Slashdot Mirror
Arctic Research Station: A Step Toward Mars
Phrogman writes: "There is some great information on the Mar's Society's Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station which is being set up in the 20km diamater Haughton meteorite crater on Devon Island in Canada's high arctic. They will be assembling a complete simulation of a manned Mars lander there and conducting research leading towards a human mission to Mars. The lander was built in Denver, and is currently undergoing final checks before being flown up to the crater by the U.S. Marine Corps. There is detailed information on the lander itself here.
The project is a joint venture with NASA, and is sponsored by the Mars Society, Discovery Channel, and of course flashline.com (thus the name). There is also excellent 360 degree Quicktime(tm) photos of the entire region on the official website for the Haughton-Mars project. Marc Boucher of spaceref.com is actually onsite at the base camp and will be reporting on events there over the next few months."
The attitude seems to be pragmatic -- if we want to go to Mars, we need to start building the infrastructure, make the public aware of the possibilities, demo Mars vehicles, etc.
If they need a greenhouse, I've got a great design, it can be made out of extra garbage lying around and some dirty old tarps. And I saw something just like it on a movie that praised itself for its scientific accuracy, so i'm sure it'll work.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
...there was actually some spammer (www.martianconsulate.com) who advertised getting tracts of land on Mars for sooper cheep(tm) prices. Too bad the spammer got LARTed a while back.
:)
So just be warned, if we ever do colonize Mars, we may come across some clueless newbies claiming to own Martian land
--
--
The real Raunchola isn't cool enough to have any imposters
Good morning! Been sleeping well?
How is it that crap like this thread doesn't get modded as off-topic?
I'm not going to get involved with the US/Canada pissing contest, but whoever said the moderation system here sucks was dead on.
That being said, I think privatization of the space program is an excellent idea. Our governmentS (US and Canada) should be spending their funding on solving problems at home before looking at exploration. NASA puts a lot of commercial satellites in the air using our tax dollars, but we can't get more cops to chase the crackheads off our streets, or better yet, chase them off our streets and put them in rehab instead of prison.
To sum up:
slashdot moderation: needs work
space program: sweet, but improperly funded
sophomoric country comparisons: yawn
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
I also failed in my heroic quest to read Red Mars. I left off when i noticed all the psudo mythology stuff starting, about page 50. But Antarctica is grear, really. I grew up in Christchurch New Zealand, the jumping off point for NZ and US trips to Antarctica, so we learned a lot about it in school. KSR went down as a visiting writer, and the book brings out the impact how the environment and landscape affect people personally, which (I understand) was part of what he was getting at in the bit of Red Mars he was talking about. But I liked the characters a WHOLE lot more in Antarctica. There's still a load of heavy progressive political discussions on almost every relevent topic, but even they can be rewarding; I was gripped by an explanation of the discovery of a fossilised frog. But there's also some good action, including a flotilla of ecowarriors who travel anrtarctic storms in minaturised airships, or the stricken tourist team recreating the Worst Journey in the World, a remote ice trek.
--
hmmm. none of your aggrivated responses would happen to mean YHBT, eh?
/. troll, not your typical redneck...
Anyway, the trip to AK is long and fierce. rubber is the first to go under harsh weather, pressuming you keep a mechanically sound vehicle. I needed a wiper blade- but did anyone help out a poor traveller? No. Did they grub for US dollars at the first opportunity? why yes! why is that? THEY SUCK.
I can give it up for penecillin, that's a very good 'invention' or discovery maybe. but canadarm? that is a bitch-ass accesory to some real US of A greatness.
As for being a hick or redneck, I am a vaguely effeminate city boy and a
Now, why can't any of you freakin canucks answer for the mullet problem? or the lameness in not being able to maintain a fricking MAJOR HIGHWAY?
We used to measure cost in beers and CDs. A CD was worth about 6 beers. You want to buy something? Figure out how many beers and CDs you could buy instead ;)
--
It's a
-- Danny Vermin
I mean, just think:
An hostile environment which can weed out the morons (none of this pansy "Tropical Resort" crap)
A bunch of scientists in a closed space. If they're anything like the scientists, grad students, or OSS programmers I know, the political infighting will be better than any soap opera
Tons of nifty new tech gadgets from Nasa (or assorted VC start-ups, paying to be showcased)
And the looming spectre of the US Military in the background. (ya gotta have a bad guy)
To hell with Survivor or Big Brother, I wanna see this.
--sugarman--
You can get even better stuff from the friendly biker gangs a few hundred kilometers to the east in French Columbia.
As a person who's known the owner of flashline.com for quite some time, I hope I can shed a little light on that. Basically, he thought it was a really cool idea that he wanted to throw some money at. Sure, there was the fact that it was some advertising for flashline.com, but that wasn't the primary reason for doing it. To quote him as best I can when he mentioned the sponsorship to us late last year, "Yea, we could have spent some money on sponsoring a sporting event or something, but here I feel like the money is doing something good" ** Martin
They're really setting up a backdrop against which to fake another series of "Moon Landings" and in desperate need a plausible cover story.
Think about it - NASA obviously can't _really_ be practising for Mars when they haven't even managed to put a man on the moon yet!
(I hear the gravity is weaker in Canada)
What happened to the Mars lander we sent out there? Did we ever regain control of it again? I think that it would be interesting to find out in the future that a band of wild sand pigmy's scrapped our $5 million mars lander and made it into cheap trinkets.
Maybe we can trade them some beads for half of the planet!
-S
Scott Ruttencutter
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
...and the males will all be named Brian.
obTroll: I will take these hot grits from you with my hand, and pour them down my pants.
It doesn't matter extremely if the US government doesn't go, as long as somebody goes. I'd prefer Mars to be settled by people from a culture of democratic institutions and a recent frontier, but in a pinch anything will do.
--
Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
There is precicely zero commercial interest in anything outside geosynchronous orbit.
That's simply untrue. There is tremendous commercial interest in raw materials and energy, both of which are available in the solar system (and except for solar energy, all beyond GEO) in quantities millions of times what we can extract on Earth.
The problem is simple: it just costs too much right now to get past GEO, and it is beyond our tested capabilities to bring anything back in quantity. These are things that will change, although they won't change immediately. There's simply too much room for improvement for them not to change, short of a total technological retrogression.
Right now, it costs over $5000 to put a kilogram payload in orbit. $3 of this is spent on fuel. The rest of it is spent on expendable rockets and enormous ground crews, both of which were needed to develop space flight in a hurry and catch up to the Soviets, but neither of which are intrinsically necessary with today's technology. When the costs of accessing orbit drop first by a factor of 10, then by a factor of 100, expect the situation to change dramatically. Imagine if you had to buy a new car for each trip to work, and it starts to sink in.
Of course, I don't expect costs to drop by that much any time in this decade. Rotary Rocket might have done it, but they don't have a chance at getting the financial backing. Kistler still might do it, if they can round up the last half of the funding they need; I'm not optimistic, but I've got my fingers crossed. The American aerospace giants, Lockheed Martin Marietta (insert 50 other names here) and Boeing have basically merged with all their former competitors, and (aside from the fact that we've all but lost the commercial launch market to Europe) have no big incentive for radical new development programs. They get government money at "cost-plus", where they report how much they spent on a project and get some prearranged percentage of that as a guaranteed profit. Not exactly an incentive to cut costs. I'm (indirectly) a Lock-Mart employee, and I've seen first hand the "spend this money or they'll take it away" mentality.
Smaller startups like Kistler have a chance to do much better, but this isn't the internet; a startup space program needs a couple billion dollars of capital to be a success, not a couple million like a dot com.
Billionaire venture capitalists are harder to find. I hope Beal does well; they're starting conservatively, but at least they're fresh blood.
I'm not worried about the long term; within a few centuries the fossil fuels and the fissionable uranium are going to become more and more precious, the industrializing third world is going to raise world power consumption tenfold, fusion power plants are going to be developed (and be unable to find completely clean-burning fuels closer than the Helium-3 on the moon and outer planets), and getting power from space is going to look better and better.
I'm a hopeless science ficiton fan
So am I; that's why I'd like to see the development and colonization of space start within my lifetime, when it's first possible, rather than four centuries from now, when it will first become dramatically necessary.
Hell, there's probably other SF fans on Slashdot who enjoy stories of warp drives, matter transporters, and other gee-whiz plot devices but who haven't read even layman's accounts of what's possible with real technology. A few recommendations:
Entering Space is the single book to get if you're curious about this stuff; it's also by Robert Zubrin, one of the founders of the Mars Society which is sponsoring the Arctic Research Station (see, I'm still on topic!)
The Case for Mars is probably the reason the Mars Society exists in the first place. It's also a hell of an influential book; NASA adopted a variation of Zubrin's "Mars Direct" plan, and subsequently cut their estimates of what a manned Mars landing would cost from $500 billion to $50 billion.
Halfway to Anywhere is G. Harry Stine's discussion of the SSTO concept: a single stage to orbit, reusable rocket that could cut costs to orbit by two orders of magnitude.
Mining the Sky is a little more pollyanna than the other books, but still interesting.
I'm posting anonymously, both because of the Lock-Mart mention above and because I'd like to beg that someone moderate this up without being punished for karma whoring. +1, Informative, please?
I have a quick way to solve the problem: Instead of the overachieving social animals typically employed as astronauts, why not pick folks content to sit in a small cubicle staring at a computer screen for months at a time? Who knows, a Slashdot veteran might be among our first Mars voyagers! :)
maybe one day, we might actually get there...
Personally, I see it this way. We have the technology now to go, but it'll be tough. In ten years we'll have the technology to go without much problem. In thirty years we'll be able to go with ease.
Conversely, what are the chances that we'll nuke ourselves first? At last count, there are thousands of active nuclear warheads both on ground and on submarines. Each one represents the equivalent amount of firepower that was used in Europe during the entirety of World War II. The US already loves to lob missiles at people, and it's just a matter of time before someone ups the ante. Sure, they tell us that they'll never be used. Pardon me if I dig a shelter anyway...
Anyway, just pointing out that a cessation of technology advance is not the only way we'll never reach Mars.
Bingo.
Perhaps sailors on submarines at war would be a closer example - strict radio silence, high danger.
Or perhaps the sailors of old (such as Magellan's crew) who would go 2 years or so away from port.
Plus, though they may not have voice communication due to have conversations with friends back home, they probably will have enough bandwidth for some good email and slower communications, not to mention if they have a good enough recieved they could still pick up radio and television signals from earth.
I think they'll make it.
Who am I? Subscribe and find out
*sarcasm* I think they'd sooner setup shop in the high school down the block than go to antarctica. They got this little problem of englishmetric conversions that need to be worked out first before they can get to Mars. */sarcasm*
Reminds me of the Elton John song: "Mars ain't the kind of place to raise the kids. In fact it's cold as Hell. And there's no one there to raise them, if you did."
Maybe he was talking about Canada. . .
BULLSHIT!!!!!
Creating a poxy greenhouse in a bloody big crater doesn't qualify as a 'complete simulation of a MARS lander' people. HOW STUPID ARE THEY? Plus! It's SPONSORED BY THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL PEOPLE!!! WTF DO THEY KNOW??
Then 'timothy' in his utter wisdom exclaims that 'The attitude seems to be pragmatic'. JEEESUS.
MARS and Canada are nothing alike. Nothing. Let me say that again with proper emphasis. NOTHING ALIKE!!
This is a silly bullshit idea from people with more money than sense and more time on their hands than is healthy.
Gimme Gimme Gimme - Karma!
At least you wouldn't need Fluoinert and liquid nitrogen to overclock your computers on Mars--just leave it outside ;)
I'm intrigued by the environmental-containment requirements. On the Moon you have to have a seal because there's hard vacuum out there. On Mars the same will be true, but in addition to the low-pressure unbreathable atmosphere, there's the possibility of Martian microbes. And of course it would be a shame if we got all excited over Martian "life" only to find that it was Earth microbes that had escaped and multiplied in a pristine environment.
Sagan's Cosmos has some interesting speculations on what we might find, based on "Mars jars" experiments and the inconclusive Viking data. At this point we still can't even exclude the possibility of multicellular life (simple lichens or slime molds, maybe even things as complex as moss should be able to survive on Mars).
-- Old Man Kensey
I assume there have been studies based on scientists in the Antarctic, oil-rig workers, MIR Astronauts, etc., but even those people have relatively easy contact with human civilization compared to the relay time associated with travel to Mars. And if an emergency occurred, help could be summoned within a reasonable amount of time. In space, those reassurances aren't there. Anyone know of any studies that would really compare to these conditions?
"This message is composed of 100% recycled electrons."
The project is a joint venture with NASA, and is sponsored by the Mars Society, Discovery Channel, and of course flashline.com (thus the name). There is also excellent 360 degree Quicktime(tm) photos of the entire region on the official website for the Haughton-Mars project. Marc Boucher of spaceref.com is actually onsite at the base camp and will be reporting on events there over the next few months."
The attitude seems to be pragmatic -- if we want to go to Mars, we need to start building the infrastructure, make the public aware of the possibilities, demo Mars vehicles, etc.
The attitude seems to be pragmatic -- if we want to go to Mars, we need to start building the infrastructure, make the public aware of the possibilities, demo Mars vehicles, etc.
Note: This post is in the context of manned space exploration, versus unmanned probes, the latter of which I support.
I've seen this attitude elsewhere, kind of like "if only the public really understood the idea of going to mars, there would be a lot of support for it". Well, I've got news for people: The public knows as much as they need to know, and they don't care. The public's attitude can be summed up by "Go to another rock? Been there. Done that."
There simply is no reason, from Joe Public's point of view, to go to Mars. Yes, there is a lot to discover scientifically, but that usually doesn't interest the average joe. The moon was interesting because that was new, and we had the russians to beat.
And please don't give me the old tired line about all the tech benefits that came out of the space program. Yes, benefits came out of it, but nothing that wouldn't have come out of industry anyway (only cheaper).
It's been said before, and it bears saying again. It is time for private industry to privatize space. Only when it pays for itself will humans have a permanent presence in space. Trying to rely on the fickle budgets of governments is just folly.
Wake me up when someone has a plan to start mining space, terraforming an asteroid, or launching a factory for low-grav manufacturing. Until then, all this is just a carnival sideshow.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Do you see any Presidential candidates talking about manned space exploration? Nope. People need to start asking their reps what they're going to do to support manned space exploration.
Well, now you hit another matter. I'm not a big proponent of the space program in the first place. I personally thinks it's a big money sink when those dollars could go to better use at the moment.
I'd much rather we spend our money and attention fixing up what we got down here than figuring out ways to leave it.
But this is a debate that won't come to any definitive conclusion, so it's not worth beating on it. (The same opinion I have of theological discussions... :) )
JimTheta, jimtheta@beer.com
My stupid web site
I went to montreal once. Didnt get a chance to see much except the inside of strip clubs. Damn fine country.
sorry, maybe I should get in the habbit of using my tags more often....
...
just pointing fact and poking fun... nothing more, nothing _less_...
The problem with NASA using nuclear power sources (which would often be a better choice than solar or chemical sources) is that NASA is a federal agency, subject to the people who don't like the idea of launching radioactive stuff into the air. Nobody wants a space probe filled with plutonium landing in their backyard.
Anybody remember that Cassini probe that they sent to Saturn? It had a nuclear battery and almost got canceled because of protesters.
So anyway, NASA doesn't use nuclear stuff because it's tough to get public approval for Mars colinization if the masses think of Mars as being full of radioactive space wrecks.
I will rise from the ashes like a Tuscon!
--
Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
I wouldn't let NASA off the hook that easily. It's NASA's job to test the whole shebang as a unit. Obviously, NASA didn't test it nearly well enough if something as major as that slipped through the cracks.
If you got a software back from a subcontractor and shipped it without testing it, would the customer blame you or the subcontractor?
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
You didn't steal anything, but hired people in good faith that they would fulfill a contractual agreement and generally behave in an ethical manner--clearly they are at fault. I doubt you would have much luck suing yourself for compensation of grievances, but suing the security agency would most certainly be succesful, unless they hire Johnny Cochrane or something like that.
In almost any other situation this is how the world would see it, but because its NASA they're supposed to know better, huh?--whatever. Its just a big gov't agency with dicey funding that doesn't have congress backing them up for crazy useless things like moon landings anymore, so its hard to lure the best and brightest at gov't wages to do projects the world doesn't really give a crap about anymore. If they could actually pull off something like a Mars landing it would reinvigorate interest in the agency, more than the int'l space station is now.
... will the Discovery Channel pay for the Bloodhound Gang to be sent to the Artic? or maybe just a detour from their Yellowknife tour date ;)
"God is dead." - Nietzsche
"God does not play dice with the Universe." - Albert Einstein
"Stop telling God what to do." - Niels Bohr
Alex sucks. He was too chicken to go on celebrity Who Wants To Be a Millionaire.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I know you meant it completely as a joke, but there's actually a pretty serious issue in there as well.
Mars, the most habitable plant in the Solar System besides ours, is a lot like Antarctica - except it doesn't have breathable air, a viable biosphere, natural resources (including any significant quantity of water). It's a year-long multi-million dollar space ride away from these too, which makes rescues impossible (not to mention really expensive vacations).
After all the starry-eyed idealism has worn off, who would actually want to live there? Would you?
I predict the upper reaches of Alaska or the Northwest Territories and the depths of Antarctica will be populated long before any significant settlement of Mars will occur (if ever).
We'd better take care of this planet. It's really the only good one out there.
Actually, the CBC has been all over this angle all day (radio 1). Apparently the locals were notified about this on Thursday. The locals are, of course, not white and don't speak English... if they wanted to build a mars simulation on Frontenac St. you know for damn sure there'd be six years notice and a referendum.
The Society for Mars Theme Parks on Inuit Land has stated however that they are looking after environmental concerns... how? They'll all be peein in barrels and carting it out with them. While I appreciate their concern for soil ammonia (an issue to be sure) it seems like a gesture at best. Permafrost ain't so perma... any bozo with a pickup truck can cause massive surface melts. Remember though that this is the same governmetn coalition that gave us "non-ivasive" uses of wilderness like low-level, supersonic flight testing in Labrador.
On the plus side, if we get to mars and find out that all our previous calculations about gravity, atmospheric pressure and composition yatta yatta were way off, we'll be glad we spent all that cash on Mars Condos.
2 1337 4 u!
Goddamn; whomever the moderator was who moderated the above as "Informative" is now my personal hero. For some fucked up reason, I found that even funnier that the comment being moderated. :)
Deo
In-situ production of fuel has been shown in initial experiments to be quite efficient. I believe one of the NASA Mars missions was slated to include a small in-situ unit to test it on the Mars surface. Basically the idea is to react the Martian atmosphere to create liquid fuel for 1. the return journey 2. to power the habitat and rovers 3. to produce water and oxygen as a byproduct. Simple chemistry.
:))
Keeping humans in space for the roughly 8 month outbound journey is the biggest prob, as far as I can see. Mir cosmonauts returning to Earth after a year literally have to be carried away, because they dont have the leg muscle strength to walk after spending so much time in zero Gs.
Of course, if plasma propulsion comes through in ~10 years, we could be to Mars in 3 month travel time.
http://spacsun.rice.edu/aspl/vasimr.htm
I've read all 3 Mars books through twice, and didn't get bored at all. I now feel like I know the geography of Mars better than that of the Earth. Antarctica was good too, but Robinson didn't dwell on Mars analogies. The Dry Valleys sound like a fairly close analogue to Mars, except for the atmospheric pressure, which makes all the difference.
Seriously. We haven't even put real establishment on the moon yet. Why are we jumping forward to hype about a Mars base already?
The moon is umpteen times closer, we know more about it, and more importantly, we've actually been there before. Not to mention, if there's a problem, you're a hell of a lot closer to rescue.
-JimTheta, jimtheta@beer.com
My stupid web site
You'd think that a bunch of computer geeks - although not very intelligent ones at that, you just have to read slashdot comments to notice it - would rather comment on the actual science and research involved here than make dumbwitted jokes about a country.
First off, to every patriotic american out there, get over it, you're not the center of the world. While on the subject... hey! your parents had you there, that doesn't make you superior, especially not all you inbred-bible-thumping southerners. But I'm getting sidetracked.
I'm not entirely sure whether it is because you have a poor excuse for an education system, or simply that you're all complete and utter retards, but you just don't seem to get it.
Yes, Canada is a country.
No, we don't live in igloos.
I'm sorry but I just can't stand all these stupid jokes and idiotic remarks anymore. In my opinion the only people who waste time making fun of others are either:
a) terribly bored, or
b) halfwits.
Yes, this is flamebait, and I honestly don't care.
Go ahead, moderate me down.
This is related to your last comment, regarding "low-grav manufacturing:"
I have heard much rhetoric in support of the shuttle program (and lately the ISS) that cites advances in crystal growth, drug research, fancy new materials, etc., that could come from research in LEO, but I can't for the life of me identify any tangible advances that have been made. I'd like, if someone here is in the know, to be set straight on the matter if possible--just what commercial spinoffs have resulted specifically from LEO research?
If LEO is indeed useful commercially, just how good of microgravity conditions are needed? Can parabolic-flight aircraft suffice? How about drop towers, which can provide quite good microgravity, albeit for a limited duration?
Can anyone recommend a good web site with this information? Thanks.
Sadly, there were no sites available that were simultaneously cold, arid, and otherwise Mars-like, while also having a lot of easy access to local news outlets. On the other hand, the Discovery Channel connection should provide enough coverage without the local news doing a "Look at these weirdos" human interest stories...
Regardless, I'm psyched; this was vaporware at last August's Mars Society convention and now the final product was packed up for shipping just last Monday. The plan is for a report on the first trial to be delivered at the next Mars Society convention in Toronto, August 10-13... A private organization has done more towards a manned Mars mission in the 3-4 years it has existed than NASA has in decades. I better shut up now, before I trigger my Anti-NASA rant... ;p
"I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
If he had tenants they blame him for not investigating the company enough before he hired them. I know I certainly would.
Yea!! Cool!!! its always the victim's fault. She wasn't raped she shouldn't have dressed that way.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
i think you mean . Capital stands for idiot as of html 4.41b
Canada has a larger area than the US, for a start.
And it is funny how you accuse us here in Canada of being xenophobic. Canada is the most multicultural country in North America. Come here to Montréal any day, and see for yourself. An amazing city to live in.
If you took offense at my comments about what a silly place Canada is, I humbly apologize.
Somehow, I can't bring myself to believe in your apology.
P.P.S. I know that didn't look like much of an apology. Sorry.
Ah, that must be why.
Are you adequate?
Don't forget the Pathfinder mission. Its hard to beat the ground-level 3-D color photos National Geographic published. And that little Sojourner was just way cool.
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
Personally, I really liked Antarctica too - he flies off the handle at the very end, where he spouts off about "What works for Antarctica, works for the rest of the planet", but barring that, it was a good read. Not a raw SF read, but definitely a good read. I guess it helps that I would sympathize with eco-terrorists and don't own an SUV myself... it might be a bit too wide-eyed radical eco-hippie for some tastes.
Just the one way to find out - try it! Its not a big waste.
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
delta-V = V(exhaust) * (ln( M(init)/M(final) ) - 1 )
The rocket equation is one reason why ion drives are so attractive for interplanetary space missions. If you need 14,000 m/sec of delta-V, doing it with xenon ions screaming out the back at 50 kilometers per second takes a lot less mass than doing it with superheated steam at a mere 4500 meters per second.
--
Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
I guess I might just be missing something, but why is flashline.com interested in this endeavor at all, except for the obvious advertising? Unless they somehow developed some of the software associated with the project, my guess is that they are just footing a good portion of the bill in order to have their name thrown on a tarp around the igloo or something like that.
Are we starting to see a new era here in scientific research? While you are able to get some money from good ole Uncle Sam, in order to do anything really cool you have to get someone to sponsor you and then agree to wear their logo?
I can see both a good and a bad associated with this type of sponsorship. While you are going to more money from private sources in order to do some really cool things, isn't this going to end up like ancient Rome, where people were only willing to foot the bill for really big and cool things that people would always see rather than the essentials. For instance, it was very popular to build a theater in the Roman world, and the rich people would gladly dole out the cash to build one of those as people would go there and associate their name with it. However, you didn't see people lining up to spend money on the roads (well, sometimes, but usually not), nor for basic infastructural needs of the cities. Sometimes even when the did this, they made very shoddy but large buildings, so the people were impressed, until the damn thing fell down and killed a bunch of people.
What I'm getting at here, is that this gives the possibility that the only things that are going to get funded are the sexy projects, like a mission to Mars rather than others which may have more actual value to people but have much less sex appeal (my mind is failing on these right now, but for the sake of argument, we'll throw out diabetes research, as i don't recall having heard much about that lately).
Just to be clear, I don't have anything completely against corporate sponsorship of research projects, as its giving some funding to a great project. However, I wonder at the precedent that its setting and the consequences that we will see from it. Though we may not see them right away, they may show up sometime in the future.
I am Canadian, and bud you hit the nail on the head. I was laughing all the way through your comment.
But, on the other hand, we have cultural diversity, a tolerant society, snow, universal health care, great beer, snow, not many gun problems, snow, and ummmmm....snow. Oh, and we have lots of women up here and all of them are drop dead gorgeous - it's just hard to tell with them in parkas and mukluks all the time.
BTW, we _were_ going to go to Mars ourselved _in_ a Zamboni, but we didn't have enough room for beer. And we spent the money on hospitals.
P.S. My buddy in the border patrol will be checking for that hash with a rubber glove.
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
Also, they need women.
Indeed. Send us your women!
P.S. Take it easy Canadians, I am only kidding. I would never really want to bad-mouth your charming little "country", or your amusingly xenophobic culture.
Xenophobic? You've never been to Toronto. If I wanna hear a different language all I have to do is take a few steps down the street. Being xenophobic or racist here means being pissed off at approximately 2/3 of the people on the street.
P.P.S. I know that didn't look like much of an apology. Sorry.
And yet we still maintain a leading edge in zamboni technology.
I have no fruit of vegitables in the car to declare...
I assume you meant fruit or vegetables, and they'll do that to you in any country, including going from the states to Canada. It's the 'No Flora or Fauna' rule, I thought The Simpsons would've at least taught you that.
Beware the Koala bear.
I'm reading "Red Mars" right now and enjoying it. Yes, at points it drags on, but still worth it. The amount research that Kim Stanley Robinson put in seems to be very extensive. No wonder he won a Nebula award for it. I haven't seen a book with this much detail in years.
Me too. I'd start listing addresses if it would get me more karma. :)
Wah!
The border patrol on both sides hated him. They knew what he was doing, but it took them a while to actually catch him in the act. When Revenue Canada (our border patrol people) caught him, they engaged in some vigilante action.
They used his own guns and smoked him.
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø`ø
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
(no, i'm not registered)
We, being earthlings, will NOT colonize Mars for a long time to come. I suggest that, along the lines of what was said about moon experimentation or colonization mentioned below, if people are serious about such things, and are not interested in astronaut corpses on mars, that more than just arctic testing be done. They can research whatever they want now, but I think we need experience in the area before an attempt is made to actually colonize mars. At the present rate of things, I think maybe we'll be on mars in 150-300 years... The society that is needed for this type of venture isn't really there. Worst of all, most people are more concerned with a wide array of other things much more mundane, and they consider the very idea as detached. I don't believe it will be possible with current trends for us to be on mars any time soon(for instance: 30 years?).
Hello Dommy, i'm not for overclocking, it's about something else. i'd like to program on Solaris 8, with python 1.6 to build an OpenGL OS. Before buying hardware, 1) i'd like to known if there is a good 3dLabs Permedia3 Create! driver under Solaris, and do i need Xfree ? 2) Is Mesa lib compatible with a 3dLabs Permedia3 Create! graphic card ? In fact, i don't want to pay any software, my project is "absolutly non-commercial", so i'd prefer to use Mesa vs commercial OpenGL. I don't know if it is possible to have ALL 120 functions of OpenGL under Mesa, and how to configure soft & harware to have the speedest result. I'd like to use : AMD K7M + Athlon 500 Mhz 128 Mo RAM 3DLabs Permedia3 Create! Solaris 8 (customized by a cool programmer..) SCSI HDD, CD DVD ROM, & Plextor 2/4/20 RW. Thank you, Free our sources and the Xsquadz will shut up. Ludo.
Exampled explored in Sci-Fi include:
1. War on earth kills us all before we get there. (See Titan by Baxter)
2. We just run out of resources before we escape the gravity well. (See Rainbow Mars)
3. We might give up all technology due to religious or environmental reason.
This is just of the top of my head, be aware that the human race is fragile, we might not live long enough as a race to leave this world.
Here's a map of Nunavut, Canada, with Devon Island highlighted, in case you're wondering where exactly it is.
``This, too, shall pass.'' ---Eastern proverb
The most difficult part of the mission to Mars isn't going to be maintaining a habitat on the planet when we get there. The difficulty of this mission is mostly in getting there and getting back to Earth.
The first problem is planning a way to get there in a short amount of time so that the astronauts are exposed to the least amount of radiation, while not requiring a lot of fuel. Popular Science had an article about the possible propulsion systems which are in development which will get the most thrust for the least amount of fuel. Remember that the more fuel you use, the more fuel you need also to provide acceleration for the fuel itself, and then the fuel for that, etc (I think of it as recursive fuel).
Another well-known problem is how to get people used to being in space for so long, and still have the ability to return to earth without spending the rest of their lives in physical rehabilitation.
What seems like the biggest problem is how to get back. I saw on a program on the Discovery Channel a plan for sending ahead an unmanned ship to land on the ground and automatically begin producing fuel from the atmosphere (I forgot the details on how this was be possible). The return vehicle would use the fuel generated by this device for the return trip. This would provide a huge advantage so we don't have to send all of the fuel on the trip to Mars.
I think a lot of people are discouraged by the failures of recent probes sent to mars, but they have to keep in mind that when we send people, they can solve the problems themselves en route and in real-time.
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
This looks like the most expensive game of "make believe" I've ever seen.
"Look everyone! I made a planetary habitat out of my couch cushions! Wanna come over and pretend we're on Mars?"
Can't the space advocacy groups concentrate on something useful (if boring) like inexpensive commercial transportation to orbit?
You can get better shit in BC!
And if you don't know what British Columbia is, then I give up.
Wah!
Devon Island is totally unable to support what they have in mind. That tin box will sink into the permafrost in a few weeks. They will leave their crap (and I do mean mean crap and and other garbage) on the landscape. They will trample ruts into the land that will take 1000 years to recover. Champion Moss axpands at a rate of one inch per 100 years! It's clear that they are going to leave it there if they are going to 'chute it in. This is hubris by some loosers that have no respect for their planet. No wonder they are so hot to find a new one. ARGH!!!
Sadly, there's not much up there to justify a microgravity research and manufacturing infrastructure just yet. There are a few possibilities though (any errors are due to my haste -- always rely on peer-reviewed publications):
;-) forsaw wonders we take for granted today like telecommunications and direct-broadcast satellites. You can use a Globalstar (www.globalstar.com) telephone to call from anywhere on the planet, to anywhere on the planet, or use an ORBCOMM (www.orbcomm.com or www.orbital.com) device to send e-mail anywhere-to-anywhere.
;-) or understand our environment better? There are a LOT of direct (and highly profitable) benefits which have come from human endeavours in space and all of them were impossible at some point.
;-)
Materials processing for the mixing of new alloys, chemicals, drugs, etc. can be done in a "containerless" environment, where the reagents are suspended in a magnetic field and manipulated without gravity yanking the substances down by mass.
Along those lines, initial experiments (to be expanded on in the ever-under-construction Space Station) have indicated that you can build molecules atom-by-atom in these containerless environments and make substances which would not easily (or even possibly) form in a 1-Gravity environment. This opens some exciting possibilities since, thanks to the Human Genome Project, we're starting to understand just how WE're put together atom-by-atom. Given the ability to custom-make organic materials, gene therapy to target specific ailments would be greatly assisted by such microgravity research labs. That's not to say that we'll come across something which can't be made on Earth, rather that being able to build what you want from scratch (instead of messing about with aproximations in a lab) would help speed up the experiementation process.
Microgravity research has already helped some groups in understanding their materials processing better (metals, rubbers, industrial plastics, medical assistance) and accelerated their own research. That's why companies such as SpaceHab and facilities such as Russian, European and (a few) American automated research capsules have launched full of commercially (and some government) funded experiements.
Another interesting research area is in combustion. The idea is: Compare combustion on Earth with a duplicate experiment environment in microgravity. What difference are seen? What is due to the 1-G field of Earth and what is due to properties of combustion which have so far gone unnoticed (since we're all stuck in that 1-G environment)? Even if combustion research resulted in improved efficiencies of just 1% for all new internal combustion engines, the annual fuel savings alone could justify a space research lab.
Going back to that atom-by-atom stuff, what would computer chips be like if you could build them up with raw materials, instead of scratching them out of a wafer of Silicon? Would it be possible to stick a Cray on your Palm Vx?
Along those lines, given a rarefied vacuum using a "wake shield" or other such spiffy device (do a web search on "wake shield facility") Gallium Arsenide (GaAs) wafers can be 'grown' cost effectively in large quantities. These can be used in the manufacture of computer chips in theory, though only a few wafers have been constructed in the on-orbit facilities to date, so testing remains to be done.
There are quite a few other items but, returning to your question, none of them have been demonstrated to date.
I like to think of microgravity research and manufacturing in context with the original Sputnik launch: Many people wondered what all the fuss was about with this "beeping orange" whizzing overhead. No one (well, aside from Arthur C. Clarke
GPS? Weather satellites? Remote Sensing to improve crops? On-orbit imagery to "keep the peace"
If you'd be interested in reading more, I don't have any web links, but do have quite a few technical references you could find in any university library. Just say the word and I'll post 'em for you.
Oh, and you're right about drop-towers and parabolic flights: They're great for manufacturing and experimenting with some things, but most materials processing and medical experiments require more than a few seconds time. That's why the fates invented microgravity
We have antlers instead.
3=) 3=) 3=).
...with the constant flamewars going on about "out" vs "oot" and "about" vs "aboot"...Or maybe that's just here in Slashdotland.
Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
"being flown up to the crater by the US Marine corp"
Let's hope the Marines can do a better job at landing the thing than NASA.
Because it's the closest thing to Mars we have. (rimshot)
Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
On a more positive note, I have to applaud any effort to get more space exploration going. The earth is pretty played out for explorers...
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
New Scientist also reports that flash floods may be occuring on Mars, scarring its terrain.
Well it may not rain (sorry, my bad) But one for the geophysicists and definitely an article which poses some questions Discovery Channel would sure love to be able to answer, *Exclusive* :-)
Really cold, nothing to do, nowhere to go, and everybody stays inside the shelter at all times unless wearing special protective clothing.
Also, they need women.
(Kind of makes me wonder if there are any spots on the Martian "Ice Caps" that are smooth enough to play hockey on... and what is the cost of putting a zamboni on Mars?)
P.S. Take it easy Canadians, I am only kidding. I would never really want to bad-mouth your charming little "country", or your amusingly xenophobic culture. If you took offense at my comments about what a silly place Canada is, I humbly apologize.
P.P.S. I know that didn't look like much of an apology. Sorry.
(Oh, and if you happen to be on the Canadian border patrol, let me tell you in advance that I have no fruit of vegitables in the car to declare... just a fat bag of Peruvian hash and a whole trunkload full of guns.)
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
So who's this "Mar" anyway? Seems to be pretty gung-ho about space exploration. Good for him!
"...just what commercial spinoffs have resulted specifically from LEO research? "
Note, before we get inundated with all the "tang" "velcro" etc. posts, that I not asking about technologies developed for the space program, but rather technologies that developed as the direct result of research in LEO.
(Incidentally, Tang was merely popularized by the space program, and was not developed for it).
maybe you would, maybe you wouldn't. The standard American heuristic of "who do i sue?" is to sue the person with the deepest pockets, if thats the security agency your lawyer would tell you to sue them.
So why in this particular case would we think that the biggest pay-off would be to blame NASA? The only way that would pay off would be if you were in a position to get funds earmarked for NASA that congress would now be reluctant to hand over to them. Some people (in gov't) don't really like NASA and are quick to point out it's errors whenever they come up. Oddly enough, many of these people also like handing out money to Lcokheed Martin for black military projects (sorry for sounding sort of conspiracy paranoid).
Er, we were talking about transporting a landing module to a remote area of Canada. Unless you've heard something about a pending US invasion of Canadia over the 4th of July holiday. That would be a good cover, they'll think it just a bunch of stupid Americans setting off fireworks.
Maybe you're just "helping us celebrate." 3=) 3=) 3=).
Um, do those 23.8% actually believe that the advancement of technology has just STOPPED?
'Never' is quite a long time. It seems a bit ignorant/short-sighted/closed-minded to believe that man will 'NEVER' reach Mars. Long ago, people believed if a man went faster than 40 Miles per Hour, he would suffocate.
Good Thing they were proven wrong, eh?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
And we have lots of women that are drop dead gorgeous, but they're always talking on their (&^$ cellphones.
We were going to go to Mars too... but we spent all the money on weed. Actually, I think we did go to Mars once... or maybe we did... hmm... I forget, man.
So anyhow,
P.S. My buddy in the border patrol is making that hash in his garage!
Wah!
--
Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Mars is a good place to settle because there's not much weather to worry about.
Sure the winds blow fast, but not hard (there's just not enough air). The biggest thing you have to worry about is long periods of overcast skies and poor visibility from the dust storms (better than the months-long winter-night of the arctic and antarctic).
You can pitch your giant tents or burrow in the low gravity and live indoors. Imagine giant buildings that are like a cross between a greenhouse and a mall, and I think you've got a fair idea of what Mars will be like for everyone but the first few pioneers (and there may never be uncomfortable pioneers; it makes more sense to me to just drop construction robots made in space from materials mined from asteroids).
Sure, the effort of moving people there is pretty rough, but practically everything else is easier once you get started. That's mostly due to the gravity; it'll be much easier to build huge buildings on Mars. I imagine there will be some pretty spectacular architecture due to this. Also, there probably won't be any natural disasters to worry about either, until we start terraforming.
In short, dead planets put up less of a fight.
Easily. Send up some colonists/scientists and a television crew and sell the TV rights. You think Survivor is kicking in the ratings? Try Survivors on Mars! Of course then we'd have to weed out the ugly astronauts...
Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed response to my question. I would indeed be interested in the references you mentioned--feel free to email me or post them as you see fit.
Hightech Igloo!
Who's for overclocking?
--
humtata
I suppose if Discover Channel is involved, they'll be selling tickets to willing vacationers.
(obscurely referring to the rare dinosaur fossil auctions Discovery Channel has run from sponsored digs).
If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
wrote a book based on the Artic setting. Kim is well renowned for his Mars trilogy, of course. I tried getting through Red Mars but I was bored out of my mind by pg 200. The book spent too much time trying to get me to know the characters that Kim failed to excite me about the prospect of landing on Mars. How was his Antartic book?
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
if it makes an asshole cry.
Ever wonder about the timing of these events?
Could we possibly have known this before?
Error:syntax error at (eval 9) line 2, at EOF
for torpedoing carter's programme to adopt metrics? that's why NASA and the whole US works with such an antiquated system of measurement. Or should we blame the electorate who voted him in?
--
Glad to be a help.
First off, you can find out a lot about contemporary events through reading "Aviation Week and Space Technology" (affectionately known as Aviation Leak for their bleeding-edge news reputation), "Space News" or visting www.spacer.com
Most of the best stuff I've found was printed back in the mid to late 80s, since everyone was anticipating Space Station Freedom and the incredible research and manufacturing opportunities which would result. 15 years later, you'll find many of the journal articles are quite similar (yes, we're still waiting).
Anyhow, some relevant journal articles include:
R. Kohli, L.A. Ranceitelli, "Materials Processing in Space", Advances in the Astronautical Sciences (AAS), 86-442, pp. 1753-1759 (1986).
E.M. Jones, "Putting Space Resrouces to Work", Acta Astronautica, 26, pp.16-18 (1992).
G.E. Maryniak, "Harvesting Nonterrestrial Resources - A Status Report", AAS, 86-341, pp. 1735-1749 (1986).
B.Iannotta, "Shuttle Serves as Fertile Ground for Medical Research", Space News, p.11, July 31 (1995).
M.E. Vaucher, "Business Considerations Affecting the Future of Space Manufacturing", AAS, 86-444, pp.1761-1777.
...and for some off-planet stuff:
C.O'Dale, "The Development of a Commercial Lunar Infrastruture", Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 51, pp.49-56 (1998).
Those should give you a good start. Look in the bibliography section of each of these papers for leads to many more.
Happy reading!
There are a number of organizations who are interested in developing space for its commercial applications. These include (but are not limited to):
At the current time, there is to obvious economic benifit to going beyond geosyncronous orbit. Yet all of these organizations believe that we should so proceed. Why? Because there are abundant resources available on the moon, Mars, and asteroids. No, they are not in the forms that we are used to using them, but they are the same 100 odd elements of which everything here on Earth is made. I will not repeat the cases for going to the various bodies in our solar system... the different organizations which I listed above, and others like them, make a better case that I have time or space for here.
Currently, the chief restriction to executing any of these exploration and development programs is the high cost of getting materials into orbit. Face it, the space shuttle is overpriced, and alternative launch vehicles are not much better. However, several private firms (in addition to several government contractors) are in a race to develope low cost launch systems. Will they succeed? Almost certainly so within the next five years.
And once we have low cost (relative term) launch systems, I expect we will see a space tourism market begin. That will probably be the early economic force in the development of space.
And beyond that? As Robert Heinlein said in his writing, "Once you reach Low Earth Orbit, you are half way to anywhere in the Solar System."
Gonzo
I hire a private security agency to secure my building. They gut the building and steal all the valuables. Who's at fault, me or them?
Damn! What are you moderators on (hint: see subject)??? While this post may not have been exceptionally funny, he wasn't doing anything wrong!
Hell, he should have gotten some credit for not first posting or talking about the penis bird...
-saintalex.(watch me get modded...)
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
(if you're too dumb, just pray)