Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sending Astronauts On a One-Way Trip To Mars

Posted by samzenpus on from the and-don't-come-back dept.

The Narrative Fallacy writes "Cosmologist Lawrence M. Krauss, director of the Origins Initiative at Arizona State University, writes in the NY Times that with the investment needed to return to the moon likely to run in excess of $150 billion and the cost of a round trip to Mars easily two to four times that, there is a way to reduce the cost and technical requirements of a manned mission to Mars: send the astronauts on a one way trip. 'While the idea of sending astronauts aloft never to return is jarring upon first hearing, the rationale for one-way trips into space has both historical and practical roots,' writes Krauss. 'Colonists and pilgrims seldom set off for the New World with the expectation of a return trip.' There are more immediate and pragmatic reasons to consider one-way human space exploration missions including money. 'If the fuel for the return is carried on the ship, this greatly increases the mass of the ship, which in turn requires even more fuel.' But would anyone volunteer to go on such a trip? Krauss says that informal surveys show that many scientists would be willing to go on a one-way mission into space and that we might want to restrict the voyage to older astronauts, whose longevity is limited in any case. "

27 of 917 comments (clear)

  1. I'm all for it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just make sure my wife's on board.

    1. Re:I'm all for it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I second that. I want your wife onboard.

    2. Re:I'm all for it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have underwear older than the Internet.

  2. Added Bonus with old astronauts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The added bonus is that they don't have broadband at home, so they'll accept an 8 minute ping from Mars.

    1. Re:Added Bonus with old astronauts by sadler121 · · Score: 5, Funny

      They are the poor souls who will really be cursing Blizzard for Starcraft 2 not having LAN support!

    2. Re:Added Bonus with old astronauts by Jared555 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From wikipedia... StarCraft has even been taken into space, as Daniel Barry took a copy of the game with him on the Space Shuttle mission STS-96 in 1999.

      Already happened.

  3. That Analogy Falls Apart by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'Colonists and pilgrims seldom set off for the New World with the expectation of a return trip.'

    Colonists heading to the new world were heading from a place of high resource (to live) contention to a place of low resource contention. A smart move if you wish to succeed--the resources were there for the taking. The astronauts, however, are not just heading to a place of higher resource contention they are heading to a place of no resources. None for living anyway. You might find platinum ore on Mars but you aren't going to find fur trapping, fishing and logging. This isn't little house on the prairie, this is the cold deadness of space.

    You're sending them there on a one trip for one reason and one reason only: saving money. You're not sending them to a new world with more people there and more people coming and food everywhere ripe for the picking. They will eke out a miserable existence and remember earth fondly and try to be live off of what they are doing for humanity.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They will eke out a miserable existence and remember earth fondly and try to be live off of what they are doing for humanity.

      There's no delusions of extended survival mentioned. That doesn't take away what they would be doing for humanity though.

      If we can figure out the kinks we have in our biodomes, I don't see why trying to start a colony there, even if it takes 3 or 4 seperate space missions of people willing to die for it - it would be as revolutionary as the moon landing.

    2. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But I wonder what would happen when they get very old.

      This is just a guess mind you, but I'm pretty sure they would die.

    3. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      All they need is a fabrication shop which is built entirely from parts which the shop itself is capable of manufacturing.

      What if the part that breaks made the part that broke?

    4. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by stonedcat · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unless of course Mars is actually the cure for aging.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me.
    5. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by magarity · · Score: 5, Informative

      While animals do taste great, meat is very inefficient in terms of how much energy goes into first growing the plants then growing the animal. It would be 10x more efficient to just grow soy beans and other high protein meat substitutes.

    6. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Historically, the money spent on throttling men through space CANNOT be spent better when it comes to improving technology or your way of life.

      Unfortunately, the same can be said about war as a technology accelerant. It's why Hitler was Time magazine's Man of the Year, and almost won the Man of the Century, as the person who had the most impact on the 20th century. War gave us ARPANET which gave us the InnerToobs. War gave us the cold war which gave us the space race which gave us integrated circuits which gave us cpu-on-a-chip and vlsi circuitry and all the other goodness we enjoy today. War gave us the impetus to research ways to treat injuries quickly and effectively and stabilize patients in forward positions, which gave us better techniques to treat trauma. War gave us soldiers who had to be treated, and the budget and will to try to create more effective treatments. War gave us practical radar. War gave us practical ICBMs which gave us satellites. War gave us higher-strength metals.

      But as humans, we'd be better off funneling the money into space. Problem is, we'd rather fight.

    7. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by Ritchie70 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know what I say? Screw safety.

      America, in part I believe due to the sobbing heads on television anytime anything bad happens, has become so risk-adverse as to make it impossible to consider doing anything risky.

      When the Apollo program was in full swing, monkey bars of rusty steel stood on fields of asphalt.

      Cars had lap belts but nobody used them. Babies rode on their parent's lap, bigger children rode on the parcel shelf, and nobody wore a helmet on a bicycle or knee pads while skating.

      Life was risky, and people understood that and made decisions and the country was run by adults.

      We need to grow up again and understand that cost benefit analysis can include human lives, and that making that calculation doesn't make you evil.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    8. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by Korey+Kaczor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's just a slow news day. We're not sending anyone to Mars for a long time, and certainly not for one-way voyages.

      We haven't sent anyone to the moon in decades, because nobody wants to fund NASA for it. They're not going to fund NASA for Mars, either.

    9. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by symbolset · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only point of sending men to Mars is to prove the point that we can send men to Mars.

      No. The point of sending men to Mars is to establish a foothold on another planet. It's a step toward colonization. Eventually humans will establish themselves throughout our solar system and use the resources we find there travel to the stars. Or we'll die out. There is no third choice.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    10. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by shaitand · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And 100x more efficient to grow hemp seed. Soy is not a complete protein, it contains only the proteins needed for the body to synthesize the rest. Aside from meat, hemp is the only complete protein. Soy also has to be prepared specially in order to unlock the protein, hemp seed does not.

      Hemp seed is actually one of the few food stuffs that you can live off without having to eat anything else (aside from meat of course). Not that you would want but at least it tastes better than soy.

      Nutritionists recently rediscovered hemp seed as a super food. The bird seed industry knew it a long time ago. Back when certain industries slipped in legislation to outlaw hemp (almost entirely unopposed since nobody at the time knew that marijuana was the same stuff growing in their fields) the birdseed industry caught on and convinced congress to make an exception for them by claiming songbirds wouldn't sing without hemp seed in the mix. That is where a lot of the pot seed in the 60's and 70's came from.

    11. Re:That Analogy Falls Apart by twostix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Convict ships used to take six months at sea to travel from England to Australia and no the convicts weren't allowed off at the distant supply harbours.

      The first attempts to cross the Arctic and Antarctic required more mental strength than you suggest would be needed for mars mission. Considering that they were in pretty much imminent danger at all times and had absolutely *no* technology to help do it or even know where they were to any great degree.

      Some of the comments on here are very telling of what the western middle class has become. Just because you can't imagine having the mental and physical strength to survive life outside your safe, over privileged looked after cradle to grave existence doesn't mean it isn't possible. And compared to the feats of men of history, sitting in a comfortable capsule with new tech to keep you entertained, being able to speak to your loved ones and teams of specialists daily and having plenty of food is so far from being comparable to say crossing a desert or the arctic by foot pulling a four hundred kilo wooden boat full of supplies for six months or being lost at sea for months as to almost be a joke.

      Asia is going to absolutely *dominate* the west over the next few years if this attitude continues.

  4. There's a difference between Mars and the Americas by BlackusDiamondus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'Colonists and pilgrims seldom set off for the New World with the expectation of a return trip.' Indeed, they often did back in the old days, however, I am fairly confident that at the very least, they expected a breatheable atmosphere at their destination.

    --
    Shit happens and it's usually caused by assholes
  5. I'm all for it too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just make sure my wife isn't on board.

  6. its a dated suggestion by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Informative

    The cost savings of a one-way trip are minuscule now as everyone has accepted that ISRU of propellant on Mars is an essential part of any mission plan. You don't take with you all the fuel you need to get back.. you make it there.. and most of the plans call for a fully fueled return-to-earth vehicle to be sitting ready on the surface before you send astronauts from Earth to it.

    The real problem is radiation exposure. 6 months there, 500 days on the surface, 6 months back. Any astronauts you send will never fly in space again and may have trouble getting x-rays for medical problems in the future. The only known solution to this is to make the habitat module more massive.. which of course requires more fuel...

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:its a dated suggestion by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Funny

      The real problem is radiation exposure. 6 months there, 500 days on the surface, 6 months back.

      So just transfer some auxiliary power to the deflector shields. Geez, do I have to figure everything out for you?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  7. Just find some radical Muslim astronauts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tell them that there are 72 unspoiled virgins waiting for them.

  8. It doesn't have to be a "suicide mission" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just because there is no provision for returning to the Earth doesn't mean we cannot send as much help for survival as we can. Equipment and supplies to build structures, process waste water and grow food, generate power (nuclear, fusion, etc). Plus, if they could survive for a year or two, unmanned resupply missions could be sent out at regular periods until self-sustainability of the population on mars is established.

    Really people, if you want to have a human colony on mars, these are the kinds of tough choices that MUST be made. If they asked, I'd go in an instant.

  9. Sending modules to Mars by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't see why we don't shoot a couple of modules to Mars right now...

    1 that makes propellant from Martian atmosphere
    1 habitat module with some plants inside, some cameras, and an airlock.

    If we get good at landing the modules closely enough together, we could send a robot tractor to try and drag the first two together, and if that works send a power plant that could use the fuel from the first one.

    Not one person needs to be sent, and we could check if we're capable of putting down the basics of a Martian base for future use. We'd learn if we can really generate the fuel we think we could, if we can keep a habitat module in good shape for a few years at a time, etc. The power plant could just burn off the fuel just to show it works... or we could send some more power-hungry rovers and have them return to the power plant for refueling once in a while.

    After learning what we can, you repeat with the next generation of modules, and eventually you have a ready-made camp waiting for the first human arrivals...

  10. Re:At this point in US history by drdrgivemethenews · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are thousands of lines in the federal budget. Why pick on this one? Why not sacrifice a jet fighter instead? Or a bridge to nowhere?

  11. Re:Nah boring. by bickerdyke · · Score: 5, Funny

    And call it the B-Ark!

    --
    bickerdyke