Travelling in our Solar System

[Hunter_Steel]

Okay, I've been wanting to see what people thought of this.

Space travel is for the time being, or perhaps forever economically viable. Exploring our oceans proved to be less economically viable for our economies, than it has proven to explore space.

Mining asteroids is not too far away. Planetary Resources are working on moving to a near Earth orbit asteroid and scanning it for valuable resources and mine it.

Setting up a colony on Mars might be 7 or less years away from us. And traveling to space might become like using a plane to travel between continents or countries or cross country. It might become a daily part of our lives and can perhaps better the human race as a whole.

I believe its time to put half of our population in space. But what happens if the Mars colonies want independence from Earth and Earth won't give it to them?

Thats what's currently mulling around in my mind and I wanna see what the rest of you think.

~Hunter

[Kahn]

Does anybody honestly believe that if we colonized other planetary bodies, they'd accept being ruled by a government literally millions of miles away?

I think the idea of self-governing would become apparent quickly. It's one thing when your rulers live across an ocean, but it's very different when you have the vast emptiness of space separating half of our population. There's just no way it'd work, unless the people were willing.

Also, what makes you say we're so close to colonizing planetary bodies such as Mars?

[xmojox]

As our resources on Earth dwindle, we have to begin exploring alternate solutions. We need a cost effective method of getting a payload into orbit first, though...

[Hunter_Steel]

In 2020, a dutch company is planning to launch 10 astronauts to Mars.

It would be a good thing to rather pull the asteroid a little nearer to Earth than the moon, but too close and it can fall down to us and kill millions if not a billion people on this planet.

Using tug boats and thrusters, its a good method, especially since previous scans can show that the amount of resources inside the asteroid will pay for the expenses of pulling that hunk of rock to Earth.

~Hunter

[Harry Smith]

In 2020, a dutch company is planning to launch 10 astronauts to Mars.

It would be a good thing to rather pull the asteroid a little nearer to Earth than the moon, but too close and it can fall down to us and kill millions if not a billion people on this planet.

Using tug boats and thrusters, its a good method, especially since previous scans can show that the amount of resources inside the asteroid will pay for the expenses of pulling that hunk of rock to Earth.

~Hunter

The problem of living or even travelling to outer space is cosmic radiation. Look at all the tiny holes in Neil Armstrong's suite in the moon landing video, we don't have anything that absorb that much of radiation for a long time apart from lead. It would cost so much, look in the 1950's when everyone thought we could colonize the moon. I'm skeptical

[Hunter_Steel]

This is no longer the 1950s. Our technology has improved. Those little holes were caused by micro meteors, not cosmic radiation. The ISS constantly has to go under repairs because of micro meteors hitting it. New technology against radiation should be developed long before then, and living on Mars is more feasable because there's already an atmosphere that can help filter the radiation. Granted, its only CO2.

[Harry Smith]

This is no longer the 1950s. Our technology has improved. Those little holes were caused by micro meteors, not cosmic radiation. The ISS constantly has to go under repairs because of micro meteors hitting it. New technology against radiation should be developed long before then, and living on Mars is more feasable because there's already an atmosphere that can help filter the radiation. Granted, its only CO2.

I know it's no longer the 1950's- I'm not thick. You were saying about colonizing the moon in 2020, that gives us 8 years to develop the technology. It has also been proved that manned space flights can lead to brain damage, let alone the cost of trying to travel. Your whole idea about travelling there like ' a plane' as you put it is absurb due to the fact that not only does it take about 18 months, it costs a massive amount of money and requires a highly trained crew. 7 years is unrealistic

[Hunter_Steel]

We already have the technology to cut 18 months to just 3 months. I was saying about colonizing mars, not the moon. -_-

Everything is possible. People work on it all the time. And the brain damage thing is why the ISS is up there. We do tests to make sure that brain damage can be reduced or completely taken away.

Not only will the costs for space travel be eventually payed for by space travel itself, but it brings to mind, that we've been on this planet for far too long. The mindset you show here is exactly what is grounding us in the first place. It takes risk to do space travel, and without risk, nothing will be gained. So, forgive me for saying this, but: Its time to get our heads out of gravity's ass and look towards the Zero-G environment, and work on bettering that for our uses.

I've worked on countless things to help better space for mankind. (Artificial Gravity is still too damn far away for us, which means we'd have to periodically return to a gravity environment so that we can regain our strength and retain our normal physical health.) I can't see why most people dismiss space travel as too far away. Its not, its actually quite close and could come knocking on our door steps long before we're in our 50s.

~Hunter

[Southside]

Okay, I've been wanting to see what people thought of this.

Space travel is for the time being, or perhaps forever economically viable. Exploring our oceans proved to be less economically viable for our economies, than it has proven to explore space.

Mining asteroids is not too far away. Planetary Resources are working on moving to a near Earth orbit asteroid and scanning it for valuable resources and mine it.

Setting up a colony on Mars might be 7 or less years away from us. And traveling to space might become like using a plane to travel between continents or countries or cross country. It might become a daily part of our lives and can perhaps better the human race as a whole.

I believe its time to put half of our population in space. But what happens if the Mars colonies want independence from Earth and Earth won't give it to them?

Thats what's currently mulling around in my mind and I wanna see what the rest of you think.

~Hunter


I remember seeing a NASA prediction from the mid 60's stating we should have a permanent moon base in the 80's, and be on Mars by the turn of the millennium. Now, I truly believe in our lifetime we will see a Mars mission(Not in the next 10-15 years). I predict somewhere around 2030,2040.

I know it's no longer the 1950's- I'm not thick. You were saying about colonizing the moon in 2020, that gives us 8 years to develop the technology. It has also been proved that manned space flights can lead to brain damage, let alone the cost of trying to travel. Your whole idea about travelling there like ' a plane' as you put it is absurb due to the fact that not only does it take about 18 months, it costs a massive amount of money and requires a highly trained crew. 7 years is unrealistic

We could get to the moon in 7 years if we had the money....


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Harry Smith]

We could get to the moon in 7 years if we had the money....

Sorry I meant to say mars, the moon is a piece of piss

[Southside]

Sorry I meant to say mars, the moon is a piece of piss

I agree, It'd be nice to see another Moon mission in the next 20 years but Mars is WAY more ambitious and promising. When you think about it, Moon isnt really that far away, but regardless it'll be alot of money. Like I said in the past post, 2030 or 2040.

[Hunter_Steel]

Too far away, we can do it in much less time.

~Hunter

[Harry Smith]

We already have the technology to cut 18 months to just 3 months. I was saying about colonizing mars, not the moon. -_-

Everything is possible. People work on it all the time. And the brain damage thing is why the ISS is up there. We do tests to make sure that brain damage can be reduced or completely taken away.

Not only will the costs for space travel be eventually payed for by space travel itself, but it brings to mind, that we've been on this planet for far too long. The mindset you show here is exactly what is grounding us in the first place. It takes risk to do space travel, and without risk, nothing will be gained. So, forgive me for saying this, but: Its time to get our heads out of gravity's ass and look towards the Zero-G environment, and work on bettering that for our uses.

I've worked on countless things to help better space for mankind. (Artificial Gravity is still too damn far away for us, which means we'd have to periodically return to a gravity environment so that we can regain our strength and retain our normal physical health.) I can't see why most people dismiss space travel as too far away. Its not, its actually quite close and could come knocking on our door steps long before we're in our 50s.

~Hunter

We don't have the technology to get to Mars in 3 months, do you even have a source for that. You really sound like a crack pot from NASA in the 50's, I don't understand why you think Mars holds all the answers.

You said we ' need to get our head of gravity's ass....and look to Zero G, yet you latter state that we can't develop any Zero G technology yet. You seem to be puzzled on this.

What is to gain from going to mars on a mass scale, yes I agree with small teams going there but the half the planet.... you know how much that would cost just to ferry enough supplies there. A long with the politics of it all. You must be delusional if you think we can start a colony in 7 years. We haven't even got there yet

[Human]

It has to be good. Even if for some reason it isn't, we're going to go through the solar system and will need to one day.
We can't live on Earth forever... some people think 'oh we have 4 billion years' but it's more on the scale of 500 million years, as the sun doesn't just blow up and explode.
but even 10,000 years is enough to colonise new stars so why not

[TheBassoonist]

Unless the scientists working on a warp engine come up with something viable, yes, there are people working on a way to bend spacetime in order to move objects faster than light, then mass space travel won't be something that will happen in the near future. It's too expensive to send people to the Moon, build a base there, and then send people to Mars via the Moon. It's even more expensive to send people directly to Mars. And then there's the issues with surviving the full blast of solar wind for the 8+ months it'd take to get from Earth to Mars. Currently, sending humans between planets isn't very likely.

[Hunter_Steel]

In the 70s NASA built and successfully tested the ion drive. It can get us to mars in less than half the time it will currently take us.
But we cant bet everything on an engine that takes a month to get to the right speed. Think a little of what what can be built if we put our minds to it.

What you suggest is us staying in our slow rate of development.

[TheBigUnit]

I agree, It'd be nice to see another Moon mission in the next 20 years but Mars is WAY more ambitious and promising. When you think about it, Moon isnt really that far away, but regardless it'll be alot of money. Like I said in the past post, 2030 or 2040.

Why should we go back to the moon?

In the 70s NASA built and successfully tested the ion drive. It can get us to mars in less than half the time it will currently take us.
But we cant bet everything on an engine that takes a month to get to the right speed. Think a little of what what can be built if we put our minds to it.

What you suggest is us staying in our slow rate of development.

Why don't they ise it now? Did they use it with the voyagers?

As far as I know I'm pretty sure it won't be NASA colonizing Mars but various companies mainly because NASA simply doesn't have the funding, in 7 years a manned flight to Mars is possible, colonizing it is a diffrent story,

What NASA most likely should and I think will do is send several probes to Europa that would be the most bang for your buck, much more interesting and harder,

Mining asteriods will be one of the greatest human achievements ever

[Hunter_Steel]

Its used on the ISS as Ion Pulse Thrusters to keep it from falling to Earth, and Japan is using the Ion Drive on a new probe they'll launch soon to meet up with one of the comets coming our way.

~Hunter

[Kahn]

Why should we go back to the moon?

You're asking an ignorant question. The moon is our closest planetary body. Why wouldn't we go to the moon?

What NASA most likely should and I think will do is send several probes to Europa that would be the most bang for your buck, much more interesting and harder,

Europa is also much harder to hit than Mars. Whereas Mars is a giant planet that has much to offer, Europa is one of many moons. While I agree that studying Europa is much more interesting (see: http://www.space.com/20536-jupiter-moon-europa-life-ingredients.html) I feel we should start prioritizing certain missions, such as those to Mars. The sooner we have one common goal, the sooner that goal will be accomplished. Colonization of worlds within our solar system is the first step, and I'd like to see progress in my lifetime.

Mining asteriods will be one of the greatest human achievements ever

Mining asteroids will be a great achievement once we do it. It'll be like landing on the moon; everyone in the world will be waiting, but once it's over with, interest will die down. Mining asteroids will become vital if we ever become the space-faring race we could be.

[xmojox]

(John F. Kennedy speaking at Rice University, September 12, 1962)

President Pitzer, Mr. Vice President, Governor, Congressman Thomas, Senator Wiley, and Congressman Miller, Mr. Webb, Mr. Bell, scientists, distinguished guests, and ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate your president having made me an honorary visiting professor, and I will assure you that my first lecture will be very brief.

I am delighted to be here, and I'm particularly delighted to be here on this occasion.

We meet at a college noted for knowledge, in a city noted for progress, in a State noted for strength, and we stand in need of all three, for we meet in an hour of change and challenge, in a decade of hope and fear, in an age of both knowledge and ignorance. The greater our knowledge increases, the greater our ignorance unfolds.

Despite the striking fact that most of the scientists that the world has ever known are alive and working today, despite the fact that this Nation¹s own scientific manpower is doubling every 12 years in a rate of growth more than three times that of our population as a whole, despite that, the vast stretches of the unknown and the unanswered and the unfinished still far outstrip our collective comprehension.

No man can fully grasp how far and how fast we have come, but condense, if you will, the 50,000 years of man¹s recorded history in a time span of but a half-century. Stated in these terms, we know very little about the first 40 years, except at the end of them advanced man had learned to use the skins of animals to cover them. Then about 10 years ago, under this standard, man emerged from his caves to construct other kinds of shelter. Only five years ago man learned to write and use a cart with wheels. Christianity began less than two years ago. The printing press came this year, and then less than two months ago, during this whole 50-year span of human history, the steam engine provided a new source of power.

Newton explored the meaning of gravity. Last month electric lights and telephones and automobiles and airplanes became available. Only last week did we develop penicillin and television and nuclear power, and now if America's new spacecraft succeeds in reaching Venus, we will have literally reached the stars before midnight tonight.

This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers. Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward.

So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this State of Texas, this country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward--and so will space.

William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.

If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.

Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.

Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation.

We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.

There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year to shift our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the Presidency.

In the last 24 hours we have seen facilities now being created for the greatest and most complex exploration in man's history. We have felt the ground shake and the air shattered by the testing of a Saturn C-1 booster rocket, many times as powerful as the Atlas which launched John Glenn, generating power equivalent to 10,000 automobiles with their accelerators on the floor. We have seen the site where the F-1 rocket engines, each one as powerful as all eight engines of the Saturn combined, will be clustered together to make the advanced Saturn missile, assembled in a new building to be built at Cape Canaveral as tall as a 48 story structure, as wide as a city block, and as long as two lengths of this field.

Within these last 19 months at least 45 satellites have circled the earth. Some 40 of them were "made in the United States of America" and they were far more sophisticated and supplied far more knowledge to the people of the world than those of the Soviet Union.

The Mariner spacecraft now on its way to Venus is the most intricate instrument in the history of space science. The accuracy of that shot is comparable to firing a missile from Cape Canaveral and dropping it in this stadium between the the 40-yard lines.

Transit satellites are helping our ships at sea to steer a safer course. Tiros satellites have given us unprecedented warnings of hurricanes and storms, and will do the same for forest fires and icebergs.

We have had our failures, but so have others, even if they do not admit them. And they may be less public.

To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead.

The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions, such as Rice, will reap the harvest of these gains.

And finally, the space effort itself, while still in its infancy, has already created a great number of new companies, and tens of thousands of new jobs. Space and related industries are generating new demands in investment and skilled personnel, and this city and this State, and this region, will share greatly in this growth. What was once the furthest outpost on the old frontier of the West will be the furthest outpost on the new frontier of science and space. Houston, your City of Houston, with its Manned Spacecraft Center, will become the heart of a large scientific and engineering community. During the next 5 years the National Aeronautics and Space Administration expects to double the number of scientists and engineers in this area, to increase its outlays for salaries and expenses to $60 million a year; to invest some $200 million in plant and laboratory facilities; and to direct or contract for new space efforts over $1 billion from this Center in this City.

To be sure, all this costs us all a good deal of money. This year¹s space budget is three times what it was in January 1961, and it is greater than the space budget of the previous eight years combined. That budget now stands at $5,400 million a year--a staggering sum, though somewhat less than we pay for cigarettes and cigars every year. Space expenditures will soon rise some more, from 40 cents per person per week to more than 50 cents a week for every man, woman and child in the United Stated, for we have given this program a high national priority--even though I realize that this is in some measure an act of faith and vision, for we do not now know what benefits await us.

But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun--almost as hot as it is here today--and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out--then we must be bold.

I'm the one who is doing all the work, so we just want you to stay cool for a minute. [laughter]

However, I think we're going to do it, and I think that we must pay what needs to be paid. I don't think we ought to waste any money, but I think we ought to do the job. And this will be done in the decade of the sixties. It may be done while some of you are still here at school at this college and university. It will be done during the term of office of some of the people who sit here on this platform. But it will be done. And it will be done before the end of this decade.

I am delighted that this university is playing a part in putting a man on the moon as part of a great national effort of the United States of America.

Many years ago the great British explorer George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked why did he want to climb it. He said, "Because it is there."

Well, space is there, and we're going to climb it, and the moon and the planets are there, and new hopes for knowledge and peace are there. And, therefore, as we set sail we ask God's blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.

Thank you.

A famous speech from just over 50 years ago. If we ignore the obvious cold-war rhetoric, doesn't it apply to us today at least as much as it did then? Should we not go to Mars and mine the asteroids just because they're there and we can? The easy thing would be to avoid it, but when has mankind ever taken the easy way? We do things because others say these things are impossible to do.

Our survival and prosperity may very well depend on it.

[Harry Smith]

A famous speech from just over 50 years ago. If we ignore the obvious cold-war rhetoric, doesn't it apply to us today at least as much as it did then? Should we not go to Mars and mine the asteroids just because they're there and we can? The easy thing would be to avoid it, but when has mankind ever taken the easy way? We do things because others say these things are impossible to do.

Our survival and prosperity may very well depend on it.

Your can't argue with John Kennnedy

[xmojox]

Your can't argue with John Kennnedy

Nope. :)

[Hunter_Steel]

Well, as the famous line in Star Trek says:

"To Go Boldy. Where No Man Has Gone Before."

We can't think of what is possible in the next 20 years. But what we can think of, is that we can push ourselves to make what can do is think of how we can push ourselves and the limits to bringing that time from 20 years to atleast 15 years or 7 years. Just like that speech, I would rather send 10 people to mars by 2020 or 2025, and would happily go there myself, than wait till 2030 and hope that man has had the thinking capacity to develop the technology needed. And distances are mere numbers which can be crossed in less time than previously thought. Why wait for the tech to be developed, when you can develop it yourself in less time with a team of highly skilled technicians and a dream.

~Hunter

[Harry Smith]

Well, as the famous line in Star Trek says:

"To Go Boldy. Where No Man Has Gone Before."

We can't think of what is possible in the next 20 years. But what we can think of, is that we can push ourselves to make what can do is think of how we can push ourselves and the limits to bringing that time from 20 years to atleast 15 years or 7 years. Just like that speech, I would rather send 10 people to mars by 2020 or 2025, and would happily go there myself, than wait till 2030 and hope that man has had the thinking capacity to develop the technology needed. And distances are mere numbers which can be crossed in less time than previously thought. Why wait for the tech to be developed, when you can develop it yourself in less time with a team of highly skilled technicians and a dream.

~Hunter

Despite the fact that I support the motion of expansion, I still think you have to be reasonable with your argument. I can't see us getting people there in 7 years, these projects always take longer than planned. We just need to hope that the economy picks up.

[Hunter_Steel]

If the US and NASA won't do it, its up to private companies to do it. But I think that the private companies should all join together and create one huge conglomerate. Look at Space-X and Planetary Resources.

Space-X and Planetary Resources will work together to get supplies and things into space for mining asteroids, but it can happen that Space-X can be contracted by other companies to help them get their projects into space. Like the Dutch Company planning to send 10 guys to Mars every 5 - 10 years. They'll need to get into space, what better way than the contract the company that recently in 2012 successfully docked with and resupplied the ISS?

The world can only but benefit on these things.

First of all, what I didn't provide earlier:


Mars One Project (http://mars-one.com/en/)

Planetary Resources (www.planetaryresources.com)

Space-X (http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php)

NASA's Ion Drive or Ion Thruster (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/about/fs21grc.html)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Ion_Engine_Test_Firing_-_GPN-2000-000482.jpg/375px-Ion_Engine_Test_Firing_-_GPN-2000-000482.jpg

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/images/content/216928main_ds1_ionengine_226.jpg

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/712979main_NEXT_LDT_Thrusterhi-res_946-710.jpg

http://0.tqn.com/d/chemistry/1/0/l/i/halleffectthruster.jpg

These are real images taken by NASA at their testing of the Ion Drives, one is a CG image for a concept of Ion Drive.

~Hunter

[TheBigUnit]

You're asking an ignorant question. The moon is our closest planetary body. Why wouldn't we go to the moon?


What would we gain if we go back to the moon? As far as we know the moon has some water we could use if need be, we went to the moon to win a race last time, besides I don't really think we should mine the moon for the sake of not destroying it

Europa is also much harder to hit than Mars. Whereas Mars is a giant planet that has much to offer, Europa is one of many moons. While I agree that studying Europa is much more interesting (see: http://www.space.com/20536-jupiter-moon-europa-life-ingredients.html) I feel we should start prioritizing certain missions, such as those to Mars. The sooner we have one common goal, the sooner that goal will be accomplished. Colonization of worlds within our solar system is the first step, and I'd like to see progress in my lifetime.


A mars mission would be nice but unfortunatly NASA doesn't have the budget to do as much as it did before, I think it would be better if companies do mars missions, europa as far as we know would be our biggest bet in finding life even more than mars

Mining asteroids will be a great achievement once we do it. It'll be like landing on the moon; everyone in the world will be waiting, but once it's over with, interest will die down. Mining asteroids will become vital if we ever become the space-faring race we could be

Mining asteriods would be the most profitable thing nasa could probably do for usa's interests

[xmojox]

The Mars One Project is really interesting. Like the ultimate reality show....

[TheBigUnit]

If the US and NASA won't do it, its up to private companies to do it. But I think that the private companies should all join together and create one huge conglomerate. Look at Space-X and Planetary Resources.

Space-X and Planetary Resources will work together to get supplies and things into space for mining asteroids, but it can happen that Space-X can be contracted by other companies to help them get their projects into space. Like the Dutch Company planning to send 10 guys to Mars every 5 - 10 years. They'll need to get into space, what better way than the contract the company that recently in 2012 successfully docked with and resupplied the ISS?

The world can only but benefit on these things.

First of all, what I didn't provide earlier:


Mars One Project (http://mars-one.com/en/)

Planetary Resources (www.planetaryresources.com)

Space-X (http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php)

NASA's Ion Drive or Ion Thruster (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/about/fs21grc.html)

image (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Ion_Engine_Test_Firing_-_GPN-2000-000482.jpg/375px-Ion_Engine_Test_Firing_-_GPN-2000-000482.jpg)

image (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/images/content/216928main_ds1_ionengine_226.jpg)

image (http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/712979main_NEXT_LDT_Thrusterhi-res_946-710.jpg)

image (http://0.tqn.com/d/chemistry/1/0/l/i/halleffectthruster.jpg)

These are real images taken by NASA at their testing of the Ion Drives, one is a CG image for a concept of Ion Drive.

~Hunter

How do they work?

[xmojox]

How do they work?

Follow the links and read.

[Hunter_Steel]

The Mars One Project is really interesting. Like the ultimate reality show....

True dat. Would be interesting to see it on T.V lol

~Hunter

[xmojox]

True dat. Would be interesting to see it on T.V lol

~Hunter

From the way the website reads that's how they plan on funding a lot of it: through TV advertising. Mars One owns like 90% of the media company that's gonna broadcast it all.

[Kuurachan]

I really( REALLY) don`t know much about what goes on space-wise. I mean, I would know if aliens came( XD) but as for like launches into space or missions and whatever, I don`t watch that much news( ha, part of the reason is because my family doesn`t own a tv) but I am going to start looking things up, since with Korea and the rising heat going on, of which I have no idea what is, I most likely should >~> Why would space travel be a bad thing? I mean, if the people are trained like they should be and ok with spending years outside of Earth, I don't see a problem. It helps us learns and gosh darn we really haven't learned that much, at least compared to how many thongs there are TO learn! :D

[Hunter_Steel]

Well, best way to get into grips with technology and the present is by researching things on the internet. (reason I know alot on this topic is because of that). I also plan to work in this field, so I have to know alot.

What is interesting, is space can pick up the world's economy from its feet. It only needs to be done. The first explorers on the ocean didn't wait for a huge budget from a royal family or treasury. They used their own money, supplied their own ship/s and set sail onto the great open ocean. The first explorers of land did the same thing. So my question is: Why in the world should we wait four the US to do something, when we can do it ourselves, with our own team/s, our own money and funding from certain companies, and our own designs.

I won't wait for NASA to get money from the US government to get a ship up there, I'll use my own company's money, and funding from other companies to get up there.

~Hunter

[Ajmichael]

Too far away, we can do it in much less time.

~Hunter

Can I ask who is going to fund all of this so we can get there by 2020? The NASA Curiosity rover project has cost billions of pounds to develop and implement.

[xmojox]

Can I ask who is going to fund all of this so we can get there by 2020? The NASA Curiosity rover project has cost billions of pounds to develop and implement.

Follow the above link to the Mars One Project. They seem to have a fair handle on what they're doing.

[Hunter_Steel]

Independent Companies will sponsor the space projects. The more companies see that they can make their stocks and profits soar, the more they'll tribute to companies already planning to go into space. This way, there's no need to wait for government backing in funding. And the government can also then focus on stabilizing it's economy while letting private and independent companies work in space.

This makes it easier for more people to get into space. And like I said before, trips to space can become as regular as flying across the Atlantic or the Pacific. And perhaps ordinary civilians one day can buy a ticket to fly from Earth to Mars for either a vacation, or to start new lives or perhaps just seeking the ability to say: "I was on the Red Planet!"

Or perhaps using the O'Neill Cylinders and building Space Colonies through out the Solar System. Its not a matter of technology, but time to build one and money. Building a 33km x 7km colony is going to cost trillions of dollars.

Here's what they look like and the source:

http://www.planetzebes.net/oyw/profiles/oneilco.gif

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100925211137/spacecolonization/images/5/50/IslandThree_Interior1.jpg

http://www.cartographersguild.com/attachments/sci-fi-modern-mapping/16956d1253559020-how-map-oneill-cylinder-spacecolony1.jpg

And the source:

O'Niell Cylinder or O'Neill Colony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Neill_cylinder)

This can just benefit mankind, and can be created from some fairly basic technology, and no advanced technology needed to be developed to create the artificial gravity. Just the rotation of the cylinder is needed.

~Hunter

[Ajmichael]

Or perhaps using the O'Neill Cylinders and building Space Colonies through out the Solar System. Its not a matter of technology, but time to build one and money. Building a 33km x 7km colony is going to cost trillions of dollars.
~Hunter

I think you are underestimating just how much it is going to cost, and how much money is actually available to pour into this. The US is currently trillions of dollars in debt, and sweeping cuts in spending, even in private companies, mean that there is a lot less money around. Unless there is a profit to be made from it, no company on earth is going to put money into it. Could you explain where a profit is to be made?

[Hunter_Steel]

Building a self sufficient orbital space colony has a lot of profit in it. Making a new place for humans to live in space can bring in billions, if not trillions of dollars or pounds to the market. Think about it. You can spend nearly 10 trillion or more on a project that large, make it habitable. Then let people start to move into it. Make businesses in there, can research more technology that you cannot simply research on Earth, and also lets asteroid miners have a home they can go to after doing their work on an asteroid everyday. The closer you can be to asteroids, the better it is for the economy in ways of using colonies as not just habitats, but also other colonies can be used as industrial sectors, while others can be used to grow purely just crops, others can be used to grow livestock, and you won't have to worry about pests or anything because the Colonies won't have them. Meaning its a mostly clean environment. But I doubt we'd be safe from the common cold, or the flu, but can be safe from malaria and other viruses that are caused by insects. Those colonies can then be used to help end the world food shortage. And industrial colonies can be used to move factories from Earth, and make industry in space. Meaning we could clean our own atmosphere and make it mostly breathable again.

So in a sense, going to Mars and/or building orbital space colonies can both boost the economy in a sense of moving some industry from Earth and cleaning our atmosphere to also ending food shortages, and allowing more companies to invest in building in the vast open reaches of space.

Got a fuel shortage? No problem, just build a fuel depot and harvester by Jupiter to harvest it's Hydrogen atmosphere. I know my ideas are dreams at the same time, but putting some logic, and actually thinking, can produce economically viable ideas.

~Hunter

[Ajmichael]

It's not economically viable though! It is a tiny percentage of the population that would be able to afford the prices that would need to be charged for travel there if the project was to be viable at all! And that percentage is not going to want to mine asteroids for a living! Certainly nobody is going to finance the millions or even billions of pounds needed to migrate to a floating colony in space.

[Taryn98]

Space exploration is an important thing for us to have a greater understanding of the universe. In the process it could benefit us in many ways emotional/spiritual, economically, and in terms of resources. It's expensive to do, but a worthwhile cause for all mankind and I hope it continues in the future. I'd love to do it myslef if I ever had the chance.

[Hunter_Steel]

Taryn98 has the right mindset for space exploration.

Ajmicheal, think for a bit. About the long term benefits. The short term benefits aren't that good. And yes, you'd be surprised at how many miners would most likely leave work environments on Earth and go mine an asteroid. Simply because doing that is more about pioneering.

I hate the gravity personally. I feel heavy and weighed down by it. Give me Zero-G any day. I'd love to just float around. It is economically viable, and companies would most likely spend the trillions to get it right. Reason:

Profits. More and more profits. Its time to get our heads out of gravity, away from it, and think about Zero-G. The possibilities are endless, and I will perhaps be one of the people that help commercialize space.

Why?

Simply because I can and will.

~Hunter

[randomnessqueen]

i dont think its bad, but i dont think its necessary.
it takes a lot of resources, and there is so much else you could do with that.

[Hunter_Steel]

We have the resources to end world suffering via building this. Not just that, our planet is over crowded, and the more cities the build, the more animal species we kill off just so WE can live here and have more space to live. And the more cities we build, the more need there is for heavy factories that produce so much polution that in some areas, our atmosphere is barely breathable.

We have the resources to end this by moving into space. If we keep going as we are now, we might have to start destroying parts of the ocean so that we can live on Earth.

~Hunter