Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
We need to get to Mars finally. Seriously, what the hell are we waiting for?
We need to get to Mars finally. Seriously, what the hell are we waiting for?
By Vegas
19 Aug 2023 11:25 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
19 Aug 2023 11:25 am
We went to the moon ages ago...6 different times. Since then, we have been sitting on our asses. Why? Technology has advanced enough to the point that we can go. Elon Musk is full of ****. He is always talked about it, but he doesn't ****.
Q: But why go to Mars, what purpose would it serve?
A: Who cares? Because we can. Why do we have to have to have some deep profound reason? Hell, we make up reasons to spend billions on going to wars. So, let's make up reasons and spend money on going to Mars instead.
Q: But why go to Mars, what purpose would it serve?
A: Who cares? Because we can. Why do we have to have to have some deep profound reason? Hell, we make up reasons to spend billions on going to wars. So, let's make up reasons and spend money on going to Mars instead.
19 Aug 2023 11:32 am
19 Aug 2023 11:35 am
Who cares? It's about igniting a scientific progress that has been inexcusably dormant for decades.
19 Aug 2023 11:50 am
Do you hit your thumb with a hammer to see how it will feel too?Vegas » 19 Aug 2023, 11:35 am » wrote: ↑ Who cares? It's about igniting a scientific progress that has been inexcusably dormant for decades.
19 Aug 2023 12:18 pm
This is the reason we can't go:Vegas » 19 Aug 2023, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑ We went to the moon ages ago...6 different times. Since then, we have been sitting on our asses. Why? Technology has advanced enough to the point that we can go. Elon Musk is full of ****. He is always talked about it, but he doesn't ****.
Q: But why go to Mars, what purpose would it serve?
A: Who cares? Because we can. Why do we have to have to have some deep profound reason? Hell, we make up reasons to spend billions on going to wars. So, let's make up reasons and spend money on going to Mars instead.
https://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/astronaut ... /bones.asp
One of the major obstacles to long-term space missions is the threat of severe bone loss in astronauts. In the microgravity environment of space, astronauts lose on average 1% to 2% of their bone mineral density every month. For a short-duration flight, bone loss is a fairly minor consequence.
On a long-duration space flight, such as those planned for missions to Mars and beyond, bone loss can be a serious impediment. This loss may not hinder astronauts while they are in orbit, but upon return to Earth, their weakened bones will be fragile and at an increased risk of fractures. At this time, it is unknown whether this bone loss will eventually reach a plateau, or whether it will continue indefinitely.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-03/ ... /101204272
The study involved 14 male and three female astronauts with an average age of 47, whose missions ranged from four to seven months in space, with an average of about 5.5 months.
A year after returning to Earth, the astronauts on average exhibited 2.1 per cent reduced bone mineral density at the tibia — one of the bones of the lower leg — and 1.3 per cent reduced bone strength.
Nine did not recover bone mineral density after the space flight, experiencing permanent loss.
"Astronauts experienced significant bone loss during six-month spaceflights — loss that we would expect to see in older adults over two decades on Earth, and they only recovered about half of that loss after one year back on Earth."
"During spaceflight, fine bone structures thin, and eventually some of the bone rods disconnect from one another," she said.
"Once the astronaut comes back to Earth, the remaining bone connections can thicken and strengthen, but the ones that disconnected in space can't be rebuilt, so the astronaut's overall bone structure permanently changes."
19 Aug 2023 2:08 pm
Okay. So let's start trying to address the bone structure issue. Nobody said it would be without problems. The moon mission certainly had their share.OdeToJoy » 19 Aug 2023, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑ This is the reason we can't go:
https://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/astronaut ... /bones.asp
One of the major obstacles to long-term space missions is the threat of severe bone loss in astronauts. In the microgravity environment of space, astronauts lose on average 1% to 2% of their bone mineral density every month. For a short-duration flight, bone loss is a fairly minor consequence.
On a long-duration space flight, such as those planned for missions to Mars and beyond, bone loss can be a serious impediment. This loss may not hinder astronauts while they are in orbit, but upon return to Earth, their weakened bones will be fragile and at an increased risk of fractures. At this time, it is unknown whether this bone loss will eventually reach a plateau, or whether it will continue indefinitely.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-03/ ... /101204272
The study involved 14 male and three female astronauts with an average age of 47, whose missions ranged from four to seven months in space, with an average of about 5.5 months.
A year after returning to Earth, the astronauts on average exhibited 2.1 per cent reduced bone mineral density at the tibia — one of the bones of the lower leg — and 1.3 per cent reduced bone strength.
Nine did not recover bone mineral density after the space flight, experiencing permanent loss.
"Astronauts experienced significant bone loss during six-month spaceflights — loss that we would expect to see in older adults over two decades on Earth, and they only recovered about half of that loss after one year back on Earth."
"During spaceflight, fine bone structures thin, and eventually some of the bone rods disconnect from one another," she said.
"Once the astronaut comes back to Earth, the remaining bone connections can thicken and strengthen, but the ones that disconnected in space can't be rebuilt, so the astronaut's overall bone structure permanently changes."
19 Aug 2023 2:09 pm
PhiloBeddo » 19 Aug 2023, 11:50 am » wrote: ↑ Do you hit your thumb with a hammer to see how it will feel too?
Not exactly a great analogy. Do doctors need to have cancer before doctors can find ways to cure cancer, or figure out that it is deadly for patience?
19 Aug 2023 5:36 pm
Essentially, they would have to create artificial gravity on the ship, and that doesn't solve the problem when they get to Mars. Mars has slightly more than 1/3 (38%) of Earth's gravity. They would have to build structures with an artificial gravity for the astronauts to live in long term.Vegas » 19 Aug 2023, 2:08 pm » wrote: ↑ Okay. So let's start trying to address the bone structure issue. Nobody said it would be without problems. The moon mission certainly had their share.
They would have to build a spinning spacecraft to create the centrifugal force to create an artificial gravity. When they got there, they would have to wear weighted suits 24/7. I'm not sure that it would be a pleasant experience.
19 Aug 2023 6:00 pm
19 Aug 2023 6:07 pm
waste of money...Vegas » 19 Aug 2023, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑ We went to the moon ages ago...6 different times. Since then, we have been sitting on our asses. Why? Technology has advanced enough to the point that we can go. Elon Musk is full of ****. He is always talked about it, but he doesn't ****.
Q: But why go to Mars, what purpose would it serve?
A: Who cares? Because we can. Why do we have to have to have some deep profound reason? Hell, we make up reasons to spend billions on going to wars. So, let's make up reasons and spend money on going to Mars instead.
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime”
LAVRENTIY BERIA
19 Aug 2023 6:08 pm
PhiloBeddo » 19 Aug 2023, 11:50 am » wrote: ↑ Do you hit your thumb with a hammer to see how it will feel too?
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime”
LAVRENTIY BERIA 
19 Aug 2023 6:19 pm
I'd rather they colonize the moon
Closer, more hospitable
Never saw the need to go so far, to such a God awful place
Closer, more hospitable
Never saw the need to go so far, to such a God awful place
19 Aug 2023 7:18 pm
On Mars they would have to build a large carnival ride type spinning tower.OdeToJoy » 19 Aug 2023, 5:36 pm » wrote: ↑ Essentially, they would have to create artificial gravity on the ship, and that doesn't solve the problem when they get to Mars. Mars has slightly more than 1/3 (38%) of Earth's gravity. They would have to build structures with an artificial gravity for the astronauts to live in long term.
They would have to build a spinning spacecraft to create the centrifugal force to create an artificial gravity. When they got there, they would have to wear weighted suits 24/7. I'm not sure that it would be a pleasant experience.
Instead of seats, there could be a ring of rooms. It would keep them at an increased gravity.
At least there would be some access to earth-type weight for sleeping quarters, living rooms.
In space, a 224 meter circle spinning at 2 RPM would generate 1G.
If you're already on a planet surface with 38% of the gravity, the RPM would only need to be about 1.24 RPM.
Slightly faster than a clock second hand. Solar powered gravity...
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
19 Aug 2023 7:26 pm
Vegas » 19 Aug 2023, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑ We went to the moon ages ago...6 different times. Since then, we have been sitting on our asses. Why? Technology has advanced enough to the point that we can go. Elon Musk is full of ****. He is always talked about it, but he doesn't ****.
Q: But why go to Mars, what purpose would it serve?
A: Who cares? Because we can. Why do we have to have to have some deep profound reason? Hell, we make up reasons to spend billions on going to wars. So, let's make up reasons and spend money on going to Mars instead.
Why? Because it's a **** load further away than the moon is. It has a atmosphere so a lunar module like lander won't work. There is no way to fix anything if something goes wrong. There is nothing on Mars we can use to support life. I'd say we don't go until we can get there in less than a week. **** that coasting for 7 months ****.
19 Aug 2023 7:27 pm
Well, we certainly won't breathe easy!
19 Aug 2023 7:33 pm
Mrkelly » 19 Aug 2023, 6:19 pm » wrote: ↑ I'd rather they colonize the moon
Closer, more hospitable
Never saw the need to go so far, to such a God awful place
I'd rather spend the money on high speed rail.
19 Aug 2023 7:38 pm
I don't see any point to a manned mission to Mars. Its suicide. Why not get a colony on the sea floor or the moon if we are wanting to accomplish something meaningful? Mars is a dead uninhabitable **** with nothing worth harvesting.
19 Aug 2023 7:43 pm
The effort would help unify the nation and the technology push would bring multiple benefits.
19 Aug 2023 8:05 pm
Better locations accomplish the same outcome without suicide.Bruce » 19 Aug 2023, 7:43 pm » wrote: ↑ The effort would help unify the nation and the technology push would bring multiple benefits.
19 Aug 2023 8:06 pm
Who is online
In total there are 4739 users online :: 4 registered, 12 bots, and 4723 guests
Bots: DuckDuckBot, ADmantX, MicroMessenger, proximic, YandexBot, facebookexternalhit, CriteoBot, curl/7, Googlebot, Mediapartners-Google, Applebot, bingbot