will go much slower than the initial time schedule. For example, ExoMars, if approved, will not launch in 2009, it's been moved back to 2011. Still, some other projects are moving forward, so it's hard to say if and when manned missions to Mars will happen. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if some eccentric billionaire does it before any of the space agencies...

 

I wonder what the problem with the ISS is? I mean, costs are monumental and yet it's not a big station. The biggest yet, but not big, in my opinion. Why can't things be done efficiently and quickly? Is it because it's a government project?

 

I think that simply getting to Mars and/or establishing a small base on the moon or lunar L1 orbit will be a huge undertaking and will drain the resources from building a permanent colony.

Then a permanent colony on the moon should come first, and use it to build other structures including L1 waystations and Mars spaceships. We must free ourselves from this deep gravity well filled with thick air...

[Boerseun]

Yeah - I'm afraid we're going to be stuck on this rock for many many years to come.

Cause you get a genius like George Bush committing himself to returning to the moon, and then venturing on to Mars. The issue is, wether it happens or not, it won't happen in his term of office. His successor, on the other hand, will look for places from where to free funds for other projects, and the first casualty will be the space budget. Few people are aware of this, or can remember this, but his daddy, George Senior, promised a return to the moon and a cruise to Mars in his term of office as well - only to be snuffed out by Bill Clinton. So - we should either give up any hope for getting there under NASA, or any other governmental space agency, and pin our hopes on the private sector to pull it off, or we should start to wonder if the Bush family knows something about Mars that we dont...? Maybe if all else fails the Bush family will invade Mars! ;)

[C1ay]

We don't even know yet if a human can survive a trip to Mars....

[Stargazer]

We don't even know yet if a human can survive a trip to Mars....

There are many hazards and risks, no doubt, but it shouldn't be anything scientists and engineers can't solve or work around.

[Boerseun]

There are many hazards and risks, no doubt, but it shouldn't be anything scientists and engineers can't solve or work around.

 

Sure - we can probably fly to Mars today, given our current technology. And Russian cosmonauts have been in orbit for longer than a trip to Mars will take.

 

So - in essence, the question of going to Mars or not has been taken out of the realm of technological possibility (seeing as it is possible) and moved into the sticky world of political commitment and financial viability. Nobody wants to take the next step, 'cause it's gonna cost big bucks. And above all - WHY?

 

Why would we want to go to Mars? Are we going to survive as a species without forever exploring new frontiers? Are we going to end up in a stagnant, boring welfare state and see Western Civilization fall by the wayside unless we go to Mars? Or is it just a human trait to keep on exploring? Our current world is largely the result of the last couple of hundred years' worth of exploring, and now that we know (largely, that is) what there is to know about Earth, we have to look to the heavens. Otherwise we will all die of boredom.

[Stargazer]

Yeah - I'm afraid we're going to be stuck on this rock for many many years to come.

Cause you get a genius like George Bush committing himself to returning to the moon, and then venturing on to Mars. The issue is, wether it happens or not, it won't happen in his term of office. His successor, on the other hand, will look for places from where to free funds for other projects, and the first casualty will be the space budget. Few people are aware of this, or can remember this, but his daddy, George Senior, promised a return to the moon and a cruise to Mars in his term of office as well - only to be snuffed out by Bill Clinton. So - we should either give up any hope for getting there under NASA, or any other governmental space agency, and pin our hopes on the private sector to pull it off, or we should start to wonder if the Bush family knows something about Mars that we dont...? Maybe if all else fails the Bush family will invade Mars! ;)

NASA or the other space agencies could do all this and much more, if they streamlined their bureacracies and if they were properly funded with clear long term goals. This is not the case.

[Stargazer]

Sure - we can probably fly to Mars today, given our current technology. And Russian cosmonauts have been in orbit for longer than a trip to Mars will take.

 

So - in essence, the question of going to Mars or not has been taken out of the realm of technological possibility (seeing as it is possible) and moved into the sticky world of political commitment and financial viability. Nobody wants to take the next step, 'cause it's gonna cost big bucks.

Of course it will cost. I've said it before and I'll say it again: how governments, or anyone for that matter, could ever think that the giant amounts of money going to the military budget is a-ok, while much much less for a peaceful space programme is a waste of money, I will never understand. I'm not saying that you think so. I just think that people complain about all kinds of good stuff but forget the much more costly bad stuff. That space exploration and colonisation will be expensive is no surprise. But it does give a return. Maybe not within the current president's term so he can take credit for it, but on a long term scale. When those colonies become more or less self sustained, costs will go down and even profit can be made.

 

And above all - WHY?

 

Why would we want to go to Mars?

Why have humankind gone anywhere? Why did "we" ever spread across the globe? What benefits could it possibly give?

 

Did we explore and settle this planet because of necessity, or our need to explore, or to find new resources, to find new cultures to trade with, or because of dreamers and adventurers who wanted to see what's beyond the horizon?

 

My guess is that we did it for all those reasons.

 

 

Are we going to survive as a species without forever exploring new frontiers?

For some time, yes.

 

Are we going to end up in a stagnant, boring welfare state and see Western Civilization fall by the wayside unless we go to Mars?

Perhaps not that easy, but yes I do believe that it's time for the technological civilisation of this planet to take a step up, to evolve and to grow.

 

Or is it just a human trait to keep on exploring? Our current world is largely the result of the last couple of hundred years' worth of exploring, and now that we know (largely, that is) what there is to know about Earth, we have to look to the heavens. Otherwise we will all die of boredom.

Perhaps. I once saw a quote by a space scientist, who said that we have space exploration for the same reason we have art galleries. I think that the world is not enough. There are many more worlds in this solar system to explore and to experience, and then awaits the stars... and there's a few hundred billion of them in this galaxy. There's a lot to do out there.

[Jay-qu]

it would be really cool if there was a super-rich person out there that was a major fan of space, so then he pumps in heaps of money to privite aerospace companies and just tells them to make it happen... "i want to be standing on mars in 10years max" (i would say something like that)

[Stargazer]

it would be really cool if there was a super-rich person out there that was a major fan of space, so then he pumps in heaps of money to privite aerospace companies and just tells them to make it happen... "i want to be standing on mars in 10years max" (i would say something like that)

Both Scaled and Canadian Arrow have recieved their funding from rich people, and I believe this will continue. One day, some crazy billionaire adventurer will go to Mars perhaps...

[Jay-qu]

cool, thats something i would do, if i had the money... it would be cool to be the first person to mars - lol, and imagine if when they got there they staked there claim over the planet mars, who could stop them?

[Adrian Cobon]

Look - who says it must be government or millionare sponsored? And who says that the price of launching cargo into space must be so costly?

It is possible for those in the G8 nations to simply endorse a project that will help set up a system that will commercialize the process of going into space. It could be paid for in the same manner that they run PBS. They advertise a program and, with the help of people around the world donating money and resources, show results after a time. From what I understand, whenever an industry becomes public the cost of its products tend to decrease simply because companies are looking at the bottom line - The less it cost to provide your service the more profits you can earn while your competitiors are trying to catch up.

Another point - it is possible to use colonies for other than cities in space. Why not simply develop an "Farm Colony" whose main export back to Earth would be food? Wouldn't this help reduce the demand on resources for food and land in developing nations? And once we have a colony on Luna wouldn't we be able to use a fuel common there but almost totally absent from the Earths surface (H3) to fuel any ships? Wouldn't that help reduce the cost of fuel, one of the main reasons for the extreme cost of space travel?

[Boerseun]

Look - who says it must be government or millionare sponsored? And who says that the price of launching cargo into space must be so costly?

It is possible for those in the G8 nations to simply endorse a project that will help set up a system that will commercialize the process of going into space. It could be paid for in the same manner that they run PBS. They advertise a program and, with the help of people around the world donating money and resources, show results after a time. From what I understand, whenever an industry becomes public the cost of its products tend to decrease simply because companies are looking at the bottom line - The less it cost to provide your service the more profits you can earn while your competitiors are trying to catch up.

Another point - it is possible to use colonies for other than cities in space. Why not simply develop an "Farm Colony" whose main export back to Earth would be food? Wouldn't this help reduce the demand on resources for food and land in developing nations? And once we have a colony on Luna wouldn't we be able to use a fuel common there but almost totally absent from the Earths surface (H3) to fuel any ships? Wouldn't that help reduce the cost of fuel, one of the main reasons for the extreme cost of space travel?

 

Sure - we can set up a "Farm Colony", if we do ever get to colonize the moon, we won't have much of a choice. But not for export to Earth, no way. Unless you can afford ten million dollars for a pale-looking moon-carrot.

 

As for cost: We can probably drop a fair amount of cost per pound by turning the boosters and shuttles etc. into enormous phallic-shaped billboards. Durex will love it. Coke & Pepsi will try to outbid each other to paint their logos on the next flight to Mars. Whenever the Mars Rovers send a video stream, the scientists will have to move the cameras to see what's under the little Nike logo engraved into the camera's lens. That's the American Way.

 

There are usable resources on the moon, fuel might just be one of them. The thing is - the moon is still a fairly large gravity well, and the cost of shipping fuel to low Earth-orbit might just be less than building a high-risk fuel producing plant on the moon. If you want to go to Mars, you have to land on the moon first, in other words. Which implies monster boosters to get you off the Earth to the moon. Rather build your craft in orbit with repeated smaller-booster flights, and then set off to wherever.

 

I still think if we do go anywhere, wether it be the moon or Mars, there must be a solid reason for it. Not just because heck, it sounded like a good idea at the time.

[Adrian Cobon]

There is, pardon for the expression, more than one way to skin a cat. As I understand it, it is theoritically possible to send out machines to capture asteroids from the asteroid belt and simply push them toward Earths L-points. These colonies would have next to nothing gravity well (except for what artifical rotation would induce.) thus making it simplier to escape. And who says anything about needing boosters to escape Luna's gravity well? The theory I have about escaping its gravity well is simple. You know how a linear accelator works? Imagine one on a vast larger scale that is meant to propel objects out of Lunar orbit, say to Earth or Mars? The cost, in the terms I am thinking about (actually getting the object out of Earths main gravity well.) will go down if people world wide deal with the situation as if it wern't static - it is simply a minor technical problem that can be dealt with if enough research is done on alternative fuels and launch systems, not advertising (since advertising companies are kind of stuck in following public interest). How about a Space elevator? About the farm colony - imagine if a famine struck a huge part of the Earth - would you feel more comfortable with an alternative agricultural system that would be unaffected or without one? It needs to implemented, I feel, ASAP because of Moores Law - anything that can go wrong will - it is only a matter of time. I personally prefer to have a backup system in place, even if it is used initally to provide food to other colonies.

[bartock]

well the best reason would be that we are already over populated. in the years to come we are going to completely destroy this place if we don't get some of the people off earth, of if we die out.

wouldnt the answer be sustainability :rant:

[Jay-qu]

i dont think the asteroid would be such a good idea... ever heard of 'every reaction has an equal and opposite reaction' would the boosters used to take off from the asteroid potentially knock the asteroid out of earth orbit and send it crashing down towards the rest of us...