Should we invest in Mars Exploration

[Ryan_m_b]

It's not like we "Mars colonizers" demand that every last dollar of every country of the Earth must be spent on Mars program. Don't worry.

No but it will be extremely expensive. We're talking about an ecological and economical closed-system built in space. That's vastly more complicated than a few inflatable huts for a science outpost (which would also be hugely expensive). Unless automation progresses to the point where humans barely have to do anything such a colony would essentially be a city-state. Considering the ISS cost over $100 billion dollars how much do you think a city of several hundred thousand people would be? Even with cheaper launches it's still a titanic investment over time.

If you define "exceedingly rare" as "will surely happen", yes. Sun will surely fry this planet.

Year 2000 was exceedingly rare right up until 31 Dec 1999. In fact, thousands of programmers were evidently operating under assumption it won't ever happen. :D

We have hundreds of millions of years before the Earth becomes uninhabitable due to changes in the Sun's life cycle. For all intents and purposes that issue is as relevant to our budgetary concerns IRL as the heat death of the universe.

 

[nikkkom]

No but it will be extremely expensive. We're talking about an ecological and economical closed-system built in space. That's vastly more complicated than a few inflatable huts for a science outpost (which would also be hugely expensive). Unless automation progresses to the point where humans barely have to do anything such a colony would essentially be a city-state. Considering the ISS cost over $100 billion dollars

I consider NASA manned space program and ISS in particular to be a very badly managed program.

 

[nikkkom]

We have hundreds of millions of years before the Earth becomes uninhabitable due to changes in the Sun's life cycle.

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before someone does push the big red button and thousands of mushroom clouds pop up everywhere?

Do we have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before Yellowstone Supervolcano erupts (estimated 1000 cubic kilometers of lava)?

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before our telescopes see a 250km wide icy ball coming for us from Oort cloud?

 

[sophiecentaur]

There are far more immediate concerns like ecological degradation, climate change, resource shortages and global tension.

I tried that argument way back but it somehow doesn't seem to count and the fact that it benefits everyone, rather than a few enthusiasts, doesn't seem to count either.

I consider NASA manned space program and ISS in particular to be a very badly managed program.

Doesn't that give a clue about how future programmes could well be managed? Why? Because that sort of programme has the usual problem of its basic agenda which is to do both with the glamour of Space and the glamour of 'International Co operative Endeavours'. As with modern weddings and holidays, the real cost benefit comes way down the list of considerations. All big projects risk the same sort of problems unless something more tangible is involved and when the vanity aspect gets some tight control from the suppliers of the money.

 

[nikkkom]

Doesn't that give a clue about how future programmes could well be managed? Why? Because that sort of programme has the usual problem of its basic agenda which is to do both with the glamour of Space and the glamour of 'International Co operative Endeavours'.

It has nothing to do with being a space program. SpaceX is also having a "space program" - and it runs incredibly well. They are simultaneously wiping the floor with ULA and Roskosmos. Ariane and SLS are next to the chopping block.

NASA is a govt program. ISS is, on top of that, an international program. That's the problem.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before someone does push the big red button and thousands of mushroom clouds pop up everywhere?

Do we have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before Yellowstone Supervolcano erupts (estimated 1000 cubic kilometers of lava)?

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before our telescopes see a 250km wide icy ball coming for us from Oort cloud?

I would say that we have a maximum of thousands, going on millions of years before the potential instability of the human race causes it to self destruct. We need to look within ourselves for the potential sources of our destruction. Much more subtle and very unglamorous and I fear that we inherently don't have it in us to sort that out. OK for our lifetime and for a few more generations though - I hope.

 

[russ_watters]

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before someone does push the big red button and thousands of mushroom clouds pop up everywhere?

You're using the "jump around" tactic to try to avoid developing your logic in enough detail to see where it leads (failure). But here you accidentally just agreed with @Ryan_m_b that our concerns are more local. Directly: yes, global nuclear war is a more pressing concern than the evolution of the Sun, which is why it is actively being dealt with, and escaping the Earth before the Sun boils us is not.

But more broadly, "the sun boiling us" is the only such problem that can't have a local solution (and that's even setting aside that "Go to Mars!" isn't a permanent solution to that either!).

 

[sophiecentaur]

It has nothing to do with being a space program. SpaceX is also having a "space program" - and it runs incredibly well. They are simultaneously wiping the floor with ULA and Roskosmos. Ariane and SLS are next to the chopping block.

NASA is a govt program. ISS is, on top of that, an international program. That's the problem.

It worries me that all I ever seem to read about Space X is Musk. He is like a Roman Emperor. What will happen once he passes on? No question that he has fantastic drive and that he has produced some brilliant stuff but so did Jobs. Jobs has gone. RIP
And where is the overall control in such projects? It's a new direction for the race. (human not space) Perhaps it will be Internationalism that will plunge us into a horrific World situation. (Too soon for colonisation to rescue us)

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before someone does push the big red button and thousands of mushroom clouds pop up everywhere?

Do we have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before Yellowstone Supervolcano erupts (estimated 1000 cubic kilometers of lava)?

Do we also have guaranteed hundreds of millions of years before our telescopes see a 250km wide icy ball coming for us from Oort cloud?

To different extents those are all unknowns, or at least unclear, in terms of their imminence and destructive potential. None of them guarantee the end of the human race (though they may end industrial society as we know it, leaving hunter-gatherer and primitive cities alive). We have plenty of known risks that we could be funnelling much more money into solving. It's not inconceivable from an engineering and economic perspective that the entire world could swap to nuclear and renewables over the next few decades for example. Less likely to happen due to politics but technically within our capabilities, whereas a closed ecosystem on a space habitat or other planet is not.

Regardless let's say we go with the lifeboat idea. Why space? Why don't you champion the R&D and construction of a self-sufficient city-state buried underground? Or undersea? Or underground under the sea floor? Such an endeavour requires just as much technical development but has the added bonus of being right here on Earth so we don't have the added expense of having to ship things to space. Bury it deep enough and none of your proposed crises would be an issue. Even nuclear war, because even supposing one side survives and decides to break into the city to kill everyone a) mankind still survives in this scenario (your purported goal) and b) if they're that set on genociding their enemies being in space won't help you.

 

[nikkkom]

Regardless let's say we go with the lifeboat idea. Why space? Why don't you champion the R&D and construction of a self-sufficient city-state buried underground? Or undersea? Or underground under the sea floor?

Because it does not help with "Yellowstone Supervolcano KABOOM", "Sun output +10%" cases and a few more I did not mention.

Going to space solves all cases.

 

[russ_watters]

What "trillions"? A sensible Mars manned mission would require ~$100B. We (globally) spend more on booze every year!

That's bait and switch. If you want to justify Mars exploration as a "save the human race" goal, you must examine the cost of a "save the human race" program.

 

[fresh_42]

The main subject of this thread has apparently got out of focus. As I'm also sure this wasn't our last opportunity to talk out Mars exploration, I will close this one now. (Pun not intended.)

I'd like to thank everybody for participating in this exciting discussion. In case there are new science articles, views or questions about the subject, you're invited to start a new thread about it. However, please try to avoid political discussions and phrases which are suited to heat the debate without any scientific foundation. They would only destroy the usual level of quality in our debates which you can expect from us.

Thread closed.