Slashdot Mirror


Hibernating to Mars

neutron_p writes "Manned missions beyond the Moon are no longer wild dreams. NASA plans a manned mission to Mars before 2020. With automatic systems in control, astronauts would face the challenge of living in a confined space with not much to do for an extremely long period. 'Might as well sleep it off!' Studies initiated by ESA have gone one step further. Wouldn't it be nice if astronauts could hibernate! ESA biologists are conducting investigations into the physiological mechanisms that mammals use to hibernate."

344 comments

  1. Sci Fi? by ian+rogers · · Score: 2, Funny

    Haven't they been doing that in movies for years now?

    1. Re:Sci Fi? by BinaryOpty · · Score: 3, Informative

      Of course they have, where else do you think they got the idea from? But, the sci-fi hibernation often times is cryogenic. That means all of your body's cells slow down and muscle atrophy isn't a problem. If you don't have that and attempt a sort of chemically induced hibernation where your body's metabolism slows waaaaay down, then you run the risk of atrophy as well as any other type of inaction-caused disease.

    2. Re:Sci Fi? by Aquatopia17 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Believe it or not, Science Fiction isn't the same as Science Fact. Ever see those clips of astronauts constantly exercising? They need to do that keep up their muscles out of atophy. If muscles will atophy for an otherwise active astronaut, don't you think they'll get even worse for a hibernating astronaut? The issue of hibernating isn't as easy as it seems. Biologists today don't even fully understand animal hibernation on earth.

      --
      Don't sweat the petty things. Don't pet the sweaty things. --Stephen J. Simmons
    3. Re:Sci Fi? by PDG · · Score: 1

      how about external electrode producing small jolts to stimulate the each muscle group every so often to keep them from fading out.

      if they're sleeping its not a problem, unlike those who are awake and trying to be productive (ie-astronauts)

      --
      "Where is my mind?"
    4. Re:Sci Fi? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ever see those clips of astronauts constantly exercising? They need to do that keep up their muscles out of atophy. If muscles will atophy for an otherwise active astronaut, don't you think they'll get even worse for a hibernating astronaut?

      Slowing down the metabolism slows everything down, including the process of muscle atrophy. You're right, of course, that there's a lot we don't understand about the process -- but if hibernation were the same as bed-rest, then animals that do hibernate would be too weak to move when they woke up. (And yes, being on strict bed-rest for a given period of time produces about the same degree of muscle atrophy and bone density loss as being in microgravity for the same period of time.) Odds are that hibernating astronauts would be in a lot better shape whent they got to Mars than they would be if they were awake the whole time.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:Sci Fi? by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      Freezing living cells tends to kill them, as far I've heard, so cryonic hibernation is still a pipe dream.

    6. Re:Sci Fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i don't recall any animals hibernating for three years.

    7. Re:Sci Fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a biologist, but I guess I don't understand how muscle atrophy would be slowed along with metabolism. As I understand it, they're fairly different systems. What actually causes muscles to degrade? If you can show that muscles can degrade from non-use, independant of metabolism, that would sort of squash your theory, wouldn't it?

      I wonder if anyone knows for a fact that hibernating animals don't wake up atrophied. It's not like we can throw a bear on a treadmill, but it should be pretty obvious whether they get tired more easily.

    8. Re:Sci Fi? by Cedric+C.+Girouard · · Score: 1

      If muscles will atophy for an otherwise active astronaut, don't you think they'll get even worse for a hibernating astronaut?


      Don't they have electric stimulator already in production that will make muscle work independantly of what the brain tells them ?

      --

      Marriage is considered capital punishment for the theft of a goat in some third world countries...

    9. Re:Sci Fi? by aszaidi · · Score: 1

      Odds are that hibernating astronauts would be in a lot better shape whent they got to Mars than they would be if they were awake the whole time.

      Damn right about that. I don't know anyone who can go without sleep for more than a couple of days without serious damage to their health, let alone a few months.

    10. Re:Sci Fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a pipe dream once. I was in a plumbing supply store.

    11. Re:Sci Fi? by alzoron · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dropping cells to a freezing temperature doesn't kill them if they have some kind of anti-freeze in them to prevent actual freezing. Some animals are able to produce natural anti-freeze.

    12. Re:Sci Fi? by PacoTaco · · Score: 1
      Believe it or not, Science Fiction isn't the same as Science Fact.

      Exactly. The astronauts would need to fatten up on salmon and berries before takeoff.

    13. Re:Sci Fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most animals that hibernate faten them selves up practically they whole time they arn't. In fact allot of animals halve in weight whilst hibernating. It aint slow things down that much.

    14. Re:Sci Fi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bed sores, bacteria, infection.....

  2. Send newly-minted PhDs. by pedantic+bore · · Score: 4, Funny
    After I finished my dissertation, I was more than ready for a several-month nap. (Too bad it didn't work out exactly that way...)

    --
    Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    1. Re:Send newly-minted PhDs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean you didn't go straight to the unemployment line with your student loan bills?

    2. Re:Send newly-minted PhDs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PhD students (generally) get research or teaching assistantships and do not need to take out student loans.

    3. Re:Send newly-minted PhDs. by rob_squared · · Score: 1

      *Yawns*

      Are we there yet?

      --
      I don't get it.
    4. Re:Send newly-minted PhDs. by dsanfte · · Score: 1

      That's true, but until you're admitted to graduate school, you're still racking up the bills as a regular undergrad B.Sc (or whatever).

      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
  3. Dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    ESA To Study Human Hibernation
    Posted by timothy on 10:20 AM -- Wednesday August 04 2004
    from the that-report-will-be-a-snooze dept.
    colonist writes "The European Space Agency (ESA) plans to study human hibernation for long-duration space voyages (a la 'Alien', '2001'). Although 'practical hibernation mechanisms are at least a decade away', ESA researchers will make initial inquiries into DADLE (D-Ala,D-Leu-enkephalin), an opium-like drug that triggers hibernation in ground squirrels and human cells. Other subjects of interest include dobutamine, a drug that maintains muscle, and the Madagascan fat-tailed dwarf lemur, the only primate known to hibernate."

  4. Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    works for most of USA

    1. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Stevyn · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or since they're traveling, the 6 songs that are played on every Clear Channel radio station should zonk them out for a while.

    2. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      >Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips
      >...
      >works for most of USA


      or a PC with an internet connection, works for all /. readers!

    3. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Zorilla · · Score: 4, Funny

      or a PC with an internet connection, works for all /. readers!

      Macintosh zealot in 5, 4, 3, 2....

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    4. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      ... 1 How about giving them a Mac, you insensitive clod?!?

    5. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by mobby_6kl · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Macintosh zealot

      I'm usually very afraid of Mac/Apple zealots, but I thought I was safe on this one. In this case it's just a Personal Computer, as opposed to Navigation Computer or Life Support Computer. Saying PC or Mac would make me sound like a stupid PC supporter (the last PC = "politically correct"). Also, somebody on /. was trying to prove that PC doesn't exclude Macs, and that the term was hijacked by the x86 people, but I can't find that thread right now.

    6. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Inominate · · Score: 1

      Yea but can you imaging trying to do anything with multiple minutes of lag!? For many of us thats probably as close to hell as you can get without dying.

    7. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by Zorilla · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I agree with you on that. Nevertheless, you can always expect somebody waiting to jump on this knowing that some will assume that PC = x86.

      At least the term "IBM Compatible" is long gone as a byproduct of this.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    8. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by v1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      but the ping time sucks by the time you get near mars...

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    9. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by eofpi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It can't be any slower than dialup from some infamous ISPs. Aside from not being able to play online games, the biggest problem that springs to mind is finding an IRC server that'll accept 1800 second pings

      --
      Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
    10. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by metlin · · Score: 1


      Hmm, although the the term PC was originally coined to refer to any microcomputer, with the advent of IBM's x86, it's become synonymous with IBM compatible systems.

      Even Wikipedia's entry mentions PC as -

      Personal computer, IBM PC, or IBM PC compatible ...
      A personal computer is an inexpensive microcomputer, originally designed to be used by only one person at a time, and which is IBM PC compatible - (though in common usage it may sometimes refer to non-compatible machines).


      So although you're technically correct, general convention would disagree with you.

      For a common user, a PC is x86 and a Mac is well, a Mac - it's as bad as arguing on what a hacker is - according to the rest of the world, a hacker is a mean guy, no matter how much we try to convince them otherwise.

      I do not mean to say you are wrong, merely that it's sometimes better to stick to well-agreed upon conventions. Makes life easier.

    11. Re:Just give them TV a Fridge and Chips by ByteMangler_242 · · Score: 1

      I resemble that comment!!!
      /looks away from Mac at beer belly, gets depressed.

      --

      Rule of the open mind
      People who are resistant to change cannot resist change for the worst.

  5. Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just gather up a bunch of geeks and toss them in the capsule. Once they get away from Earth, send a message letting them know that you accidentially packed decaf. Once the panic wears off, they'll sleep the rest of the trip.

    1. Re:Simple by mbrewthx · · Score: 1

      "NASA this Spaceship Alpha"
      "Spaceship Alpha this is Nasa, why aren't you guys asleep?"
      "Nasa we took the back up compter and two of our robot rovers and modded them into a matter generater, you guys knew we were Star Trek fans. Now we have all the coffee we want. Who you knew could could make coffee with Linux, we always thought it was the other way around."

      --
      __________ Leave me alone I'm compiling a RPG II program on my S/36...Thanks to metamucil I'm a Regular Meta Moderator
    2. Re:Simple by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Just gather up a bunch of geeks and toss them in the capsule.

      Just launch our basement offices with us in it, since we never go outside, we won't know the difference as long as the internet connection works.

    3. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops! Redundant. Love the Moderation Lottery.

    4. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't, I'm afraid - before too long the latency will be too high for TCP.

  6. Don't hold your breath... by Dinosaur+Neil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This strikes me as having two BIG problems right from the start:

    • Reliability - ISS crewpeople spend the bulk of their time doing housekeeping/maintenance chores. How are they gonna get a brand-new, untried vehicle to run for a six-month trip each way, without multiple someones keeping an eye on things?
    • Reality - This study is still in the "maybe we can get this to work" stage. But I've been hearing about serious studies like this since the 70's and so far no useful results. Will they have something tested and reliable in 15 years?

    This would be great, if it works, but I bet we end up doing it the hard way...

    --
    "I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
    1. Re:Don't hold your breath... by datastalker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reliability - people can sleep in shifts, and not hibernate for the entire time.
      Reality - 2020 is more than 15 years from now. What has no useful results now may in 15 years. (It was considered bad form to operate on the heart thirty years ago, and now it's routine.)
      The hard way - everything is done the hard way. Every pioneering effort is. It will continue to be that way, and we either suck it up and do it, or we don't. I think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

    2. Re:Don't hold your breath... by patdabiker · · Score: 1

      Reliability- Robots. Seriously, this is 15 years from now. We better have robots that can handle that kind of stuff.

    3. Re:Don't hold your breath... by nzkbuk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Reliability - ISS crewpeople spend the bulk of their time doing housekeeping/maintenance chores. How are they gonna get a brand-new, untried vehicle to run for a six-month trip each way, without multiple someones keeping an eye on things?

      Don't run a certain Redmond OS, Perhaps it might be a good idea to use a *nix one.

    4. Re:Don't hold your breath... by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      Why not just sleep for 18hr blocks, that way you use less energy/food/air.

      So you awake for 10, then sleep 20-30 with help of drugs.

      Always rotate crew and have at least 2 people awake at any one time.

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
    5. Re:Don't hold your breath... by jlar · · Score: 1

      "Don't run a certain Redmond OS, Perhaps it might be a good idea to use a *nix one."

      Redmond OS in 2020, you must be kidding. We all know that Linux has achieved World Domination (tm) by 2015.

    6. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Dinosaur+Neil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By "the hard way" I meant going to Mars with existing tech. 15 years is a long time in "computer years", but something like long-term hibernation is going to take at least a decade to to work out the bugs because every test is going to have to run at least a few months in order to have meaning. Even if they were to come up with something that works tomorrow, it would be pushing to make it practical by 2020. Sleeping in shifts might help (a la 2001), but that would further complicate things.

      Lots of things need to be done before we go to Mars; we need far more durable, reliable and usable pressure suits, a life-support system that can run for three (minimum) years without spare parts from Earth, some sort of rover that can go more than a couple klicks, actual studies of the effects of long term exposure to low-gravity, etc. etc. Suspended animation will be useful, someday, but...

      Yes, computers, robotics, medicine, and other technologies have come a long way in a short time, but there's no gaurantee that the growth will continue; aircraft technology went from none 100 years ago to jets in the 50's, but it took another 50 years (and the X-prize) to kick things up a notch... Progress can be linear, but it doesn't have to be.

      A bit cynical, I know, but I've been disappointed by NASA for 30 years now; I watched Armstrong set foot on the moon when I was eight and was told that we'd be on Mars by the mid-80's. By the time I got out of high school, we were trapped in LEO by the shuttle. Things like this worry me because they can keep us waiting for a "perfect" solution for a loooong time...

      --
      "I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
    7. Re:Don't hold your breath... by FosterKanig · · Score: 1, Funny

      You can't really have them sleep in shifts because the awake ones will fuck around the sleeping people. They'll shave eyebrows, draw on their faces, and when they get really bored they will take pictures of themselves teabagging the sleeping astronauts.

    8. Re:Don't hold your breath... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      umm, well it would make it much less time if they used nuclear thrust on a continual basis half way there and then revers the thrusters and blast them the correct amount needed to get into orbit.

      this would make the trip about 3-5 weeks., and it makes trips to the Jupiter system a reality, not to mention mining the asteroid belt on a full time basis.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    9. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll send a robot in a flying car powered by cold fusion.

    10. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Jack9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As a person who has had multiple open heart surgeries, let me contradict the previous post. Open heart surgery has been practiced and studied by multiple organizations in america, since the wooden prosthetics of the 1700's. It was never bad form to operate on the heart as there had never been any "elective" surgeries that ppl could choose to have AFAIK. When you get told you have to have open heart surgery, let me tell you, YOU WANT TO GET OUT OF IT. All surgeries relating to the heart are considered necessary as certain tissues have the consistency of wet toilet paper (aortic valve for example).

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    11. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wasn't even remotely funny.

    12. Re:Don't hold your breath... by hugg · · Score: 1

      The only reason the ISS crew spend their time doing housekeeping is to give them something to do and thus justify their budget. A ship in hibernation would only have to drift, make very minor course corrections (maybe), supply oxygen and scrub CO2 (at a much lower rate than during normal human activity), supply heat, etc. We have enough experience in manned and unmanned spacecraft and designing redundant systems to do this.

    13. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 0, Troll

      A bit cynical, I know, but I've been disappointed by NASA for 30 years now; I watched Armstrong set foot on the moon when I was eight and was told that we'd be on Mars by the mid-80's. By the time I got out of high school, we were trapped in LEO by the shuttle. Things like this worry me because they can keep us waiting for a "perfect" solution for a loooong time...

      Well.. if you just accept the fact that we have never set foot on the moon, it isn't that disappointing!

      Let's see:
      No real moon landing = that required level of process not attained = we are still trying now!

      No biggie.

      Besides all the technology in the US of A can't make a flag flutter on the moon the way it does on earth!

    14. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Eponymous+Mallard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When you get told you have to have open heart surgery, let me tell you, YOU WANT TO GET OUT OF IT. All surgeries relating to the heart are considered necessary as certain tissues have the consistency of wet toilet paper (aortic valve for example)

      I can second that. I've been told I might need open heart surgery someday due to a perforated aortic valve, and I do indeed want to get out of it. It's scary as hell. You have my respect and sympathy for making it through.


      Funny you should mention the consistency of "wet toilet paper." I had an infection (endocarditis) that burned a tiny, 1-2mm, hole in my valve. If the hole gets larger I may need surgery. I was wondering about the odds of that occurring, so I asked my cardiologist about the consistency of the aortic valve. He compared it to chicken skin - very thin but tough. "Wet toilet paper" doesn't sound so good.


      Either way, the aortic valve is one nasty point-of-failure for the human body.


      The Eponymous Mallard -- "If it quacks like a duck, it may be The Epomymous Mallard"

    15. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Man it would suck to have a wooden prosthetic heart . . .

    16. Re:Don't hold your breath... by BashDot · · Score: 1

      The question is... how well will you function after being in that environment for 3 years? Sleeping in shifts seems almost critical... you'd have to exercise or I think your muscles would suffer (but then again, IANADoctor).

    17. Re:Don't hold your breath... by iq+in+binary · · Score: 1

      Since you're trolling.............

      You're right, the US of A can't make a US flutter like it does on earth in the reduced gravity of the moon. We can make it ripple due to shifts in position, because of the low-gravity environment the flag would be much more susceptible to such movement.

      End result? It looks like the flag is waving because of the "Fan" in the "Studio".

      And if anything, you could've at least brought up the radiation belt. Fucking retard.

      --
      Of all the Universal Constants, here's one I know: Nice guys finish last ;)
    18. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...while playing duke nukem forever with his girlfriend

    19. Re:Don't hold your breath... by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A bit cynical, I know, but I've been disappointed by NASA for 30 years now; I watched Armstrong set foot on the moon when I was eight and was told that we'd be on Mars by the mid-80's. By the time I got out of high school, we were trapped in LEO by the shuttle. Things like this worry me because they can keep us waiting for a "perfect" solution for a loooong time...

      NASA is something of a fluke. It's the result of a "pissing match" between the USSR and the USA. It would not exist in any meaningful form except fro the cold war.

      Notwithstanding the tremendous benefits that have come from the space program, (eg: NMh batteries, satellites, and too many others to name) the space program would only exist so long as there are private (CAPITAL) reasons to do so. In 100 year, NASA will be a dim memory of a failed model of developing outer-space.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    20. Re:Don't hold your breath... by alzoron · · Score: 1

      Duke Nukem Forever? That game won't be out for at least another 15 years after that.

    21. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > > Will they have something tested and reliable in 15 years?

      > Reality - 2020 is more than 15 years from now

      Yes, it's 15 years and 2 months. Ever heard of rounding?

    22. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Jack9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed they also fashioned wooden valves. What would suck would be to have a wooden heart valve that, even if an implant was successful, would simply corrode and fail in a few weeks. But as far as medicine goes, it was a noble effort. Better to operate on 10 patients who wouldnt last 2 days, have a 20% success rate resulting in patients that die later that month. Is a treatment that's fatal worth the extra few days when faced with certain death sooner? Whatever it takes.

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
  7. In other news... by jhealy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Crazy scientist is creating psychotic robot that has the ability to wake or kill hibernating humans.

    1. Re:In other news... by dotwaffle · · Score: 1

      Good Morning Dave ;)

    2. Re:In other news... by bigjocker · · Score: 1

      Crazy scientist is creating psychotic robot that has the ability to wake or kill hibernating humans.

      You don't need any robot to do that, just sent Matthew along ...

      --
      Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
    3. Re:In other news... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      We'll find out that they were cutting costs by using old hardware and running linux on it... then they'll announce "The milenium bug was the cause" which is what could of happened with hal :P

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  8. Sleep time? by Paster+Of+Muppets · · Score: 1

    Given that a proposed trip to Mars would have an approximate duration from launch to returning to Earth of between 400 and 650 days, if they're looking for a volunteer to sleep that long...

    --
    Due to lack of disk space this user has been discontinued
    1. Re:Sleep time? by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
      90 days there
      ~300 days on the surface
      90 days back.

      So, no sleeping for two years.

      Besides, I think this is a stupid idea. What if something goes wrong? What if life support fails and ground control can't get it started again or wake the crew up?

      And what if we include instruments that can be used in flight. Things that can collect solar wind or monitor the earth's magnetosphere? Give them some experiments to perform, that usually keeps scientists going for a while.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  9. Give'm a job! by ScuzzyTerminator · · Score: 5, Funny

    Make them earn their passage by doing some programming along the way. Set up the food dispensers so that if you don't work, you don't eat. That will keep them occupied!

    1. Re:Give'm a job! by spectecjr · · Score: 3, Funny

      Make them earn their passage by doing some programming along the way. Set up the food dispensers so that if you don't work, you don't eat. That will keep them occupied!

      Now that's what I call outsourcing :)

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    2. Re:Give'm a job! by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they are programming stuff they will need in Mars while GOING to Mars, they are the ultimate slackers.

    3. Re:Give'm a job! by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Make the astronauts hot men and hot women. Make sure they are compatible on eharmony.com.

      Yep. It'll be a fun ride over.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    4. Re:Give'm a job! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      [Make them earn their passage by doing some programming along the way] Now that's what I call outsourcing :)

      wayoutsourcing

    5. Re:Give'm a job! by WhiteDeath · · Score: 1


      well at least until they "bump" themselves off coarse....

    6. Re:Give'm a job! by KliX · · Score: 1

      Hey Queeg!

    7. Re:Give'm a job! by jamesh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Now that gives me an idea. Load the ship up with about 10-20 more people than required. Install hidden cameras all over the place. The audience would be able to vote 1 person off the ship at regular intervals (hence the extras :).

      Selling the show to the highest bidder would probably fund the whole trip!

    8. Re:Give'm a job! by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      Make them earn their passage by doing some programming along the way. Set up the food dispensers so that if you don't work, you don't eat. That will keep them occupied!

      What if their landing gear module drivers have a null pointer exception while they are entering the martian atmosphere?

    9. Re:Give'm a job! by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      Then set up a few extra cameras and get the porno industry to fund it. They make more money than anyone else, with zero gravity porn they'd be unstoppable.

  10. Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Mal-2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It would suck to be stuck in a spaceship for three years, sure. But it would also suck to fall asleep and wake up three years later -- and three years older, with absolutely nothing to show for it. Sure, external sources of damage would be nearly eliminated, so you wouldn't be three years shorter of telomeres. Also, being in one place for the duration means hard radiation shielding is much more practical than trying to hard shield the entire ship.

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    1. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by moonbender · · Score: 5, Funny

      But it would also suck to fall asleep and wake up three years later -- and three years older, with absolutely nothing to show for it.

      Kind of like studying computer science... ;)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    2. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by vhold · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hibernating must be a pretty profound state if it really means that you don't have to eat or use the bathroom for up to 7 months.

      That seems like that would slow down the systems that cause aging as well.

      Then again, their implementation of hibernation will probably come out nothing like that, it'll probably be some kind of constant drug/nutrition feed.

      An interesting question is, would you be willing to go into a matrix-esque environment for those months, where you could go to movies, read books, interact with people on earth (speed of light limitations would make this really trippy), to pass to the time while your body sleeps?

    3. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      it would also suck to fall asleep and wake up three years later

      I'm a powernap expert and have slept for up to 36 hours in one stretch. What would you like to know?

    4. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by dustinbarbour · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about muscle atrophy? If I slept for six months straight, you can be damn sure that I'd have a hell of a time getting out of bed in the morning. Astro/Cosmonauts on the ISS have enough trouble as it is when they return to the planet and they're always doing stuff while on their mission to include working out!

    5. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by anethema · · Score: 1

      Your muscles would weaken at a slower rate just like the rest of the things in your body.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    6. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Umm... how would you evacuate waste from a hibernating person's body if they are being constantly fed? Sounds like an unpleasant engineering challenge indeed.

    7. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      External sources of damage would NOT be eliminated. The biggest problem, I believe, with this proposal is that any extended period of hibernation leads to muscle atrophy. When people come down from ISS (or Mir, back in the day) they have to spend some time re-learning how to walk in Earth's gravity. And that's true even though they have a strict and extensive exercise regimen. If one is sitting around for two years doing nothing, it would take at least a few months of continuous exercise to be able to do anything.

    8. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm a powernap expert and have slept for up to 36 hours in one stretch. What would you like to know?

      Not something to put on a resume, if you ask me.

    9. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by damiam · · Score: 1

      Unpleasant, but already solved. How do you think they support people in comas?

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    10. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Three years older and nothing to show for it...yeah, that sucks. Three years older and imminent arrival on Mars to show for it...that's a little different.

      You have to remember that 150 years ago, people would sign up for three years of dangerous, backbreaking labor aboard a cramped, stinking whaling ship and come back with nothing to show for it but enough money to get drunk and laid until the next voyage.

      rj

    11. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... nothing to show for it but enough money to get drunk and laid until the next voyage...

      And thus the great nation of England was created..

    12. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1

      I think they should send some artists and musicians up there. They wouldn't get bored. And they could definitely make money selling the stuff when they got back - "listen to the first album created entirely in space!" etcetera. I'd sign up.

      --
      I belong to the ______ generation.
    13. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Bad+D.N.A. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yea but hard radiation shielding is really the problem. Sure we can pack a bunch of Al or some other material around a enclosed area and keep out the energetic ions both from solar events and from cosmic rays but what about the neutrons? We simply have to way to stop the neutrons and packing a lot of shielding around the sleeping area will no doubt increase the number of neutrons that the travelers would absorb. Talk about keeping them busy during flight is a nice discussion for Martha Stewart but the one of the hard core science questions (besides how to get back off the Martian surface) is how to keep them from getting cancer during the trip.

      --
      "Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
    14. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Poppageorgio · · Score: 1

      Is it possible to mod this to +10 insightful?

      --
      Me fail English? That's unpossible!
    15. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Chrispy1000000+the+2 · · Score: 1

      Bedpans?

      --
      Sig
    16. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Rew190 · · Score: 1

      I'm no doctor, but I would imagine atrophying of the muscles would be a problem as well.

    17. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Good idea. Let's start with Britney Spears, Cher, Celine Dion and, oh, as many other low-talent RIAA-affiliated artists as will fit on the ship. :-)

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    18. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm... no. muscles weaken because they're not fighting against gravity in earth.

    19. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
      Okay, then enlighten me, how is it done? I assumed the answer was diapers, bedpans, and lots of unpleasant manual cleanup labor for the nurses who tend to them. Not exactly practical for a long hibernation-enabled journey. If you could point me to a link to the automated crap-cleaner-upper machine of which you speak, I'd be curious to learn more.


      This has to be the most foul discussion I've ever had on /. .

    20. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Pfhreakaz0id · · Score: 2, Funny

      .. can you say "B Ark" boys and girls? I knew you could...

    21. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by dsanfte · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, you could keep their bottom halves out in space.

      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
    22. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by dsanfte · · Score: 1

      And the processes that cause their muscles to weaken are slowed, because the body is hibernating. What, do you think that bears have to learn to walk again when they wake up in the spring?

      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
    23. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you could keep their bottom halves out in space.

      In other news, how comets are formed.

    24. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by acz · · Score: 2, Interesting
      An interesting question is, would you be willing to go into a matrix-esque environment for those months, where you could go to movies, read books, interact with people on earth (speed of light limitations would make this really trippy), to pass to the time while your body sleeps?


      Read Maze of Death from Philip K. Dick on the subject. My favorite PKD book.
    25. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      ...stinking whaling ship and come back with nothing to show for it but enough money to get drunk and laid until the next voyage.

      Getting laid? Wow, that is even more than we get.

    26. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      How about muscle atrophy? If I slept for six months straight, you can be damn sure that I'd have a hell of a time getting out of bed

      Obviously animals that hibernate don't have that problem. That's one reason to study hibernation, as opposed to sleep.

    27. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do they get paid for those three years? Only asking, cause I know the accountants will try to wangle their way out of it ...

    28. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by ralphclark · · Score: 1
      would you be willing to go into a matrix-esque environment for those months
      The brain is the busiest organ (in terms of energy expenditure) in the body. Obviously, to support the brain's metabolism, the other organs would have to be working as well. So if you want to keep the brain going then you have to forget hibernation altogether. Hibernation is going to mean a very deep sleep.
    29. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about colostomy, with an external peristaltic pumping pipe instead of a baggy. Catheters for urine...

    30. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
      Are you seriously suggesting a serious surgical procedure be performed, albeit a reversible one, to solve the problem of dealing with human feces during hibernation?


      Yes, it's not so hard for a surgeon to reverse a colostomy, but it's still major abdominal surgery to get it in the first place, then major abdominal surgery to reverse it afterwards. And potential complications after each. I realize space exploration has its risks that these astronauts would be assuming, but I think the doctors and scientists involved would all have serious ethical issues about performing two unnecessary operations of that magnitude.


      I understand catheters for urine, although to be honest, a Foley catheter needs to be periodically replaced to prevent infection, and even so, long term use is not advisable - imagine a serious UTI/kidney infection out in the middle of space. Not a good thing.

    31. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read another article on this a while back, (Sorry, I really don't remember where it was) and it went into a little more detail about the trigger molecule they speak of. Basically, researchers introduced the molecule to a cell culture and the cells went into hibernation. When the molecule was removed the cells were revived again. The big plus here is that it does not require a constant application of drugs, just a one-time dose and some kind of antidote to wake up again.

    32. Re:Does hibernation slow or stop aging? by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      Dear Mal-2: Omar says come home. Everything's forgiven.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

  11. 2001 by mutewinter · · Score: 1

    Hmm sounds like 2001: A Space Odyssey a few years late.

  12. Changing astronaut requirements by thellamaman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Expect NASA to announce, in the next few months, that physical requirements for astronauts have now changed. All prospective recruits must now have at least 400 lbs. of body fat.

    1. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by BeatlesForum.com · · Score: 2, Funny

      And you wake up three years later at a thin 100 pounds. Forget Atkins, let's go to Mars!

      --
      When millions disappear from earth, it's not aliens, it's the rapture.
    2. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is funny, but it's actually on the right track. Rather than developing machines that we can sleep in for long periods of time, we should be looking at modifying humans (genetically or otherwise) so that they can survive a long trip through space. Nature has adapted us to life on Earth, we must adapt ourselves to living in other environments. Best of all would be to transplant our consciousness into durable robotic chassis with interchangeable/hot-swappable components so that we can effectively live forever and survive anywhere.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Tesko · · Score: 0

      Wow! They're going to accept half of /. readers?

    4. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I refuse to go. Latency is so bad outside of Earth orbit, that making a first post is impossible!

    5. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by jerryasher · · Score: 2, Funny

      Damn you, that blows my Sigourney Weaver in heather underwear fantasies.

    6. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 1

      Go read Diaspora by Greg Egan. Polises and Gliesners and 800 times faster cognition all the way baby!!!

      --
      Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
    7. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, after 3 years hibernation, your extra flab wouldv burnt off, and if things get really scary, you could pull your spare belly skin over your head like a blanket!

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    8. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by damiam · · Score: 1

      The nice thing is you wouldn't have to wait 20 seconds to post - the lag would be inherent in the system.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    9. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Mipmap · · Score: 1

      Conserving calories is easy - other mammals do this at will (bats are really amazing - going down to nearly stopping their metabolism during the winter - with frost and icicles hanging from them even). BUT, even bats need to wake up every now and then to hydrate. My point? None really, I've had a few beers. But I'd say it would be much easier to build an interface between a man and a machine to keep the man asleep for 3 years, than it would to modify humans to be completely self-sustaining for this long a period.

    10. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Bad+D.N.A. · · Score: 1

      Close. It's actually all prospective recruits must be 50 years or older so that when they die of cancer 10 years later everyone can say it was from natural causes.

      --
      "Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
    11. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by geg81 · · Score: 1

      Best of all would be to transplant our consciousness into durable robotic chassis with interchangeable/hot-swappable components so that we can effectively live forever and survive anywhere.

      There is no reason transfering your consciousness into the robot should kill you. So, after this transfer, there is still a copy stuck in your body and there is a copy of you running around in a powerful robotic body. Why exactly do you want that? And, for that matter, why would anybody else want that? And how would that be different from just sending a robotic probe?

    12. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by CMRichar · · Score: 1
      Best of all would be to transplant our consciousness into durable robotic chassis with interchangeable/hot-swappable components so that we can effectively live forever and survive anywhere.

      Yes! I want a robot body! With chainsaw hands!! BzzzzZZzzz!!! (with all respect to the Sealab 2021 crew...)

      --
      "Good night, good work, sleep well, I'll most likely kill you in the morning." - Dread Pirate Roberts
    13. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by eddeye · · Score: 1
      Best of all would be to transplant our consciousness into durable robotic chassis with interchangeable/hot-swappable components

      I call dibs on the chainsaw hands and D-cups of justice! Barbot-bot away!

      --
      Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
    14. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      And you wake up three years later at a thin 100 pounds. Forget Atkins, let's go to Mars!

      But what about the return trip? Would this mean the ship would have to have enough food so that on Mars you could bulk back up to 400? If so, that might negate the savings from hibernation!

    15. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by BeatlesForum.com · · Score: 1

      Good point!

      --
      When millions disappear from earth, it's not aliens, it's the rapture.
    16. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      There is no reason transfering your consciousness into the robot should kill you. So, after this transfer, there is still a copy stuck in your body and there is a copy of you running around in a powerful robotic body.

      You mean in the future, Windows may be Gates? Holy shit!

      If you think people enjoy tweaking up Clippy now....

    17. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by burdalane · · Score: 1

      If hibernation could stop or slow down aging, I would like to hibernate right here on Earth until I can be modified to become immortal and survive a long trips through just about any environment.

    18. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not to mention, what happens when you get on your own nerves? I hope the original me will know how to turn off the robot before I rip my head off. Hopefully, I can use my dislike of the sight of blood against me. I don't know about you, but when it comes down to me or me, I know whose side I'm on.

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    19. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by ralphclark · · Score: 1

      Aye. Diaspora is a bloody fantastic story (poor Yatima!)

      Have you read Permutation City? It's mind blowing.

      Egan rocks.

    20. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by ralphclark · · Score: 1
      There is no reason transfering your consciousness into the robot should kill you.
      The process of scanning the information content of the relevant parts of the brain (perhaps with resolution down to the quantum level) might well be destructive.
      So, after this transfer, there is still a copy stuck in your body and there is a copy of you running around in a powerful robotic body. Why exactly do you want that?
      Even if non-destructive scanning were sufficient so that there were two of you running around after the procedure, is that a problem? One of you still gets to go to Mars. And the one that gets to go, still remembers being you. It has just as much right to lay claim to being "you" as the one left behind has.
      And, for that matter, why would anybody else want that? And how would that be different from just sending a robotic probe?
      People working in AI now are rather pessimistic about the prospects of engineering a sentient, human level artifical intelligence (I'm not, but let that pass). Isn't it worthwhile to send someone who can offer a human perspective rather than just a literal-minded robot? I think most people would agree that it is.

      Finally, would you feel so negative about it if the space traveller's memories could be downloaded back into the Earthbound copy's skull and merged with his own after the traveller's return? It seems likely to me that the technology for rewriting the brain might appear not long after the technology for reading it.

    21. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by geg81 · · Score: 1

      People working in AI now are rather pessimistic about the prospects of engineering a sentient, human level artifical intelligence

      Not as pessimistic as about uploading.

      The process of scanning the information content of the relevant parts of the brain (perhaps with resolution down to the quantum level) might well be destructive.

      OK, then uploading yourself into a machine amounts to making a copy of yourself followed by committing suicide. It just doesn't sound very appealing. Why would you want to do that?

    22. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by ralphclark · · Score: 1

      Why? If the uploadee has better prospects than the previous incarnation.

      Such as, "You can only go to Mars as an uploadee because otherwise the radiation and other stresses would kill you".

      Such as, "Your body is about to die anyway so here is a new one that will do you a bit longer so you can finish writing your book".

      Such as, "Your old body is OK as far as it goes, but this new body is better. Better, stronger, faster".

      Once uploading is available and once you are prepared to accept it, you are effectively immortal - without the misery of ill health and old age, to boot.

      BTW I know I'm sidestepping the point that you're really trying to make, but that's quite deliberate: I believe in Leibniz' Identity of Indiscernibles. I also disbelieve in the self as a physical object. If somebody wakes up tomorrow thinking he's me, with some sufficient proportion of my memories, attitudes and other faculties all nicely intact, then he's me. What's to argue? You make the very same leap of faith every night when you go to sleep.

    23. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by geg81 · · Score: 1

      I believe in Leibniz' Identity of Indiscernibles

      But the metal entity with your memories would be very different in many ways.

      If somebody wakes up tomorrow thinking he's me, with some sufficient proportion of my memories, attitudes and other faculties all nicely intact, then he's me.

      The question whether he "is" "you" is useless semantics IMO. The real question is: given the choice, would you like to create a second you with all your memories and should society permit you to do that.

      You make the very same leap of faith every night when you go to sleep.

      There is no "leap of faith" involved there: I very much hope that I become different persons day after day, and the choice is clearly proscribed. But with "uploading", it is entirely unclear what kind of person you would create, and you do actually have a choice whether and how to do it.

    24. Re:Changing astronaut requirements by ralphclark · · Score: 1
      But the metal entity with your memories would be very different in many ways.
      You're making unwarranted assumptions about the details of a hypothetical technology that doesn't exist yet!
      The question whether he "is" "you" is useless semantics IMO.
      I'm glad you have grasped this crucial philosophical point. Most people don't. Even (ironically enough) William Gibson.
      The real question is: given the choice, would you like to create a second you with all your memories and should society permit you to do that.
      If the technology was up to the task, and if I had sufficient reason to (any of those I enumerated previously would do), then yes why not. As to society...society will ultimately decide under what circumstances the benefits outweigh any drawbacks. eg: if I am mortally injured/terminally ill, my death will impoverish my wife and young children and place a burden of care on the State. If the State allows me to extend my life so I can continue to provide for them, surely that's a good thing? It apparently is, because the state (any state) already allows the ill and injured to receive life-saving surgery. Same thing.
  13. A prime example of spin-off technology by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Stories like this illustrate why people who say things like "why are we spending all this money on space when we have so many problems to solve here on Earth" need to rethink their arguments. Not only would true hibernation open up voyages to destinations much farther away than Mars, but being able to put humans into hibernation would have enormous medical implications -- imagine hibernating through surgery, or in the case of something incurable, being put into hibernation (thus, persumably, greatly slowing the process of the disease) until a cure is found. Also, the advances necessary to acheive this would lead to a much better understanding of human biology generally, with attendant medical advances we can't necessarily imagine at this point.

    The usual counterargument to this is, "But if we spent the money studying ___ for its own sake, we would make the same discoveries, without the overhead of space flight!" This misses the point, IMO; we could do the research, but without an obvious need such as space flight creates, we generally wouldn't. Space exploration has provided the justification for some of the most important research the world has ever seen -- the reason "space-age technology" has fallen out of favor as an advertising slogan is because the stuff is now so woven into the fabric of our daily lives that we no longer think about its origins -- and clearly continues to do so.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You make it sound like technology never grows without space flight. It may have been true years ago when space programs were part of the cold war, but it's not true anymore.

      For the last 20 years or so, technologies developed outside of the government space programs have benefited them, rather than the other way around.

      Lets put it this way, name 5 things the space program has pushed forward with development on in the last 10 years. Things useful to everyone.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

      first off, a lot of techology takes longet then10 years to reach market. Smoke detectors are a good example.
      second, there is going to be less, becasue NASA keeps getting there budget slashed
      third, Many thing that get to market are inside other products you don't relize.
      forth, the answer to your question:
      artificial Heart

      Automotive Insulation

      Balance Evaluation Systems

      Bioreactor

      Diagnostic Instrument

      Gas Detector

      Infrared Camera

      Infrared Thermometer

      Jewelry Design

      Land Mine Removal Device

      Lifesaving Light

      Prosthesis Material

      Rescue Tool

      Vehicle Tracking System

      Video Stabilization Software

      more here:
      http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/
      http://www.st i.nasa.gov/tto/spinselect.html
      http://www.thespac eplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by moonbender · · Score: 1

      This misses the point, IMO; we could do the research, but without an obvious need such as space flight creates, we generally wouldn't.

      You could use that argument to support mostly any otherwise pointless exercise. Like, instead of space exploration, we could try to re-build the Tower of Babel. I'm sure a lot of useful technology could potentially result from this. Or we could just dig huge holes and refill them really fast. Or design and build new fighter airplanes. All perfectly reasonable ways to subsidize high tech research and development.

      In any event, I tend to disagree, I think most of the research that applies to the "real world" would be done in any event, and I don't think you present a convincing argument otherwise. You don't really need to convince me, though: I'm not sure about the merits with respects to the "real world", but I'm still not opposed to space exploration. In the end, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the world is one of the highest goals in itself.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    4. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well funding "space" project, aside form having pratical uses here at home, put large amounts of capital into the economy, meaning people make and psend more money, meaning it improves the economy and creats skiled adn int he long run unskilled jobs (service industry relies on people that make more money to spread the wealth by spending it)

    5. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NASA keeps getting there budget slashed

      What the fuck are you talking about? NASA's budget has been increasing for years.

    6. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by damiam · · Score: 1
      Diagnostic Instrument

      Now there's a nice specific accomplishment.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    7. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by Hortensia+Patel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      we could do the research, but without an obvious need such as space flight creates, we generally wouldn't.

      Uh huh. Because it's almost impossible to raise funds for medical research. There's just no demand for living longer and surviving incurable diseases, you see. And governments won't touch it with a bargepole; political suicide.

      I don't buy this whole line of reasoning, to be honest. For one thing, it's misleading. The USA's Pentagon system shovels money into military tech in the hopes that something genuinely useful will fall out as a side-effect. And it often does, if only because a lot of military-funded research ends up being anything but military. But you can pump that money directly into civilian-oriented research instead. Japan's MITI used to do this (interestingly, their funding breakdown by tech segment was almost identical to the Pentagon's) and was rather more efficient in terms of ROI.

      More importantly, though, I think it sets the arena of debate all wrong. It's not about the spin-offs, nice though they are. The Apollo project was IMO the single most heroic and awe-inspiring achievement in human history. It wasn't an R&D lab for non-stick frying pans. Defending it in those terms feels demeaning.

      As for this particular problem, I suggest that instead of training humans to hibernate, NASA should consider training groundhogs to fly spaceships.

    8. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by mi · · Score: 1
      because NASA keeps getting their budget slashed

      We've just gone through this. This is simply a factually wrong statement. NASA's budget stayed the same (adjusted for inflation) since, at least, 1999.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    9. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by renjipanicker · · Score: 1
      imagine hibernating through surgery, or in the case of something incurable, being put into hibernation (thus, persumably, greatly slowing the process of the disease) until a cure is found.
      Not trying to troll but seriously... what's wrong with death when the time comes?
    10. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by My_Dirty_Facist_Ass · · Score: 0
      ""..NASA keeps getting there budget slashed..""

      "What the fuck are you talking about? NASA's budget has been increasing for years."

      Jesus Fucking Christ, I hope all of you people die. ALL OF YOU. We're talking about a simple question here. Has NASA's budget increased or decreased in the recent years? It's one or the other, for fuck's sake, and should be easily answerable. Even if it's not it means one of you is lying or are unsure. Everyone's so sure of the answer that they're unwilling to consider they may be wrong. That's why I want us all to fucking die, myself included. Let nature choose another species to ascend, it will probably do better.

    11. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      You know whay nothings changed in the last 10 years due to "space aged technologies"? Its because for the last 10 years NASAs been doing the same thing they were doing for the 10 years before that. The Apollo program brought advancements, the shuttle program brought advancements. But once they finished designing and building the Apollo rockets, the source of new technologies disappeared. Same goes for the shuttle program. It gets old. To keep reaping the benefits in other areas, we need to keep devoloping new technologies. Which wont happen without new goals (and actual resources put into reaching them).

    12. Re:A prime example of spin-off technology by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Are you joking?

      Rescue tool? Lifesaving light? What the hell kind of examples are those?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  14. Two words: by elid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashdot archives That should keep them busy for awhile

  15. Light speed by 3770 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd have to recommend near light speed instead. First of all, the trip will be faster. And as an added bonus, time will pass faster.

    The trip will feel as if it was from now... to... now. Or even faster, from now to now. Or maybe even from nowtonow if they are really close to light speed.

    The one advantage with the hibernation thing is that they might feel really rested when they get there.

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
    1. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have to recommend E=mv^2 instead (where v ~ c).
      That's how much energy you'd need to accelerate to your near speed of light

    2. Re:Light speed by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      Even at light speed, it's still 100,000 years to traverse the Milky Way. I think it's something like a quarter of a billion years to Andromeda.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:Light speed by 3770 · · Score: 1

      Umm... You say that v should be approximately c, but do you mean bigger or smaller than c?

      Because if it is bigger they would arrive before they started and that is creepy. I've read about that in the Silver Surfer.

      --
      The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
    4. Re:Light speed by gollum123 · · Score: 1

      at near light speeds time will slow down to a crawl not pass faster on the ship.

    5. Re:Light speed by bleckywelcky · · Score: 1


      Only about 4 light years to Alpha Centauri

    6. Re:Light speed by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      4 years, assuming you can accelerate instantaneously to the speed of light and then stop on a dime, which isn't terribly realistic. Even then, the number of destinations reachable within 100 years of lightspeed travel is comparatively minute.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    7. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the relativistic expression for kinetic energy is gamma*mc^2 - mc^2 = (gamma-1)mc^2, where gamma = 1/sqrt[1-(v/c)^2], and m is (rest) mass. This diverges to infinity as v approaches c.

    8. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well. it would be 100k years for you and for me, but not for the austronauts.

    9. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure that if near light speed was an option they would take it, but if you keep reading in your Modern Physics book, Science News for Kids magazine, or where ever you picked up on Special Relativity, we probably won't see near-light speed travel within our lifetime.

    10. Re:Light speed by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      This is exactly why it would be more practical to just move Alpa Centauri closer to us. Why travel for 4 years (even if it seems like an instant to you), when you can travel for say, 3 days at normal speed, and arrive there?

    11. Re:Light speed by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but how is this "Interesting"? First, near-light speed is not possible anytime soon. (Not in the time frame of this project.) Secondly, if we had near-light speed, the trip will take an hour and a half by our time. Near light speed travel will be bad for the astronauts because their time will take forever to pass. Time slows down the faster you get.

      So there.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    12. Re:Light speed by 3770 · · Score: 1


      Heh... The interesting mod has me confounded as well. I was aiming for funny.

      --
      The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
    13. Re:Light speed by Chrispy1000000+the+2 · · Score: 1

      I always wondered, that if you exceded the speed of light, and went back in time, would it look like you were gonna crash into yourself at some point along the timeline? And what about in that instant that you were at c + a little bit? Would there be a slight overlap of the matter in the front and rear ends of the spaceship? What would that do? Create a black hole?

      //So that's where all thouse other advanced, extra-terrestrial, civilizations went

      --
      Sig
    14. Re:Light speed by 3770 · · Score: 1


      Man, I used to go nuts wondering where the universe ended.

      And I used to wonder if a ship speeding away from earth at 0.6c would see my flashlight if I was at the back of another rocket ship also speeding away from earth at 0.6c but in the opposite direction so that neither would go faster than the speed of light relative to earth, but so that they would be distancing themselves at 1.2c from each other.

      And now you gave me two more things to go nuts about.

      --
      The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
    15. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Near light speed travel will be bad for the astronauts because their time will take forever to pass. Time slows down the faster you get.

      You got it backwards. Time dilation means that less time will seem to pass for the astronauts than for those remaining at home.

    16. Re:Light speed by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1
      The one advantage with the hibernation thing is that they might feel really rested when they get there.
      The other advantage of hibernation is that it may actually be possible within the next century.
      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    17. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>First of all, the trip will be faster. And as an added bonus, time will pass faster.

      Unless they're slow readers.

    18. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is correct that the Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, but a quarter of a billion years to Andromeda? That's not even plausible. The Andromeda is just in our galactic neighbourhood at a distance of 2.9 million light years (i.e. about just 1% of a quarter of a billion light years). It is really not that hard to check the facts before posting.

    19. Re:Light speed by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      First, near-light speed is not possible anytime soon. (Not in the time frame of this project.)

      Now that's the understatement of the century. The same could be said for human hibernation. This would be a far more important achievement than getting to Mars, which I hope was the point.

      Secondly, if we had near-light speed, the trip will take an hour and a half by our time.

      I think it's more like 15 minutes.

      Near light speed travel will be bad for the astronauts because their time will take forever to pass

      From our perspective (say, watching them with a telescope), their onboard clocks are only ticking at 1/10 the speed of ours, but the astronauts are also being slowed down compared to us. So from their perspective the trip will still seem to take about 15 minutes. Both of our clocks should read 15 minutes. It's just that one minute for them may equal about 10 for us. They will only age, say, 3 earth minutes for the round trip. While we would age the full 30 minutes.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    20. Re:Light speed by ben_white · · Score: 1
      Yes, the ship would see your flashlight. He would also measure the speed of this light as c. The answer is from the theory of special theory of relativity which states that measurement of the speed of light is independant of the observers. The trick here is that the relative speed of the two observers is NOT 1.2c. This has to do with changes in time and distance that occur as the relative speed of two frames of reference approaches c. Distances contract and time dilates, thus the paradox.

      Cheers, ben

      --
      cheers, ben

      Never miss a good chance to shut up -- Will Rogers
    21. Re:Light speed by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      oops. It seems that a clock designed for the earth's frame of reference will actually tick slower on the spaceship. So, the spaceship's clock may actually only read about 3 minutes (assuming the time dilation factor in the example).

      I suppose you could have two different clocks onboard. A normal clock that would display spaceship time and another much faster clock that would compensate for time dilation by ticking x times faster and display earth time.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    22. Re:Light speed by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      That's why I said "I think". Too lazy to check every single fact, and hell I was only off by two orders of magnitude.

      But it IS possible for something to be a quarter of a billion light-years away. We know that the universe is at least 15 billion years old, because that's the distance of the farthest objects that we've been able to see, and thus that light has traveled 15 billion light years to reach us.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    23. Re:Light speed by Chrispy1000000+the+2 · · Score: 1

      But then , if time is diating, would not they be going less than .6c? If this idea is correct, you would be unable to be observed at going more than .5c, no? But if you can't measure or observe something going at a certian rate, is it going at that rate at all, or is it even there in the first place...

      //I've just genocided some brain cells, I'll go take a nap now.

      --
      Sig
    24. Re:Light speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, we won't get light speed travel anytime soon. Actually, at light speed, traveling to Mars would just require between 4 minutes and 20 minutes, depending on the distance between Earth and Mars. However, if you want the trip to take just 1.5 hours you would need to invent a way to create inertial damping fields (like they have in StarTrek :-) ) first or you would have a very unpleasant acceleration/deceleration.

      Assume we go to Mars by accelerating constantly for the first half of the trip and decelerating the second half. Now, suppose we accelerate/decelerate at 1G. That is, on board the spaceship, this acceleration/decelaration would feel like normal gravity due to inertia (and even though we could, we would probably not want a much stronger acceleration for any extended time). Mars has an orbit of roughly 1.5 AU (an AU, Astronomical Unit, being the distance from Earth to the Sun). That means the shortest distance between Earth and Mars (when Earth and Mars are on the same side of the sun), would be about 0.5 AU or 75 million kilometers. We know (as you once probably learned in highschool math) that for linear acceleration:

      d = 0.5*a*t^2

      Where d is the distance (in meters), a is the acceleration (in meters per second squared) and t is the time (in seconds). Assuming an acceleration of 10 m/s^2 (1G is actually 9,81 m/s^2, but 10 is close enough). Also, note that we can only use half the way to accelerate, then we must start reducing speed. Thus we have:

      75,000,000,000/2 = 0.5*10*t^2 ==>

      7,500,000,000 = t^2 ==>

      t = sqrt(7,500,000,000) = 86602 seconds.

      This is close to a full day (24*60*60 = 86400s), just for the acceleration. We will need the same amount of time decelerationg. Thus its at least about two full days required to reach Mars. The good news is, if this way of traveling ever gets possible, it would only be about 4.5 full days of travel to get to Mars even if it was at the other end of the solar system (even though it would be 5 times further away). Now, with this mode of constant acceleration for interplanetary travel, what would our top speed during the trip be? Would we get even close to lightspeed? The highest speed we would reach on a trip to Mars would be when doing the 4.5 day version of the trip to the other side of the solar system.

      We would then have our top speed after half the way (before we start decelerating). An acceleration of 10 m/s^2 means we increase our speed by 10 m/s every second. For the long trip we stop accelerating and start deceleting after 193649 s. The speed at this time thus would be 10*193649 m/s = 1936.490 km/s. This is really fast. The escape velocity of earth is just about 11 km/s (and most people on earth would consider that really fast too). However, compared to the speed of light, 300,000 km/s, it is close to nothing. You won't even notice any effects of time dilation at 2000km/s. In fact, if you do the math you will find that in order to reach light speed while accelerating at 10 m/s^2, you would need almost a full year.

      On the other hand, with this mode of space travel, there would be none of the normal space problems of having zero gravity, and neither the need for creating any form of artificial gravity by spinning the ship etc. since inertial forces that comes with such acceleration would automatically provide perfect artificial gravity for the entire trip. At the halfway point, travelers could be permitted to enjoy a brief moment of zero gravity while the ship is turned around before starting deceleration, but, if this is not desirable it would probably would be possible to just keep the engines going at constant acceleration while gently turning the ship around, thus never really losing artificial gravity at all during the trip

      Another problem is that a lot of energy is needed to provide constant acceleration at 1G for such long time. This problem could probably be solved with nuclear propulsion systems, but it will likely not happen anytime soon. Anyhow, in due time we will probably get interplanetary spacetravel on a regular basis, as well colonies on other planets. One day ordinary people will be able to buy a ticket to Mars and get there within a week. The question is, will we still be around by then?

  16. there is a simpler way by abaybas · · Score: 0

    just show them how to play everquest. Though it might be difficult later to actualy get them to leave their computers and walk on mars.

    1. Re:there is a simpler way by 3770 · · Score: 1

      Or Quake. That would make for good gaming stories when they get back.

      "So there I was, I had just gotten the rocket launcher and my ping was 18 minutes, but I rocket jumped up to the ledge and..."

      --
      The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  17. Just be real sure... by bcrowell · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...not to hit the snooze button when you get there.

    1. Re:Just be real sure... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Hmmmrminmm? Aaw, just lemme sleep another planet, kay...?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  18. Body deterioration due to lack of movement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    One of the problems in space is your body begins to weaken since there is no gravity. That, with the fact that a year of not moving even on earth would make you too weak.. One wonders.

    -Eric

    1. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by vhold · · Score: 1

      The hibernation concept you think might help defeat that to some degree. Your body is deteriotating itself in the course of normal functioning, you slow down the functioning and you slow down the deteriotation?

    2. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by ntxb229 · · Score: 1

      I can attest first hand to the affects of atrophy. I had shoulder surgery and my arm was in a sling for a month. After my arm got out of the sling you could see an extremely noticable difference between the size of my shoulders. The other thing that happens is that the joints tighten up when they dont't move. I couldn't raise my arm above shoulder level. Keep in mind this is just a month and just for one shoulder. I can only imagine the effect over a period of several months (or years) and across the whole body.

    3. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm, but if you're not moving at all then presumeably it would be easier to make spinning-wheel "artificial gravity" as opposed to an entire functioning ship that spins

    4. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I believe that hibernatiopn slows bodily deterioration, all but stopping it.

    5. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by NarrMaster · · Score: 1
      --
      That's right. All your base.
    6. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by jimmyeatmud · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The concept of hibernation is to get every system in the body to slow down. The muscles in your body deteriorate when you start to live sedentary because your system is still at full power. If you run your body at 1% and remain still your muscles will retain their strength and flexibility and still be useful when you are "rebooted".

      My question is what happens to the brain when it is rebooted. Over hibernating animals we have a consciousness and where does that go when our brain is suspended? If it's purely biological then it will still be there, if it is something spiritual then who knows?

    7. Re:Body deterioration due to lack of movement by Ralph+Yarro · · Score: 1

      Over hibernating animals we have a consciousness

      What does that mean and how did you test it?

      --

      The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
  19. HAL 9000. by neodude88 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just look at 2001: A Space Odyssey; if you hibernate to a distant place with a super AI computer watching over your critical life support functions and the spaceship, you'll die a nasty, red-LED blinking death. Just don't codename the computer HAL 9000...

    1. Re:HAL 9000. by EvilMidnightBomber · · Score: 1

      "Just a moment...just a moment...I've just picked up a fault in the AE-35 unit" "Neodude88, I believe you'll have to go eva and bring it in."

    2. Re:HAL 9000. by arekq · · Score: 1

      Many of you probably already know this: HAL becomes IBM if you advance each letter by one.

  20. Mars crew returns to earth by halftrack · · Score: 3, Funny

    CNN-reporter: I'm standing here with Mr. Carter, first human on Mars. So, tell me, Mr. Carter, how was it like?

    Mr. Carter: *Gasp* I don't know. O.K. I guess, but I had this wonderful dream about a great pink mushroom and a sea of chockolate. Ahh ... if only I could return. Maybe tonight.

    --
    Look a monkey!
  21. Number 1 by 3770 · · Score: 1

    No, I've made up my mind. Near light speed is better. Just because, can you imagine how bad you would have to go when you got there? And there is probably only room for one bathroom on the ship.

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  22. Ask a ninja by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    >>the physiological mechanisms that mammals use to hibernate

    Ninjas are mammals.

  23. Thus the bear-proof suit... by Alpharaptor2k4 · · Score: 1

    Well if you studing Hibernation, someone has to eventualy try and take a "sample" from a sleeping bear. Thus, why that guy in the "Bear-Proof" suit started on his apparently mad quest to build that strange contraption. He sold the prototypes on Ebay which was listed here some time ago. But his plan may soon be needed if the ESA has their way.

  24. Good idea. Let's tweak some humans by Trikenstein · · Score: 3, Funny

    What could possibly go wrong with that?

  25. If I want to be an astronaut by RealProgrammer · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... do I have to live on salmon and wild berries? I like salmon well enough, but berries make my nether region itch.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  26. Cool, but... by Sagara+Sozou · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Lets just hope that this doesn't run on windows.

    --
    Those poor bastards, they have us surrounded. Now we can fire at them in all directions!
  27. NASA is dumb by Charcharodon · · Score: 5, Funny
    Why do they get so worked up over social group issues and confinement for astonauts on long space journeys. If the standard "NASA astronaut" (bunch of over achiever egomaniacs anyway) can't hack it then they need to change the standard.

    I say you surf the net and find the biggest net geeks they can find that never log off. After a spot check at their house to see they do in fact only leave their room to shit, get pizza, soda, and beer then sign them up to be astronauts. These guys wouldn't even notice they have left earth, much less have difficulty handling the isolation. That is of course till Halflife 3 came out and wouldn't run on their computers.

    Then we would have to have an emergency mission. Of course we could get ATI or NVIDIA to pay for the privlage of being "the official sponser of the graphics card upgrade rescue mission".

    1. Re:NASA is dumb by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they'd go nuts and start killing each other once they got far enough away from Earth for the ping times to slow down.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:NASA is dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That idea won't fly. The ping time to Mars is several _minutes_. I get annoyed at 0.1 seconds...

    3. Re:NASA is dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, why not just combine the Mars trip with big brother? The prize could be that the winner actually gets to come back... (Saves weight and rocket fuel over bringing them all back).

    4. Re:NASA is dumb by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      Just make sure you send enough of them that they can have satisfying LAN games.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    5. Re:NASA is dumb by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Seriously, though, can it be that hard to find introverted astronauts able to make the voyage without getting cabin fever?

      Might make more sense to take your standard Montana hermit, or anti-social computer geek, and train them, rather than going the other way around. :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    6. Re:NASA is dumb by Chrispy1000000+the+2 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the bandwidth is incredible. And you don't gotta really worry about the jurisdiction of intelectual property rights, do you?

      --
      Sig
    7. Re:NASA is dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But NASA wants happy, good-looking people-people with showcase families. That's what they need to keep the "good ol' American hero" thing going, and they need that to attract funding.

    8. Re:NASA is dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That is of course till Halflife 3 came out and wouldn't run on their computers.

      That's easy, just leak the news that the source code got stolen and that the release has been delayed and let them whinge on some web-forum...

      Wait a minute (looks outside the window) hey!

  28. Wrong priorities by PapayaSF · · Score: 1

    I'd much rather they spent their time and money on building faster rockets, and avoid the long-travel-time problem altogether.

    --
    Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
  29. Induce depression. by achilstone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wouldn't a long trip without the prospect of seeing friends and family for 4 years (assume 2 years each way) with lack of light and natural exercise plus the fact of being stuck with the same people cause depressive like symtoms in the astronauts.
    E.g. Oversleeping, loss of appetite, general tiredness etc.
    Would these symtoms actually be useful for a long Mars like trip or would it backfire with the astronauts freaking out?
    Perhaps studies carried out of prisoners kept in near isolation with a borderline diet could give some pointers as to what to expect.

    1. Re:Induce depression. by vhold · · Score: 1

      We'll hibernate their entire social network too.

      Maybe cheesy lost-in-space-esque adventuring families will actually occur somehow naturally someday as the solution to this problem.

    2. Re:Induce depression. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Wouldn't a long trip without the prospect of seeing friends and family for 4 years (assume 2 years each way) with lack of light and natural exercise plus the fact of being stuck with the same people cause depressive like symtoms in the astronauts."

      Send nerds. They don't have any friends anyway, and live a nocturnal life so the lack of daylight won't be a problem. As long as they don't try to recompile the mother ship's kernel half way out everything will be fine :-)

    3. Re:Induce depression. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      In years gone by, adventurers and missionaries used to set out travelling the globe, and they wouldn't return for months or years at a time. They seemed to cope reasonably well without the problems the grandparent mentioned.

      It will be a return to those days once we start flying out into the great unknown.

      Besides, with modern communication techniques, near realtime video messages can be bounced around.

      An aspect which supports the grandparents concerns however, prisoners or hostages go through similar relationship deprivation, but respond less well to those who prepared and planned for a seperation.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    4. Re:Induce depression. by burdalane · · Score: 1
      Confined spaces, lack of natural light, and lack of contact with friends and family are not really problems. I spend the overwhelming majority of my time in a confined space with very little natural light or contact with friends, family, or the outside world, doing very little for long periods of time, and usually eating only marginally appetizing food. I wouldn't mind doing those same things on a long trip to Mars. But sharing the spaceship with other people would pose a problem, which is why a solo mission would be much more enjoyable.

      On the other hand, depressive symptoms can pass the time and prevent boredom.

  30. What about exercise! by adolfojp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought that astronauts needed daily exercise to avoid bone and muscle loss.

    Wouldn't sleeping during the trip be detrimental to their health?

    Oh, and I don't thing that using small electric jolts to stimulate the muscles would work. There was a class action lawsuit against a company that sold such a device as exercise equipment because it didn't work. Repetitive arm movements to type and to use the mouse require more muscular strength than those devices produce but you don't see computer geeks (like me) with super strong forearms and wrists.

    Cheers,

    Adolfo

    1. Re:What about exercise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lemme tell you what I do to bulk up my forearms.

      And it isn't typing...

    2. Re:What about exercise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Lemme tell you what I do to bulk up my forearms.
      > And it isn't typing...

      You play the organ?

    3. Re:What about exercise! by koan · · Score: 1

      Well not from typing anyhow =)

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    4. Re:What about exercise! by Xiph · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, i assume that since all body processes are slowed down when hibernating, so is the processes responsible for muscle loss.

      also as i read this, the same technology would be usefull for organ-transplants (keeping the donor-organs alive for longer) and as mentioned by someone else, keep people in near-stasis untill their ailment can be treated.

      /Xiph

      --
      Blah blah sig blah blah blah irony blah blah
    5. Re:What about exercise! by lrohrer · · Score: 1

      as much as two hours a day and they still need several years to recover once back...

      What is the real dollar cost of this health club in space? When will it turn a profit?

    6. Re:What about exercise! by Solilok · · Score: 1

      Forearm, maybe not.
      Wrist, most probably!

    7. Re:What about exercise! by justins · · Score: 1
      as much as two hours a day and they still need several years to recover once back...

      Pulled that figure out of your ass?
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    8. Re:What about exercise! by ralphclark · · Score: 1

      Correct. If I had mod points available you'd get 'em.

    9. Re:What about exercise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not from typing at least. ;-)

  31. I have the answer by defishguy · · Score: 1

    I'm a high school teacher and the FASTEST way to initiate a deep, quasi permanent sleep in another person is to turn on a projector of some sort while also telling them to follow along in a text book. I have one student in a class that is now 45 years old and I still can't wake him up!

    1. Re:I have the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check his pulse.

  32. Video games? by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 1

    If you can't sleep it off, why not play video games, read books, or something else? It seems like a simple solution.

  33. Something To do by r2q2 · · Score: 1

    We could do experiments along the way that could only be done in space. Do studies of long term exposure to weightlessness. See if certain biological systems and other systems function differently in space. If one of the voyagers are artistic you could write a novel or make some art etc...

    --
    My UID is prime is yours?
  34. Re:Hopefully this research will bear fruit soon.. by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

    wont it be nice to have a president whose term in office you can sleep through?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  35. What I would do instead of hibernating by Bob+Cat+-+NYMPHS · · Score: 2, Funny

    I would just spend all day reading Slashdot.

    Oh, wait...

  36. Or hibernate drop outs by GrAfFiT · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Or hibernate prisonners so they take less place, surveillance and don't appeal... reminds me of some movie from Spi*lerg and/or book from P. K. D*ck. Frightening ?

    1. Re:Or hibernate drop outs by damiam · · Score: 1

      You're probably thinking of Minority Report. Hibernation is like a reversible death penalty - you go to sleep and never wake up, unless your sentence is overturned. It wouldn't make much sense for normal prisoners, though, because the purpose of prison is (in theory) to reform criminals in addition to snipping time out of their life.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    2. Re:Or hibernate drop outs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's Demolition Man.

  37. Hibernation and Medicine by BoldAC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Induction of hibernation has a much more practical purpose here on earth -- organ transplant.

    If we could force an ex-planted organ into hibernation, then we wouldn't have to rush around trying to get organs into people within 6-12 hrs (it is different for each organ type).

    Hiberation may also inhibit the reperfusion injury that often complicates transplant as well.

    That's just the obvious use of medical hiberation. We already know that somebody can not be declared dead until they are "cold and dead." This is because the many cases of people appearing to be brain dead --especially children-- who have a complete recovery after warming. (So if you are going to drown, please do so in a very cold lake.)

    Imagine the day when people who are dying at home get placed into hiberation until they can be brought to the hospital and worked up. Instead of blindly trying treatments in the field, one could slow down the dying process until a cause of injury is found.

    It has always amazed me that so many animals hiberate, but we can figure out how to translate that into humans.

    1. Re:Hibernation and Medicine by BoldAC · · Score: 2, Informative

      sorry...

      Corrections...

      - Can not be declared dead until they are "warm and dead."

      - It has always amazed me that so many animals hiberate, but we can not figure out how to translate that into humans.

      Trying to watch Ole Miss vs Auburn, UNC vs Miami, and type on slashdot all at one time.

    2. Re:Hibernation and Medicine by ramk13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > It has always amazed me that so many animals hiberate, but we can figure out how to translate that into humans.

      I think there's been some work on studying hibernation, but even if we get a really good understanding of how it works, that doesn't mean that we can translate it to humans easily. A crude comparison would be to say that since we now how birds fly we should be able to make humans fly... There are genetically coded mechanisms in place that allow for hibernation and it's not trivial to recreate those mechanisms without the genes in place.

      Also hibernation implies that there is still metabolic activity, but it's slower than normal. For an organ to be hibernation, you would still need to provide it oxygen and nutrients, just at a much lower rate than you normally would.

      Not to say that it can't be done, but we are far from hibernation for humans and even farther from true metabolic suspension (which no animals do).

  38. Wait, wait! by ae-valkyre · · Score: 0, Troll

    I've got a a better idea!

    MAKE THE SPACE SHUTTLE GO FASTER.

    I'm such a genius, NASA should hire me.

  39. Easy! by cmcguffin · · Score: 4, Funny

    How are they gonna get a brand-new, untried vehicle to run for a six-month trip each way, without multiple someones keeping an eye on things?

    All they have to do is have some kind of automated assistant to keep an eye on things!

    They could call it the Hybernation Assistance Lifeline.

    It could do things like keep the radio antenna lined up with Earth, and manage the opening and closing of the pod bay doors.

    1. Re:Easy! by I_am_Rambi · · Score: 1

      Dave, stop it Dave... Its hurting Dave.... Dave.... Stop it..... Dave.....

    2. Re:Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, mcmguffin, HAL can't do that.

  40. I'll believe it when I see it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    'Manned missions beyond the Moon are no longer wild dreams. NASA plans a manned mission to Mars before 2020.'

    Manned missions to Mars are right up there with moon bases and flying cars in the "I've heard that one before" stakes. Wake me when they have the spacecraft on the launch pad. I won't hold my breath.

  41. Re:Hopefully this research will bear fruit soon.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thank you fellow communist in the moderator ranks for marking parent post as overrated. Any post mocking John Kerry that is rated over 0 is overrated.

  42. Send HACKERS! by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've always wondered why they dont send people who are use to sitting in a chair for months at a time. ;)

    I know after I get HL2 I wont be on Slashdot for at least a week!

    1. Re:Send HACKERS! by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Because at the end of the travel time, there will be real work to be done, and geeks don't do that :)

      They need to find people who are suitable for the trip and the destination.

    2. Re:Send HACKERS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because at the end of the travel time, there will be real work to be done, and geeks don't do that :)

      Whoa, Hold it right there. Hours of coding isnt work? Sitting at a terminal is just a job as anything else...

    3. Re:Send HACKERS! by Zone-MR · · Score: 1

      I can spend, and have spent, years at a computer terminal leaving only briefly in order to empty my bladder and get some food...

      However, disconnect that computer terminal from the internet, and there is only so much one can do.

      Figure out a way to provide an IRC connection back to earth, and only then will you give geeks perfect living conditions.

  43. GBA's or DS's - the most important choice of all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do the astronauts choose to become the Tetris Master or Mario 64 speed record holder?
    Decisions decisions...

  44. Who gives a shit? by Xenu+Xenu+Xenu · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'd rather see investment towards the Asteroid Belt and Lagrange point colonization

  45. That sound in my ears.... by TheUnknownOne · · Score: 1

    I am repeatedly hearing... "Daaaaiisy..... Daaaiisy...."

  46. Two better words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google Cache.

    And if you include images they would never run out of pr0n either.

  47. Learn the lessons of Doom 3 by nxtr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Make sure to send the astronauts with plenty of firepower. Chainguns, rocket launchers, armor and a chainsaw would be plenty enough to keep those aliens at bay. Don't let the spam get to the astronauts too. They'd be pretty pissed off at that.

    1. Re:Learn the lessons of Doom 3 by balster+neb · · Score: 1

      Aaargh! You forgot the most important: DUCT TAPE!!

      We don't want an expensive duct tape supply mission, do we?

  48. Fast and cheap by jkmartin · · Score: 1

    We've already checked the fast and cheap boxes for this project. Do we really want to tempt the relilability demons by going with something like hibernation? We have plenty of experience with people being confined in small spaces, with little human contact and nothing to do. They're called supermax prisons.

  49. Not much to do? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

    astronauts would face the challenge of living in a confined space with not much to do for an extremely long period.

    Sounds like my teenage years. I managed to make it!

  50. Hibernation here on Earth. by SnprBoB86 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So they are trying to make a human hibernate for 3 years? I wonder if 4 years is possible.

    If Bush wins, I want to sleep right through it.

    --
    http://brandonbloom.name
    1. Re:Hibernation here on Earth. by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      If Bush wins, I want to sleep right through it.

      Might not be much of a country to wake up to.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
    2. Re:Hibernation here on Earth. by SnprBoB86 · · Score: 1

      Well, at the end of the first year, if things aren't looking so good, NASA can send me to Mars.

      --
      http://brandonbloom.name
    3. Re:Hibernation here on Earth. by bot24 · · Score: 1

      Aren't there a few TV shows where somebody is frozen or goes into a coma and then everything is different when they wake up to a ruined world?

    4. Re:Hibernation here on Earth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well there's Goodbye Lenin, when this girl wakes up the wall has fallen, because of her weak heart condition the rest of the family have to pretend that east still is east to avoid her having a new heart attack. Pretty good movie.

    5. Re:Hibernation here on Earth. by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a solution to the IT unenployment problem! Just sleep right through it. Maybe in 1000 years or so the demand for a Java developer will be once-again=measurable...

  51. Missed reference by wasted · · Score: 1

    Whoever modded the parent down obviously never saw the first episode of Lost in Space, or (luckily for them,) the movie of the same name.

  52. Why are we going to Mars? by slinkyredfoot · · Score: 0

    It must be asked. Why go to Mars? For no good reason really.

    Humans must determine why we are attempting to establish a means to which sustained, and maybe even permanent, life be possible away from home(earth).

    The answer is obviously to preserve the race. We need to be able to pack the bags, run out the back door, and say goodbye and never come back.

    So, why then just see if we can go to Mars ? We need to have the best scientists, funded by the wealthiest entities, researching possible ways to live in space for indefinite amounts of time. Maybe a colony on another satelite would be the best first step. And that colony would have to be able to provide for it's new inhabitants with enough resources to sustain us and power our machinery. This way, by having effectively settled in two relatively distinct locations of space, we have increased our chances of survival two fold.

    But it's not enough. We would need to accomplish the same goals as often as possible. Also ,work would have to be done on a self-sustaining space city/shuttle/satelite.

    Oh well. Just my opinion. Not that it really matters.

  53. Reality check... by vwjeff · · Score: 1

    I agree with all of your points but there are two more important hurdles that I believe will prevent a manned mission to Mars during my lifetime. (I am 20 years old.)

    Gravity: We need gravity to keep our muscle mass and bones strong. Considering these astronauts will experience no gravity for six months each way I do not see how this will be possible. Life on the space station for this period of time can not be used as evidence that it is possible to for extended hibernation space travel. Astronauts on the space station spend hours each day exercising in order to delay the breakdown of muscle and bone. I don't think a manned mission to Mars will be possible until we can "create" gravity.

    Money: If NASA continues to receive the funding it is currently getting, we will never go to Mars or even return to the Moon. Congress does not see the purpose of space travel. Until we are forced to go to Mars (mass extinction due to astroid, global warming, ect, ect, ect.) this will not change. I don't think any huge earth changing events will happen during my lifetime that will force us to pack up and move.

    1. Re:Reality check... by Class+Act+Dynamo · · Score: 1

      First, can you imagine being that first guy. "Okay, we're gonna put you to sleep now, not sure if you are gonna wake up". It's not even like risky surgery where you're gonna die if nothing is done. I will gladly leave this to the braver of our species. Second, I have never understood why Congress sees no purpose in space travel. To me, even if the goal is never quite achieved, it creates incentive for technology to be created and built, much of it with specs in the public domain so that others can get ahold of them for free. I am not saying that we should just come up with some fantasy and then pursue it like idiots, only that for feasable (ideally feasable) missions, we should pursue them, even if the ends are never met (think Columbus trying to get to India). Remember that the hand calculator came from the mission to the moon. Depending on how you feel about the calculator, this may be a good or bad thing. I could be dismantling my case as I write, but you get the idea of what I am saying. I think working problems all day for the GRE math subject exam has fried my brain.

      --
      My other computer is a Jacquard loom.
    2. Re:Reality check... by Goonie · · Score: 2, Informative
      Gravity: We need gravity to keep our muscle mass and bones strong. Considering these astronauts will experience no gravity for six months each way I do not see how this will be possible. Life on the space station for this period of time can not be used as evidence that it is possible to for extended hibernation space travel. Astronauts on the space station spend hours each day exercising in order to delay the breakdown of muscle and bone. I don't think a manned mission to Mars will be possible until we can "create" gravity.

      There are several possible ways around this:

      • Rotate the spacecraft. More to the point, attach your spacecraft to a counterweight (like the empty upper stage of the rocket you used to lift you off earth), and spin the system. Instant "gravity", add water and stir. Poses a few minor engineering difficulties (high data rate antennas need to follow the earth, getting the spin started, doing course corrections while keeping the tether taut etc) but it's certainly doable.
      • Do the trip faster. There are technologies available that could almost certainly be developed within your lifetime to do the trip much faster than present technologies. Aside from the 1950's-tech Nuclear Pulse Propulsion, which could certainly be developed but is unlikely to be politically acceptable, there are a number of things like ion drive and the recent Magbeam proposal on the drawing boards that could reduce the trip time in half at least.

        As to the political will, these things can change very quickly. Imagine if China announced they were going to send a mission to Mars to claim it for China...

      --

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
      --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  54. Muscle Loss by peanutious · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sleeping it off sounds like a great idea, if only muscle loss could be stopped during the rest period. Astronauts already have a hard enough time keeping in shape for their ride home when they're awake.

  55. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  56. Hibernate? Sign me up, I can do that! by James_Armstrong · · Score: 1

    Zzzzz.....

  57. Re:Changing astronaut requirements - the down side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great idea - perhaps we can call these newly altered people 'Titans' and they could be put in charge of our colony planets. Actually, no - I for one don't welcome our cymek-slashdot overlords ;)

  58. Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what prevents the chimpanzee from taking one of the human's hibernation chambers?

  59. Why Hibernate? by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 1

    We just leaned a few days ago on Slashdot about the potential of nuclear rocket engines that could greatly reduce the transit time between Earth and Mars from ~9 months to ~7 weeks. Reducing the transit time solves a great many more problems that teaching astronauts how to hibernate IMHO.
    BTM

    --
    That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    1. Re:Why Hibernate? by Bad+D.N.A. · · Score: 1

      Your right on. The problem is not how the travelers spend their time or how to induce hibernation. The problem is how to reduce the radiation exposure that they will encounter on such a long trip. Speeding things up will accomplished both tasks.

      --
      "Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
  60. Lost in Space...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And the monkey flips the switch..."

  61. Dreaming in Hibernation by brandonp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder what the dreams would be like in extended Hibernation. I get some crazy dreams sometimes, what happens when you don't wake up for a few weeks?

    I wonder what stage of sleep you would be in, REM sleep? Or would it be a differege stage that has fewer dreams?

    I'm really curious what the studies will find out about dreams in Hiberantion.

    Brandon Petersen
    Get Firefox!

    1. Re:Dreaming in Hibernation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I wonder what stage of sleep you would be in, REM sleep?

      I hope not, I couldn't stand to hear that "What's The Frequency, Kenneth?" song over and over again...

  62. Re:Hopefully this research will bear fruit soon.. by ZackSchil · · Score: 1

    Research? Have you ever heard the man speak? You think we'll need to induce sleep chemically?!

    "As Americans we are absolutely united, all of us -- there are no Democrats, there are no Republicans -- as Americans, we are united in our determination..."

    And I've blacked out.

  63. ignoring the whole hibernation thing by jeff+munkyfaces · · Score: 1

    cos frankly i think it's unlikely, especially by 2020 -

    How important will computer games be for mars-onauts?

    By 2020 there should be some pretty damn good games - very long, very involving, very time consuming.

    Add to that about 30 years worth of "retro gaming"

    That should keep them busy for long enough..

    I suppose you could even combine them with the exercise they would have to do - as the eyetoy and donkey-konga style games do..

  64. Manned mission by 2020? by ravenspear · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm curious to know the source the submitter had in mind when he stated that NASA is planning a manned mission to Mars before 2020. I have not seen anything like that come out of NASA.

    The President's roadmap they recently adopted only had manned missions to the moon resuming by 2020.

    1. Re:Manned mission by 2020? by Bad+D.N.A. · · Score: 1

      Hey now, your slashing the premise of the whole discussion ... your right of course, neither have I... but thats not the point.

      --
      "Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations"
  65. Duh. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

    We're talking about a Mars voyage. The only acceptable game is Doom.

    "And there I was, with only a shotgun and some ammo, and these demons were pouring out of a dimensional gate to hell!"

  66. What about bed sores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously. Isn't that what contributed to Christofer Reeve's death.

  67. I want to hybernate here on Earth... by mi · · Score: 1
    I want the things like affordable and commonplace flying vehicles, medicine that can replace or repair failing organs with the ease of today's mechanic fixing a car. I want to travel to Moon as easily as I can now go to Caribbeans. And so on...

    The worst part is that I think, all or most of these things are only 50 or 80 years away, which means, I have a chance to see them, but will likely be too old to take advantage of them...

    The vicious German hordes overran the Roman Empire weakened by Christianity and delayed our progress by at least 500 years :-( (Oh, I don't blame them, they had their reasons, but still...)

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:I want to hybernate here on Earth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, they are thinking that about 500 AD there was a big volcanic eruption somewhere that caused crop failures all over the world which brought down the Roman Empire.

  68. Hybernating and the future... by Gamzarme · · Score: 1

    I belive that we will someday be able to hybernate, only that scientists need to figure out how to do it. Of course we can, if mammals and other animals can do it, we can too. It would diffently help our space flights! -Pat
    Free Flat Screens!

    --
    Pat
  69. Fastest but most controversial way to go to Mars. by antispam_ben · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps there will be less hibernating time necessary, but this method wouldn't be controversial if the mission were to the nearest star...

    That's right, make it a one-way trip! Without the return leg, it would be substantially less expensive. And of course, yes, only send those of sound mind who freely decide to go, knowing they won't come back, at least not on this ship.* For that matter, it might even be less expensive to also send unpersonned supply ships every few months to keep them alive and exploring indefinitely than to do just one 'standard' round trip mission. The amount learned about Mars would certainly be much greater with a permanent base for the first mission than with several round trips in the same timeframe.

    * How to handle the public reaction, or whether to tell the public the truth, and other such PR stuff is beyond the scope of this comment.

    Well, here goes my karma...

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
  70. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've given yourself away. Don't be surprised if you are occasionally modded down for no reason now...
    LOL MIAMI IS TEH LOSRE!

  71. NASA is a waste of money! by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Bunch of know nothing idiots!
    All this time and tax payer money spent on this crap and they still don't have dilithium crystals! How the hell do we expect to get anywhere without dilithium?!?

  72. Don't hold your breath... by Lorean · · Score: 0

    The US will be bankrupt by 2020.

  73. when it all comes to a point by Master_Torrez · · Score: 1

    I wonder if when human beings are granted say an infinite lifespan through technology that the government will start regulating our lifespan, say we can only live a maximum of 200 years before our steel bodies have to be recycled and they delete us and place someone new in them

  74. you got it backwards by geg81 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    we could do the research, but without an obvious need such as space flight creates, we generally wouldn't

    Hibernation has been of interest to physiologists, medical doctors, and biologists for a long time because it has lots of practical applications. Claiming that its "origin" is related to manned space travel is false advertising.

  75. A Space Oddessy by Digitus1337 · · Score: 1

    Kubrick warned us against such things years ago...

  76. Or they could... by ValiantSoul · · Score: 1

    give them a couple big screen TVs with computers and or xboxes/ps2s/gcs hooked up for some LAN gaming and of course set up a dedicated satellite to get the latest /. news!

  77. How Many Scientists Allocated this time?! by newpath4com · · Score: 0

    Gee, hibernation. That's pretty simple. Filter out 90% of the astronut's thyroid hormones from their blood while they're asleep. Wonder how many millions they'll spend on this anyway. When they awake, it'll be just like they drove to the West Coast and back. Better yet, forget them and send truck drivers.

  78. Real World Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the better choice is to simply keep them awake and transmit footage back to earth. "See what happens when 7 astronauts on the way to mars stop being nice, and start being real!"

  79. NASA, think outside of the box by Anonymous+Cowdog · · Score: 1

    Instead of tweaking a human to be able to hibernate, just tweak a bear to have the brains to be able to carry out the mission. By the time these missions roll around brain augmentation might be at at sufficient level.

    Am I crazy? No, I'm mostly joking. But, ah, you know, think outside of the box, and Go Bears!

  80. People in machines by colonist · · Score: 1
    Great post by Junior J. Junior III:
    Best of all would be to transplant our consciousness into durable robotic chassis with interchangeable/hot-swappable components...
    We're starting to do this already. We're transplanting people into durable spaceships/space stations/space habitats made up of modules/components.
    ...so that we can effectively live forever and survive anywhere.
    The individual can't live forever yet, but if we colonize the solar system, at least the species can. Survive anywhere: well, maybe not everywhere, but how about the moon and Mars for starters?
  81. That kind of isolation is self-imposed. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You may not realize it, but there's a world of difference between sitting in your house as opposed to really being isolated. If you were to be ill or injured, you could seek a doctor. If something broke down, you could call a handyman. If the pizza and soda guy had delivery problems, you could get food elsewhere.

    In space, you can do none of those things. Even if you don't need them, the knowledge that you can't get them is a heavy burden. If the food supply broke down, you would starve and it'd be longer to deliver emergency rations to you than the most obscure third world country on earth. Hell, your air supply could break down and you'd suffocate.

    In addition, putting a bunch of introverts together will quickly lead to disaster, as they are forced to live on top of eachother in cramped quarters. Nowhere to be alone. Nowhere to go. Every annoying characteristic of your co-travelers, you will have to deal with.

    For this sort of mission, you would want people that are more like polar scientists, people who've had to endure real isolation. If you want to test your suggestion, a polar base is where you'd send them. I bet most wouldn't last a month.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  82. I disagree by Burning1 · · Score: 1

    Ever seen a FPSer go batshit over Latency?

    Immagine a geek with no social skills. Now immagine the ping from mars.

  83. Naturally by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

    NASA plans a manned mission to Mars before 2020

    We'll just bypass Bush's strong support for this program, of course.

    Not a political statement, just a fact.

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
  84. A CURE FOR CANCER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of course, if they did find a cure, the drug companies would go broke and wouldn't be able to snort all that cocaine and poke all those genetically inferior blue-eyed re-tards.
    hopefully one day some gunea pig of their's will go ape-sh-i-t and sit out front of the CEO's house with an ak-47 and mistake them for rabbits.
    Just wishful thinking though.
    Hey,. we can all dream, can't we?

  85. Better than hibernation by ChiralSoftware · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Wouldn't it be better to work on some way of getting to Mars faster rather than figuring out ways to go slower? Just showing up on Mars once, making some great quote ("One small step...") and heading home with some rocks seems pointless. It was pointless the last time we pull such a stunt. If we want to get some value out of this, we need to find a way to get to and from the Red Planet quickly. Finding a way to do it without getting bored isn't an advance in the right direction.

    I'm a lot more interested in great new nuclear propulsion technologies than figuring out some way to pass the time.

    Once we have a quick round-trip propulsion system, routine flights might be possible, opening up all kinds of possibilities.

    Also, if we have a powerful propulsion system, it does start opening up even more far-flung expeditions, like unmanned long-term trips outside the solar system even.

    Of course, IANARS.

  86. Hell with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give 'em a deck of cards, a PS2 with a shitload of games, enough booze to last the trip there and back, and make sure the gender distribution is about even.

    Oh, yeah. Cable TV.

  87. This is crazy by Badboy+Recovered · · Score: 0

    we OBVIOUSLY dont have the tech to go to mars yet - lets just get ourselves back in orbit first -- then concentrate on the moon --- maybe in 2050 we can start thinking of human mars missions. What we need more than anything before we start sending humans past lunar orbit is a whole new propulsion system. right now these rovers we send there are doing just fine.

  88. Computer Games by Databass · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the problem is not to have the astronauts go insane with boredom en route to Mars, may I suggest that computer games could go a long way towards this goal?

    I've gone for days at a time, waking up, getting on my computer until I have to go to sleep, then sleeping and doing it again. I could porbably do it for months at a time if I had to. I could, in THEORY, even take short breaks to "do astronaut stuff" like checking systems and what not.

    If NASA wants to fund some kind of "lock me in a room and play games" challenge, I'll participate. ; -)

    1. Re:Computer Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a recipie for disaster.

      I can just see it now:

      Databass, this is Houston. We're showing a leak in air lock 2.

      30 min delay...

      Roger Houston. Just let me finish this level and I'll get right on it.

      30 min delay...

      Databass, this is Houston. The leak looks pretty serious. We advise you to put on your suit and repair the lock imeadiatly.

      30 min delay...

      Houston, I said I'd do it, just let me get to the save point.

      30 min delay...

      Databass this is Houston. Have you fixed the leak yet?

      30 min delay...

      . . . . . . . . . . .

      30 min delay...

      Databass this is Houston. Are you there?

      30 min delay...

      . . . . . . . . . . .

  89. Re:Hopefully this research will bear fruit soon.. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    wont it be nice to have a president whose term in office you can sleep through?

    But wait until you see the shit you just may wake up to

  90. The Best Method by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Planetary Exploration requires a new type of human being, one that is engineered cutting across our acceptable bounds of what is ethical, simply because we are not the best subjects to explore new worlds we consume to much food, water and oxygen. We lack the efficiency necessary for such endeavors, ultimately the combination of genetic engineering, surgical replacement of tissue with synthetic and cybernetic components, and pyschological conditioning as well as neural implants that ellicit certain behavior to ensure the stability of the individual. Until we are ready to change humanity to fit the task at hand we are best left in the crib.

  91. Just don't wake up early on the mission! by front · · Score: 1

    Allen Steele wrote about that...

    The Days Between

    cheers

    front

  92. i think people also forget that artificial gravity on a spacecraft is easy because of simple physics. for those of you who've seen the newer planet of the apes, think of that ship. when you have a cylinder rotating, it feels as if there is a force pulling you away from the center, assuming that you rotate with the body. this means that, if the spaceship was hollow and big enough to stand at least one human up 2.5 times [[headroom+height]x2] there would be an artificial force that the human would have to fight to move around. simple simulated gravity. thanks physics!

  93. moores law by zxflash · · Score: 1

    too bad it doesn't apply to space travel...

    --

    All the torrents you could want.
  94. the psychological impact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, there's the psychological impact of being locked up for several months or years at a time, but what about the psychological impact of being asleep for several months or years at a time? "Imagine a nightmare you could never wake up from..." And not only would you be asleep, but you'd be asleep *and weightless*, so your body will be freaking out too.

    It only took about 7 months for the Mars Rovers to reach Mars, why would it take several years for a manned probe to reach there?

  95. Give them... by Afrosheen · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...some fake jobs to do. A computer panel full of buttons that have to be pushed in sequence daily or the whole ship explodes. Add to that some actual physical exertion (like removing axle rods from somewhere that are rusty) at random intervals as well. Keep it quiet so only the scientists and some engineers know what's up.

    Yeah, give the astronauts lots of fake jobs which will then lead to fake drama as someone forgets to pull rod 14 on schedule and the core threatens meltdown. Tie it in to emergency evac announcements and lots of flashing lights. I could see this being profitable from a television standpoint as well. That in turn will help fund the mission or a future mission like it.

    Think about it this way: if you're always threatened by disaster but always avert it just in the nick of time, you never know if it's true or not. The astronauts will never wise up. :)

  96. I don't think so. by drg55 · · Score: 1

    Just don't call the capsule computer HAL9000

  97. Mars by Kamiusd · · Score: 1

    Well hibernating is all fine and dandy but, what about the nasty solar radiation the sun likes to spit out in random intervals. Seems like a bad idea to be sleeping while the potiential of such large doses of radiation are possible. It's not like they can radio down to engineering and have Scotty divert all power to the shields while they are sleeping.

  98. artificial gravity by nounderscores · · Score: 1

    Hmm, rotating ring system for artificial gravity, hybernating astronauts... all we need now is a hyper intelligent computer that can't lie to run the ship and we can go to saturn!

  99. surfing on the nav computer by nounderscores · · Score: 1

    Imagine what would happen if you got exploited and your nav computer started executing arbitary malicious code.

    mmmmm.... malicious....

  100. I say something different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do we waste so much money killing each other when we could be furthering the human race?

  101. Why by CokeFiend · · Score: 1

    Im not a earth nut or anything... but I dont understand why we can't focus more in improving our planet before we start putting so much time and effort getting to another. Life really does resemble art. Will we, like the aliens in Indepence Day, just live here until the planet is destroryed them move on to Mars?

    1. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how much you try to preserve this planet, eventually we will have no choice but to leave or die.

      Isn't it a better idea to try this _before_ our natural resources begin to run out? Before some kind of human-caused or nature-caused disaster cause us to shift our focus away from the future?

      It is easy to say "We have plenty of time", but the clock is always ticking and new problems arise all the time.

  102. Ever seen anyone after a 3-month COMA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    .:

    Ever seen anyone after a 3-month COMA? The patient is not much more than a skeleton. Maybe if we send REAL, FAT crewmembers ? Will that help preserve muscle mass? Who wants to be the guinea^H^H^H^H^H^Hsucker^H^H^H^H^H^Htester?

    :.

  103. I'd rather stay conscious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No hibernation in space for me; I don't want to die in my sleep... I wish to be conscious at the conclusion of my life!

    On a risky mission where I could die in space, I'd rest easier thinking I would at least wake up for my own death. I would not enter hibernation knowing I might never wake up.

    The "solitary confinement" aspect does not bother me. I rather enjoy confined spaces; they're like wombs to me. As a Vipassana meditator, I will never run out of things to learn about, even in solitary.

    As for reducing the metabolic overhead, Yogis can do this. I suspect this is something I could learn with proper training.

    If they find someone similar to me for the mission, all the complications of hibernation can be dispensed with.

    1. Re:I'd rather stay conscious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but are you qualified for all the science and the reserch to be carried out?

      Scientists are learning all their lives. I don't think you agree to spend the next 15 years to catch up to the current level of expected knowledge to make you actually usefull for this trip.

  104. Going about it the wrong way by GrmpyOldPgmr · · Score: 1

    How about designing faster and yet more fuel efficient propulsion systems so the trip to somewhere even as close as Mars doesn't take so damn long in the first place. I mean, it may sound like science fiction but maybe we need to actually design space travel vehicles more like the ones you see in sci-fi movies like Aliens before we start planning to fly all over the solar system, galaxy, universe, etc. Sure, it'd be way cool to watch footage of people walking around on Mars but it'd be even cooler if it didn't take them forever to get there and they weren't flying there in some ship designed with our current technology that's prone to blowing up due to things like O rings or broken fuel lines. I think maybe we're getting ahead of ourselves. That's all.

  105. This is Complete and Utter Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    We've been hearing stories about sustainable living on Mars for awhile now, and now hibernating to Mars. Until it happens right here on Earth, it's vaporware. Nobody's hibernating, and nobody has built a successful closed-system biosphere. Send three Martianauts off to Mars for 5 years anytime in the next 15, and someone will win the pool because their chosen date will be the closest to when the last one breathing decides to take the white pill.

    Record deficits, robots already exploring... c'mon people, get realistic. Our hundreds of billions of dollars are going toward Roman Empire fantasies and paying off the costs of occupying other countries, not manned space travel.

  106. problem solved by delong · · Score: 1

    OK, 90% of the objections seem to be about muscle atrophy and having no one on-board keeping an eye on things. Here's my idea of an easy fix, ala 2001 - take shifts.

    A Mars trip has generally been planned for 4-5 crew members. If its 90 day trip to get to and from the planet, one person at any time is out of hibernation for 15-18 days. That person does the "housekeeping" on board and gets plenty of exercise. Problem solved. Someone is watching the ship at all times, and everyone gets exercise in-trip to maintain muscle mass lost in hibernation.

    Say there's a four-person crew. The pilot/commander takes the first wake watch, and also the last wake watch to recover from the longest hibernation period. There would be five watches of 18 days (15 days if 5 person crew.)

    Voila.

  107. prosthetic hearts? by subtropolis · · Score: 1

    made of wood?!

    --
    "Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
  108. More than a few .... by gstoddart · · Score: 1
    Rotate the spacecraft. More to the point, attach your spacecraft to a counterweight (like the empty upper stage of the rocket you used to lift you off earth), and spin the system. Instant "gravity", add water and stir. Poses a few minor engineering difficulties (high data rate antennas need to follow the earth, getting the spin started, doing course corrections while keeping the tether taut etc) but it's certainly doable.


    As I recall the idea of just spin the spacecraft and get free gravity has been more or less dropped specifically because we have almost no experience in engineering such things.

    I don't simply mean 'keeping the antenna aligned' type stuff. I mean the actual physics/mechanics of this large spinning body that we don't have any experience in building and how to keep it from tearing itsself apart.

    So is the whole spinning-for-gravity thing real, or a bit of sci-fi we always would become real science? Anybody actually qualified care to chime in on this?? Like I said, I've seen stuff that NASA specifically abandoned that type of gravity.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:More than a few .... by Goonie · · Score: 1
      I don't simply mean 'keeping the antenna aligned' type stuff. I mean the actual physics/mechanics of this large spinning body that we don't have any experience in building and how to keep it from tearing itsself apart.

      While you are right that we haven't built a large spinning spacecraft before, the physics of "not tearing itself apart" would seem to be breathtakingly simple. The rotation will apply a constant (magnitude) acceleration to the craft pulling it towards the center of rotation (which, if you go with a tether-counterweight design, is a point somewhere along the tether). That's what gives the sensation of gravity. There would also be Coriolis forces and whatnot, which I'm not competent to calculate but would be of much smaller magnitude.

      In any case, calculating the stresses involved, and the structural strength required for the craft, would be an extremely simple exercise for any competent engineer. All the forces acting are extremely well-understood and easy to model.

      Don't get me wrong, there would be challenges with this kind of artificial gravity, for instance:

      • Whether living in it for a substantial time (months) has health effects that we haven't anticipated.
      • How to deploy the counterweight and start the spin.
      • How to design a tether that won't break if it's hit by a micrometeorite.
      • How to change course while the system is spinning (not impossible, apparently, but it's not as straightforward as when you just fire one rocket in the required direction).

      While none of the current NASA plans include artificial gravity, I don't see any evidence that they think it's infeasible. For instance, see this story about a student project in which they designed a mission where humans orbited, but did not land on, Mars. They used artificial gravity in their design. A guy from NASA reviewed their work, and, according to the story, said he believed that the design was feasible.

      --

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
      --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)