Manned Space Travel.....Pbbbbbttttttt!

[Revoltingest]

OK, we've been to the Moon, & it was fun.
But Mars is a completely different animal, with far more daunting problems & costs awaiting.
Some say we need to colonize it to preserve our species.
Poppycock!
We'd just be taking our problems there....if we even survived there.

There are better places to spend money.
Look at this bargain (only a billion & a half dollars).....
Atacama Large Millimeter Array - Wikipedia
It's not only cheap, but there's no chance it will crash & burn during its long mission.

Mars is just in our backyard....but this fella lets us see across the universe with a new & powerful vision.
And it has a greater chance of finding alien life.

 

[Revoltingest]

With the current attitudes of the most prosperous nations I'd say i'm not incredibly comfortable with the meet and their records of first contacts with other societies would convince me further.

We wouldn't meet any aliens....we'd just observe the signatures of life.
Unless someone overcomes the universal speed limit, we'd be physically separated by virtually "forever".

 

[Quetzal]

Put me in coach, I'm ready!

But Mars is a completely different animal, with far more daunting problems & costs awaiting.

Sure. No one is arguing against this. But I do not think we should shy away from innovation just because it is expensive and challenging.

Some say we need to colonize it to preserve our species.
Poppycock!

This is a popular misconception, let me explain a bit. On a long enough time line, our species will experience an extinction event. Being capable of colonizing other planets will help limit/delay/eliminate this risk. Now, will colonizing Mars save our species? In itself, I don't think so. Most catastrophic events that would do us in on Earth would clobber Mars as well. But that isn't the point. The point is to develop, test and deploy technologies that will allow us to take the next step beyond Mars. Mars is not the end goal, but simply a stepping stone to further exploration.

We'd just be taking our problems there....if we even survived there.

We are our own worst enemy, that is true. However, I am optimistic that more petty squabbles would be at least hushed while the first few stages take place. After that? Well, let's tackle our multi-planet social/economic/political problems as they come, shall we?

There are better places to spend money.
Look at this bargain (only a billion & a half dollars).....
Atacama Large Millimeter Array - Wikipedia
Mars is just in our backyard....but this fella lets us see across the universe.

This is neat but not good enough. There is no innovation here. At some point, in order for us to continue, we will have to take that step. Mars is simply one of those steps.

And it has a greater chance of finding alien life.

We will eventually need a sample and boots on the ground. It is inevitable.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Its a bad idea to meet aliens because of the viral and bacterial exchange. Viruses and bacteria are 'Nanotech', and we do not have good control of Nanotech. If aliens approach we must stop them before they arrive at Earth or anywhere that humans must live. The risk of contamination is equivalent to a great evil. If they send a probe we must not let it do anything near Earth. It could kill us all just by being in orbit, on accident with no harm intended. At best our robots may have a meeting with their robots far away from here in some unlivable zone.

 

[Quetzal]

If aliens approach we must stop them before they arrive at Earth or anywhere that humans must live. The risk of contamination is equivalent to a great evil. If they send a probe we must not let it do anything near Earth. It could kill us all just by being in orbit, on accident with no harm intended.

Well, not be design but "accidents" do happen.

 

[Revoltingest]

Put me in coach, I'm ready!

You're just trying to get home on our dime, ya miserable little gender ambiguouis gray Tralfamadorian wannabe!

Sure. No one is arguing against this. But I do not think we should shy away from innovation just because it is expensive and challenging.

There are just better places to spend the money.
People are fragile, & the burden of keeping them alive is the vast majority of the cost.
More can be achieved (scientifically) by.....
- Telepresence
- AI instead of human brains roaming the solar system
- Remote sensing, eg, ALMA (which looks far more promising than even a successful manned Mars mission)

This is a popular misconception, let me explain a bit. On a long enough time line, our species will experience an extinction event. Being capable of colonizing other planets will help limit/delay/eliminate this risk. Now, will colonizing Mars save our species? In itself, I don't think so. Most catastrophic events that would do us in on Earth would clobber Mars as well. But that isn't the point. The point is to develop, test and deploy technologies that will allow us to take the next step beyond Mars. Mars is not the end goal, but simply a stepping stone to further exploration.

I don't object to that goal.
But it's premature at our level of technology.
Deciding to start now would be inefficient because we'd have to use so many backward lifting technologies.

We are our own worst enemy, that is true. However, I am optimistic that more petty squabbles would be at least hushed while the first few stages take place. After that? Well, let's tackle our multi-planet social/economic/political problems as they come, shall we?

I say we'll always have the social problems we have.
So they shouldn't affect our decisions regarding exploring the universe.
The only question is about what is the best way at this time.

This is neat but not good enough. There is no innovation here. At some point, in order for us to continue, we will have to take that step. Mars is simply one of those steps.

The step can be taken with unmanned exploration first.
What we really need to send people out is the space elevator.
Space elevator - Wikipedia
Could it be done?
If not on Earth, then on bodies with less gravity, which would cut fuel needs at one end.

We will eventually need a sample and boots on the ground. It is inevitable.

Not really.....it just feels that way because it's enticingly cool.

 

[Kirran]

I'm more in favour of colonising space through the utilisation of asteroid resources personally.

 

[Quetzal]

You're just trying to get home on our dime, ya miserable little gender ambiguouis gray Trafalmadorian wannabe!

...well, what can I say, you got me there.

There are just better places to spend the money.
People are fragile, & the burden of keeping them alive is the vast majority of the cost.
More can be achieved (scientifically) by.....
- Telepresence
- AI instead of human brains roaming the solar system
- Remote sensing, eg, ALMA (which looks far more promising than even a successful manned Mars mission)

I would support all of these things.

I don't object to that goal.
But it's premature at our level of technology.
Deciding to start now would be inefficient because we'd have to use so many backward lifting technologies.

That's fair. I don't have much to offer in regards to specifics, but public sneak peeks look promising. We will see.

I say we'll always have the social problems we have.
So they shouldn't affect our decisions regarding exploring the universe.
The only question is about what is the best way at this time.

Mhmm, and that is a question I do not know the answer to.

The step can be taken with unmanned exploration first.

We have sent probes, rovers and Matt Damon to Mars. Is there another form of unmanned exploration you have in mind? (Matt refuses to go again, something about trying to leave him there? I dunno.)

Not really.....it just feels that way because it's enticingly cool.

Leave my bias alone!

 

[Quetzal]

I'm more in favour of colonising space through the utilisation of asteroid resources personally.

Good news for you is we are on our way with that one.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Well, not be design but "accidents" do happen.

Right, so if you see a huge tank of whales approaching from outside the solar system...

 

[Revoltingest]

We have sent probes, rovers and Matt Daemon to Mars. Is there another form of unmanned exploration you have in mind? (Matt refuses to go again, something about trying to leave him there? I dunno.)

Yes...too bad the mission to strand Matt Damon failed.
But our robots are becoming rapidly more sophisticated because of computer technology.
Note that it was only last year that Alphago reached a real AI milestone by playing professional level go.
We could even program robots to experience the joy of exploration....

 

[Quetzal]

Right, so if you see a huge tank of whales approaching from outside the solar system...

I am very sensitive about my weight...

 

[Quetzal]

We could even program robots to experience the joy of exploration....

I wonder what Kevin Bacon is up to these days...

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm more in favour of colonising space through the utilisation of asteroid resources personally.

Yes, but the "Belters" might attack Earth.

(Nerd joke there.)

 

[Guy Threepwood]

We wouldn't meet any aliens....we'd just observe the signatures of life.
Unless someone overcomes the universal speed limit, we'd be physically separated by virtually "forever".

Not if we can figure out cryogenics though.... journeys of 1000's of years could become viable and bring many solar systems into range, hypothetically the colonization of the entire galaxy..

Which is why I don't think we'd meet any aliens anywhere, because apparently no one else ever did this! My guess would be because they don't exist. The universe is too small to make another Earth very likely-

 

[Quetzal]

The universe is too small to make another Earth very likely-

Really? I disagree.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not if we can figure out cryogenics though.... journeys of 1000's of years could become viable and bring many solar systems into range, hypothetically the colonization of the entire galaxy..

Which is why I don't think we'd meet any aliens anywhere, because apparently no one else ever did this! My guess would be because they don't exist. The universe is too small to make another Earth very likely-

We'd be talking about far far more than thousands of years with our current or envisioned engines.

 

[Brickjectivity]

The step can be taken with unmanned exploration first.
What we really need to send people out is the space elevator.
Space elevator - Wikipedia
Could it be done?
If not on Earth, then on bodies with less gravity, which would cut fuel needs at one end.

I agree. That means you are right this time. Good for you.

 

[Revoltingest]

I agree. That means you are right this time. Good for you.

First time I've been right this year....woo hoo!

 

[Quetzal]

We'd be talking about far far more than thousands of years with our current or envisioned engines.

This is why we need Battlestars...