Terraforming Mars would ultimatly waste a huge amount of the solar systems useable materials. Without bulking Mars up we get a repeat performance of a planet losing it's atmosphere and going to waste. Better to use the moons comets and asteroids for o'Neil habitats and suchlike.
My observation with respect to the Mars colony is shorter term than yours. I don't know enough, but I'd think that it is somewhat easier to build a self-sustaining Mars colony, than a self-sustaining O'Neill habitat, or similar outposts on the Moon, etc.
So for the long term, yes, the raw materials of Mars are important, but in the meantime we can't stop aiming for a second home there.
Hmm, I don't see the advantage of trading one steep gravity well for another. Even with expected capabilities of nanotech, how is needing to push yourself out of a deep pit on mars to get any where any use at all? Cuz what do you have to do there? Avoiding radiation and meteors means digging in. How fun! Do the same thing to the same effect on luna and you are A) Closer to earth. B) In a higher solar energy orbit. and C) In a lower gravity which facilitates material and product exports.
Yes, Luna is a good outpost too. Let's have both! :)
(Even with its flimsy atmosphere, compared to Earth, the temperature extremes are lower on Mars, and the radiation is shielded somewhat... That is an advantage.)
Are you sure this isn't a paid advertisement by the Disney Corporation for WALL-E?
A great movie but, from a PR POV, it does not make Mars look an interesting place to visit for exploration. It might make a great penal colony however :-)
Ahhh yours is way better than mine lol
Cameronx11 3 years ago
:)
Haven't seen WALL-E, so can't tell you about that. But I agree that it does not look a cozy place as a tourist destination. :)
Which is also pretty true: humans won't find Mars comfortable once there. That is why keeping sending robots makes so much sense.
But establishing a colony on Mars is still a fundamentally important task in order to spread our bets in terms of planetary homes to humanity.
davidorban 3 years ago
Terraforming Mars would ultimatly waste a huge amount of the solar systems useable materials. Without bulking Mars up we get a repeat performance of a planet losing it's atmosphere and going to waste. Better to use the moons comets and asteroids for o'Neil habitats and suchlike.
damianpoirier 3 years ago 2
Very good point.
My observation with respect to the Mars colony is shorter term than yours. I don't know enough, but I'd think that it is somewhat easier to build a self-sustaining Mars colony, than a self-sustaining O'Neill habitat, or similar outposts on the Moon, etc.
So for the long term, yes, the raw materials of Mars are important, but in the meantime we can't stop aiming for a second home there.
davidorban 3 years ago
Hmm, I don't see the advantage of trading one steep gravity well for another. Even with expected capabilities of nanotech, how is needing to push yourself out of a deep pit on mars to get any where any use at all? Cuz what do you have to do there? Avoiding radiation and meteors means digging in. How fun! Do the same thing to the same effect on luna and you are A) Closer to earth. B) In a higher solar energy orbit. and C) In a lower gravity which facilitates material and product exports.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
Yes, Luna is a good outpost too. Let's have both! :)
(Even with its flimsy atmosphere, compared to Earth, the temperature extremes are lower on Mars, and the radiation is shielded somewhat... That is an advantage.)
davidorban 3 years ago
Are you sure this isn't a paid advertisement by the Disney Corporation for WALL-E?
A great movie but, from a PR POV, it does not make Mars look an interesting place to visit for exploration. It might make a great penal colony however :-)
stevenzenith 3 years ago 3