SpaceX and the prospects of Mars colonization.

[ericaltm]

Let's take the facts as they are. We couldn't go to Mars TODAY if we wanted. NOT with the guarantee that everything goes 100% as expected unless you are expecting to fail. But just as many years ago they started to make boats from cutting trees in half and then making room for 1 or 2 people to cruise ships and yachts today, this is the journey that we have to take to make things possible. Little steps, including big and small mistakes to achieve the goal.

In a way becoming a multi-planetary species is necessary due to that our solar system is moving slow and pretty much will be eaten up in millions of years. Going to Mars is step 1 of many many many to prevent the loss of our species.

[1714901045]

1714901045

[1714901045]

1714901045

[1714901045]

1714901045

[1714901045]

1714901045

[1714901045]

1714901045

[1714901045]

1714901045

[notbatman]

Show me scientific proof outer space is real, you're being sold a lie by SpaceX! Ask a scientist how much Mars weighs and they'll tell about how they use the gravitational constant "G" to calculate its weight. "G" is derived from an experiment that observed two heavy balls through a small hole in a 17th century shed.

They weigh Mars with heavy balls in a shed, this is their scientific proof that Mars is a giant heavy ball in the sky. You want to call me fucking mad for believing Mars is just a small light? This space shit is a total fucking scam.

But it was a pretty big shed lodge.

FTFY

[Spendulus]

Let's take the facts as they are. We couldn't go to Mars TODAY if we wanted. NOT with the guarantee that everything goes 100% as expected unless you are expecting to fail. But just as many years ago they started to make boats from cutting trees in half and then making room for 1 or 2 people to cruise ships and yachts today, this is the journey that we have to take to make things possible. Little steps, including big and small mistakes to achieve the goal.

In a way becoming a multi-planetary species is necessary due to that our solar system is moving slow and pretty much will be eaten up in millions of years. Going to Mars is step 1 of many many many to prevent the loss of our species.

Good insight, but the part bolded is unnecessary.

All those concepts of safety and 100% are maybe for public consumption, but things moving at huge rates of speed, going through pure vacuums, and entering planetary atmospheres hoping to slow down and land....

Those are dangerous things to do.

The death rate from the Shuttle flights was what, 2%?

[notbatman]

Let's take the facts as they are. We couldn't go to Mars TODAY if we wanted. NOT with the guarantee that everything goes 100% as expected unless you are expecting to fail. But just as many years ago they started to make boats from cutting trees in half and then making room for 1 or 2 people to cruise ships and yachts today, this is the journey that we have to take to make things possible. Little steps, including big and small mistakes to achieve the goal.

In a way becoming a multi-planetary species is necessary due to that our solar system is moving slow and pretty much will be eaten up in millions of years. Going to Mars is step 1 of many many many to prevent the loss of our species.

Good insight, but the part bolded is unnecessary.

All those concepts of safety and 100% are maybe for public consumption, but things moving at huge rates of speed, going through pure vacuums, and entering planetary atmospheres hoping to slow down and land....

Those are dangerous things to do.

The death rate from the Shuttle flights was what, 2%?

The idea of a hard vacuum next to a pressurized atmosphere without a barrier is ludicrous, what scientific proof do you have for outer space?

[Spendulus]

....
The idea of a hard vacuum next to a pressurized atmosphere without a barrier is ludicrous, what scientific proof do you have for outer space?

Indeed this is an erudite and profoundly stifling intellectual conflagration.

I submit the following reply for your consideration.

You are familiar with the Light Switch of course. These are everywhere, in most rooms. They are thought to turn light on and off. But in reality, what they do is quite different. They turn dark on and off.

Quite similarly, pressure switches are a complete falsehood. They are really vacuum switches.

From this you can see quite readily that dogs are cats, an monkeys are birds.

[Flying Hellfish]

From this you can see quite readily that dogs are cats, an monkeys are birds.

Logic on this one checks out solid

Internet picture proves it.

[Spendulus]

From this you can see quite readily that dogs are cats, an monkeys are birds.

Logic on this one checks out solid

Internet picture proves it.

It's so unfair, that we are trapped in a small point of light. Below is the Land that we Should Have, the Flat Land of Mars.

[Luis_Gray]

Show me scientific proof outer space is real, you're being sold a lie by SpaceX! Ask a scientist how much Mars weighs and they'll tell about how they use the gravitational constant "G" to calculate its weight. "G" is derived from an experiment that observed two heavy balls through a small hole in a 17th century shed.

They weigh Mars with heavy balls in a shed, this is their scientific proof that Mars is a giant heavy ball in the sky. You want to call me fucking mad for believing Mars is just a small light? This space shit is a total fucking scam.

Is people going to outer space not enough proof to you that it is real? They talk about their experience and make videos and take photos. How about the fact that even people on earth can watch the astronauts launch off into space. Then you see them return after a month. What is your theory on that one? You think they are just hiding up in the sky somewhere for a month and they come back down to help spread lies? It's not just SpaceX "selling lies". It's most governments and scientists in the world. Are you a flat-earther, by chance?

[bkbirge]

Musk can't resist the temptation to public announce very tight dates. He should protect his reputation (and Space X's one) better, with more prudent dates.

I think it's good that he has aggressive mission timelines. I can tell you for sure that his successes have very much put a fire in the bellies of other aerospace companies to compete, which leads to improved access, economics, and capability for all of us.

[Spendulus]

No doubt, if we waited 50 years more, we could go for much less money and lesser risks, but why give the glory to our sons and grandsons?

Since our fathers and grandfathers left this opportunity, let's take it ourselves.

Well said.

The reason is the large number of materials and processes which must be tested, and then implemented, and then made safe and reliable on Mars, before people could possibly actually lived there.

[bkbirge]

No doubt, if we waited 50 years more, we could go for much less money and lesser risks, but why give the glory to our sons and grandsons?

Since our fathers and grandfathers left this opportunity, let's take it ourselves.

Well said.

The reason is the large number of materials and processes which must be tested, and then implemented, and then made safe and reliable on Mars, before people could possibly actually lived there.

The impediment is not technical or workforce related. It's political and fiscal. The minute someone shows there is real money to be made by sending people there it will be done. Most people are not big picture thinkers, it takes the Musks of the world to push in the direction we need to go but it takes those being pushed to get off their duffs and turn it into a new normal rather than an eccentric industrialist's pipe dream.

[Spendulus]

No doubt, if we waited 50 years more, we could go for much less money and lesser risks, but why give the glory to our sons and grandsons?

Since our fathers and grandfathers left this opportunity, let's take it ourselves.

Well said.

The reason is the large number of materials and processes which must be tested, and then implemented, and then made safe and reliable on Mars, before people could possibly actually lived there.

The impediment is not technical or workforce related. It's political and fiscal. The minute someone shows there is real money to be made by sending people there it will be done. Most people are not big picture thinkers, it takes the Musks of the world to push in the direction we need to go but it takes those being pushed to get off their duffs and turn it into a new normal rather than an eccentric industrialist's pipe dream.

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

[Luis_Gray]

No doubt, if we waited 50 years more, we could go for much less money and lesser risks, but why give the glory to our sons and grandsons?

Since our fathers and grandfathers left this opportunity, let's take it ourselves.

Well said.

The reason is the large number of materials and processes which must be tested, and then implemented, and then made safe and reliable on Mars, before people could possibly actually lived there.

The impediment is not technical or workforce related. It's political and fiscal. The minute someone shows there is real money to be made by sending people there it will be done. Most people are not big picture thinkers, it takes the Musks of the world to push in the direction we need to go but it takes those being pushed to get off their duffs and turn it into a new normal rather than an eccentric industrialist's pipe dream.

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

Haha, you say that as if there's a building supplies shop on Mars. How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars? I don't think they have their own economy over there. If they do, they're doing a very good job of hiding it. Haha! I think what you're trying to say is that there's nothing on Mars that could be sold for enough on Earth to make it worth the trip. I could see that being the case.

[BADecker]

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

Haha, you say that as if there's a building supplies shop on Mars. How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars? I don't think they have their own economy over there. If they do, they're doing a very good job of hiding it. Haha! I think what you're trying to say is that there's nothing on Mars that could be sold for enough on Earth to make it worth the trip. I could see that being the case.

"How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars?"

Try jumping to Mars. Get the latest position of Mars from some star chart, go out into the parking lot at just the right time, and jump real hard. Did you make it to Mars? No? Well how about this?

Buy an airplane and fly to Mars. I mean, all it will cost you is the price of the airplane and fuel. Did that work? No? Well, how about this.

Crawl on top of a NASA Saturn rocket, and have NASA fly you to Mars. Did it work? Was it cheap? No? Well, you could always go back to a bottle rocket idea. It's cheaper that way.

What is there on Mars that is going to justify the expense of going there? So far we haven't found any justification for the expense of sending our robot vehicles there. So far it has all been a waste of society time and money. So far it has done more to increase poverty on earth than we could ever imagine.

[kolsernik]

It is easy to find the means to organize a flight to Mars.If the prospects of such a flight are scientifically and economically proven, there will be a lot of investors.I hope that in my lifetime people will visit Mars

[BADecker]

Countries are too busy fighting wars, and preparing for more wars, to make the time for going to Mars. All the talk about moon and Mars shots, exists simply to distract the people from the fascist military industrial complex building up more armaments for war.

[Luis_Gray]

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

Haha, you say that as if there's a building supplies shop on Mars. How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars? I don't think they have their own economy over there. If they do, they're doing a very good job of hiding it. Haha! I think what you're trying to say is that there's nothing on Mars that could be sold for enough on Earth to make it worth the trip. I could see that being the case.

"How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars?"

Try jumping to Mars. Get the latest position of Mars from some star chart, go out into the parking lot at just the right time, and jump real hard. Did you make it to Mars? No? Well how about this?

Buy an airplane and fly to Mars. I mean, all it will cost you is the price of the airplane and fuel. Did that work? No? Well, how about this.

Crawl on top of a NASA Saturn rocket, and have NASA fly you to Mars. Did it work? Was it cheap? No? Well, you could always go back to a bottle rocket idea. It's cheaper that way.

What is there on Mars that is going to justify the expense of going there? So far we haven't found any justification for the expense of sending our robot vehicles there. So far it has all been a waste of society time and money. So far it has done more to increase poverty on earth than we could ever imagine.

I was just responding to Spendulus's comment. He/she said that, "There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible." It obviously costs money on Earth to get to Mars. I just thought it sounded funny to talk about the cost of things on Mars. They can't actually have a financial cost if they have no economy. It's sort of hard to tell if investing in trips to Mars has been a waste or not. Time will tell. It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings, as they say.

[BADecker]

I was just responding to Spendulus's comment. He/she said that, "There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible." It obviously costs money on Earth to get to Mars. I just thought it sounded funny to talk about the cost of things on Mars. They can't actually have a financial cost if they have no economy. It's sort of hard to tell if investing in trips to Mars has been a waste or not. Time will tell. It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings, as they say.

I agree with your point that it may not be over til the fat lady sings. But the fat lady hasn't even started dress rehearsal so to speak. That's how expensive going to Mars in any practical way is.

[Spendulus]

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

Haha, you say that as if there's a building supplies shop on Mars. How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars? I don't think they have their own economy over there. If they do, they're doing a very good job of hiding it. Haha! I think what you're trying to say is that there's nothing on Mars that could be sold for enough on Earth to make it worth the trip. I could see that being the case.

"How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars?"

Try jumping to Mars. Get the latest position of Mars from some star chart, go out into the parking lot at just the right time, and jump real hard. Did you make it to Mars? No? Well how about this?

Buy an airplane and fly to Mars. I mean, all it will cost you is the price of the airplane and fuel. Did that work? No? Well, how about this.

Crawl on top of a NASA Saturn rocket, and have NASA fly you to Mars. Did it work? Was it cheap? No? Well, you could always go back to a bottle rocket idea. It's cheaper that way.

What is there on Mars that is going to justify the expense of going there? So far we haven't found any justification for the expense of sending our robot vehicles there. So far it has all been a waste of society time and money. So far it has done more to increase poverty on earth than we could ever imagine.

I was just responding to Spendulus's comment. He/she said that, "There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible." It obviously costs money on Earth to get to Mars. I just thought it sounded funny to talk about the cost of things on Mars. They can't actually have a financial cost if they have no economy. It's sort of hard to tell if investing in trips to Mars has been a waste or not. Time will tell. It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings, as they say.

Those are confused ideas and trains of thought.

Every robot probe sent to Mars (or anywhere) is a complex exercise in economics.  

An assumption was made earlier by someone that a functioning economy on Mars that would require goods shipped back to Each. That is a false premise. Jus think about it. Consider a small machine that made a wheel from local materials. Future missions could buy wheels from that operation. Send two rovers instead of one because the payload is lighter since you don't need to take wheels.

That's a local economy on a small scale. And on the other side, a decision to build and send totally self contained rovers maximizes income and work for Earth bound aerospace companies. That's nothing BUT a decision based on economics.

Having said that, it's worth noting that colonization of Mars does not start when people are sent there. It starts with simple attempts to isolate raw materials with robotic operations, materials of which the extraction of is essential to human life.  In the chemical industry these would be called "pilot plants." The likes of NASA and Musk is not competent to send and operate these types of facilities.

[Luis_Gray]

That will never be the case.

There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible.

Haha, you say that as if there's a building supplies shop on Mars. How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars? I don't think they have their own economy over there. If they do, they're doing a very good job of hiding it. Haha! I think what you're trying to say is that there's nothing on Mars that could be sold for enough on Earth to make it worth the trip. I could see that being the case.

"How can something be cheap or expensive on Mars?"

Try jumping to Mars. Get the latest position of Mars from some star chart, go out into the parking lot at just the right time, and jump real hard. Did you make it to Mars? No? Well how about this?

Buy an airplane and fly to Mars. I mean, all it will cost you is the price of the airplane and fuel. Did that work? No? Well, how about this.

Crawl on top of a NASA Saturn rocket, and have NASA fly you to Mars. Did it work? Was it cheap? No? Well, you could always go back to a bottle rocket idea. It's cheaper that way.

What is there on Mars that is going to justify the expense of going there? So far we haven't found any justification for the expense of sending our robot vehicles there. So far it has all been a waste of society time and money. So far it has done more to increase poverty on earth than we could ever imagine.

I was just responding to Spendulus's comment. He/she said that, "There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible." It obviously costs money on Earth to get to Mars. I just thought it sounded funny to talk about the cost of things on Mars. They can't actually have a financial cost if they have no economy. It's sort of hard to tell if investing in trips to Mars has been a waste or not. Time will tell. It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings, as they say.

Those are confused ideas and trains of thought.

Every robot probe sent to Mars (or anywhere) is a complex exercise in economics.  

An assumption was made earlier by someone that a functioning economy on Mars that would require goods shipped back to Each. That is a false premise. Jus think about it. Consider a small machine that made a wheel from local materials. Future missions could buy wheels from that operation. Send two rovers instead of one because the payload is lighter since you don't need to take wheels.

That's a local economy on a small scale. And on the other side, a decision to build and send totally self contained rovers maximizes income and work for Earth bound aerospace companies. That's nothing BUT a decision based on economics.

Having said that, it's worth noting that colonization of Mars does not start when people are sent there. It starts with simple attempts to isolate raw materials with robotic operations, materials of which the extraction of is essential to human life.  In the chemical industry these would be called "pilot plants." The likes of NASA and Musk is not competent to send and operate these types of facilities.

I guess it's just a question of semantics. You said, "There are no materials which are cheap enough on Mars and expensive enough on Earth to every make freight plausible." Typically, when you said something is cheap or expensive somewhere, you are referring to the price it costs to purchase it. When you say something is cheap on Mars it seems strange to me. Everything is free on Mars, since as far as we know, there's nobody up there claiming they own it already. The thing that is not free, would be to extract these materials. We would have to spend a lot of currency here on Earth to purchase needed materials and motivate people to do the necessary work. Maybe it would be better to say, "There are no materials which would be cheap enough to extract on Mars and valuable enough on Earth to every make freight plausible."