usrbinbash

11 ms·

481.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> A colony will depend on the mother country / planet for quite some time, but has a chance to become materially independent in 150+ years Boston was founded in a breathable atmosphere and a livable climate, in a land that contains
482.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
You are of course correct. I should have said: The lowest energy option for a Mars transfer happens every 24 months. Transfer outside that window is possible, but requires more energy, which increases the transfer time, limits the payload,
483.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> That is simply not true. Yes that is true, as shown by the link I provided. Methane/LOX is simply one of the go-to options for liquid fuel rocket engines these days, whether or not these engines are intended to go to Mars or not.
484.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> thats why starship uses methane No, that's not why. Starship uses Methane/LOX because almost all modern rocket engines do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rocket_engines_using_... > Mars has wa
485.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> that's already had 55 seconds of controlled flight Good. And once it makes the trip to Mars and lands successfully, with 100t of payload, then I will accept it as an argument. > Parachutes, aerobraking, skycranes We are not tal
486.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> is a way to create a habitat not controlled by any Earth government. Yeah, a few tiny problems with that assumption: a) Earth goverments can easily shut down launches from Earth. Since any Mars Base would be dependent on resupply for p
487.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> How come you're so confident about this? Because Mars was created from the exact same stellar matter accretion as our own planet, and nothing we ever learned in 63 years of mission-capable Mars-Research gave even the slightest hin
488.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> You could launch 200 rockets the same day if you wanted to. No, I can launch 200 rockets the same day if I have sufficient rockets, launch pads, reload-capacity on these pads, fuel, and personnel. We have none of these things, and they
489.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> robots on the other hand have the disadvantage of being dumb with no understanding of the situation Which is hardly a disadvantage given that this includes not understanding that we send them on a mission with no return, and a high lik
490.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> I disagree Your disagreement won't change the fact that there are no resources on Mars that we cannot already collect here on Earth, for a fraction of the cost, and without constant risk of someone dying to explosive decompression
491.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Well, it's "a just technically very hard one" right now. Because, we could, technically, just send fertilizer, and soil, from Earth. The question I am asking isn't "is it possible" . The question I am asking i
492.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> So you're saying a single Starship could ferry 7 to 8 full rigs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starship_flight_tests > 14 tons of payload is not a big deal right now Correct...to low earth orbit, it
493.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> dig a hole then put an inflatable hab inside and bury it An inflatable hab...that somehow remains stable and sealed after getting "buried" under a pile of rock?
494.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> You keep raising these logistical issues like you’re the only person who ever thought of them. Better than to hand-wave them wouldn't you agree? Because these issues are real, hard and very limiting factors, and they don't go
495.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> The point I made is you can never know the benefits. Yes we can know the benefits, and for the exact example you mentioned, we did. It was pretty clear to every major seafaring nation, that securing as big a piece as possible of that n
496.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Eyes connect to one of the best diagnostic systems in the universe. These eyes, and the attached brains, can safely study the images that the aformentioned cameras send back to earth, and spend their valueable brainpower developing eve
497.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Nitrogen in Earths soil is present in the form of Ammonia, and derived substances. Occurring naturally, it is the product of microbial nitrogen fixation of diazotrophic bacteria, and subsequent biological processing. Plants can use these co
498.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Chances are, Mars may have local concentrations of nitrous minerals Which would have to be found, ideally near the equator (otherwise landing and solar power generation is going to be a problem), mined and transported. And since Nitrou
499.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> You could totally just dig a 1 meter deep hole with a fancy bulldozer, then plop down a prefabbed house and bury it Yes, and that "prefabbed house", that is sturdy enough that we can "bury it" under a pile of rock [
500.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Okay, let's talk about that. A (very) small roadheader starts at around 8 metric tonnes, and requires around 20kW of power...just for operating the cutting head. And that's a really small one. Again, for comparison, Perseverance:
501.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> In contrast, there's enough atmosphere available on Mars The martian atmosphere has less than 1% the pressure of Earths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars So for the purposes of building habita
502.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> you honestly don't think ten years of strong-willed national (or even international) effort could get us a robot capable of digging holes? Yes, I do think that. Because there is a big difference between an exploratory vehicle that
503.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> There are nitrates on mars The martian atmosphere is 2.8% N2. For comparison, Earths atmoshpere is 78.08% N2, while also being more than 100x as dense. And Earth already has soil, and a developed nitrogen cycle, while Mars doesn't
504.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Design? Sure. Launch? Maybe. Launch while also having to launch everything the people we send there need for the rest of their lives, and also launch everything needed to power and maintain that robot for as long as it's required? Hmmm
505.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> But who cares about that? Everyone who actually has to make a mars colony work . Because, yes "yearning for the vast and endless sea" is certainly more poetic than figuring out how to make beams from tree trunks. But witho
506.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I'm also pretty sure some people said things like "We will soon have colonies on the moon" shortly after Neil Armstrong stepped off that Lunar Lander ladder. Fun fact: No human has set foot on the Moon since 1972: https:&#x2
507.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> I bet some people said the same about america in 1400s. Here is what I bet noone said about america in the 1400s: "Man, it sure would be nice if there was air, arable soil, and building materials in america." > If we c
508.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
It would suck a lot more if we wasted money on a mars colony, that will take hundreds of years to become self sufficient, if it is possible at all (I am still waiting for a solution to human bodies deteriorating in low gravity that is actua
509.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> We would just ruin Mars too. Well, considering that Mars is currently a frozen, low-gravity, toxic, airless, irradiated, soil-less desert with barely any water, no nitrogen to speak of, very few options for energy generation, no protec
510.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I would argue that a civilization that is actually capable of building a generation spaceship, should be capable of defending their planet from GRBs. How? I have no idea. Then again, we also have no idea how to build an actually working gen

More ›