Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Elon Musk Probably Won't Be the First Martian

Posted by Soulskill on from the get-your-musk-to-mars dept.

pacopico writes: In a new biography on him, Elon Musk goes into gory details on his plans for colonizing Mars. The author of the book subsequently decided to run those plans by Andy Weir, the author of The Martian. Weir's book is famous for its technical acumen around getting to and from The Red Planet. His conclusion is that Musk's technology, which includes the biggest rocket ever built, is feasible — but that Musk will not be the first man on Mars. The interview also hits on the future of NASA and what we need to get to Mars. Good stuff. Weir says, "My estimate is that this will happen in 2050. NASA is saying more like 2035, but I don't have faith in Congress to fund them."

7 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. Of course not by rossdee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ray Walston

  2. Funding by jklovanc · · Score: 1, Insightful

    My estimate is that this will happen in 2050. NASA is saying more like 2035, but I don’t have faith in Congress to fund them.

    I, in fact, hope that NASA does not fund a manned mission to Mars. Spending billions of dollars to send people to Mars so they can hide in a hole in the ground praying that the next re-supply mission will get through is a complete waste. Anything useful a human can do on Mars can be done by a robot for much less money and loss of life.

    1. Re:Funding by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And with much less public excitement and inspirational value. Another robot on Mars will not be widely seen as a major step forward in our exploration of the solar system, a man on Mars will be.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Funding by jklovanc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your comparison is way off. Sending people to Mars will have little or no effect on the lives of people on Earth. Researching alternate fuels would have an impact. The two are nowhere similar.

      The government is not a business and should create money for the General Welfare (as the private sector creates money on the order of tens or hundreds of trillions of dollars a year, for personal profit).

      The private sector does not create money. It converts resources, be that natural resources or people resources, into money. Other that devaluing all money by printing it governments do not create money. I see no "General Welfare" in wasting billion on sending people to die in a hole on another planet when there are cheaper and better alternatives.

      Scarcity thinking applied to money throttles progress.

      Scarcity of money is a fact of life. If it wasn't we would all me living in mansions and never working. We need to spend our limited money where it will do the most good. Tell me how sending people to Mars will help progress on Earth better than sending robots to Mars. "Because it is cool" is not a valid reason to send people to Mars.

  3. Musk is a busy man. by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just like how the sitting president never traveled far from US borders (Until safe aircraft and a Radio communication infrastructure). A CEO of a large global corporation, really doesn't have the time to leave on an extended multi-year adventure.
    A 20 minute data Lag for a modern CEO could cause major business issues.
    Also the fact when it is ready Musk will be an old man, not really fit for such an adventure.
    Sadly I will be too old to travel to mars in my lifetime. Who has nearly less responsibility as Musk.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  4. The Moon is the way to go by invid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As much as I would love to colonize Mars, it would be a lot easier to colonize the Moon. In both cases you need a pressure suit and you're going to be hit by lots of radiation. You'll be spending most of your time underground in both cases. And it's cheaper to get more stuff to the Moon to help people to survive.

    --
    The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
  5. Re:Almost gets it... by jandrese · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with orbital mining is that it depends on the presence of orbital manufacturing. And orbital manufacturing depends on the existence of raw material. There is a chicken and egg problem unless you're willing to try to safely deorbit many tons of material every year, which is a terrifying prospect. It doesn't really make sense until we're building some sort of enormous space station or space ship in orbit and the launch costs exceed the eye popping costs of starting up an orbital mining/refining/manufacturing industry.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.