Skip to comments.
Politics of Water: Ancient Sea on Mars Begs Human Exploration
space.com ^
| 3/24/04
| Tarig Malik
Posted on 03/24/2004 6:47:54 PM PST by KevinDavis
The discovery that a salty sea once covered party of the surface of Mars will have lasting effects on the future exploration of the red planet, according to scientists and policy experts inside and outside NASA.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
TOPICS: Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: mars; nasa; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 next last
To: RadioAstronomer
Thanks.
61
posted on
03/24/2004 9:56:31 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: LibWhacker
I would like it to be a reality in our lifetimes... say the next decade or two.
62
posted on
03/24/2004 9:57:14 PM PST
by
Robert_Paulson2
(the madridification of our election is now officially underway.)
To: RadioAstronomer
The respective governments would never allow nuclear weaponry to be launched no matter for what purpose they were intended. The rest of the world has been so busy thumbing its nose at us lately, I'd love for us to do it without their advice or consent -- and then deny them access to space.
So "all" we really have to do is convince our own government to do it. :-)
To: LibWhacker
Heck just one would keep scientists very very busy
64
posted on
03/24/2004 10:01:36 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: irv
New sources of resources, for one thing. You worry about debt? A whole world to pull into the economy. It will take some investment to get there, but the potential payoff is enormous. The payoff is enormous? Hardly. There is nothing on Mars that would be anywhere close to valuable enough to justify the cost of obtaining it and transporting it to Earth. Resources on Mars are whorthless. If Mars where made of solid gold, it would be worthless. Resources on the MOON are worthless, for the same reason.
To: LibWhacker; GeronL
I still think NERVA and VASIMR is a better way to go. :-)
To: LibWhacker
Couldn't a much smaller version be used to prove the concept?? Imagine sending four people to Mars aboard a smaller one, talk about making history. Their names would grace ships in the future. Other astronauts would be plenty jealous.
67
posted on
03/24/2004 10:05:04 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: RadioAstronomer
Test them all!
68
posted on
03/24/2004 10:07:03 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: GeronL
Yep . . . We could have mining operations going on throughout the solar system, if they're needed. Can't imagine we'd need that much right now. But what I'm really thinking, being inclined to national defense, is that we have land, sea and air forces . . . Soon we'll need a serious space force. The Chicoms have already announced plans to put men on the moon. The Europeans are thinking the same thing. And you know Russians want to get back in the race. We don't dare fall behind since the entire world seems to be chomping at the bit to take us down.
To: Phil V.
For some, sending humans to Mars is mostly about being bold. But many geologists would like to actually go there on the grounds that the history of the red planet's geology, and its biology if any, will only become clear after scientists set foot in red dust. As my structural prof once said, "You can't be an armchair geologist". I'm more than ready to go.
70
posted on
03/24/2004 10:15:16 PM PST
by
Aracelis
To: GeronL
Couldn't a much smaller version be used to prove the concept?? I think they did some proof of concept work in the 50s, using conventional explosives. A lot is STILL classified, which speaks volumes. But absolutely, there's no reason to start off building the largest ship possible. :-)
It kills me that they were so close to actually doing this 40 years ago!
To: LibWhacker
After the concept is proven with a smaller vessel, which probably will happen after a test with an unmanned satellite, the serious building will start. The first large one will need to be done slowly, because every system has to be perfect. The whole thing will be new, with several back-ups to the systems. They won't be in orbit, so they can't just land. As a matter of fact these things will never land again.
Those 3 foot thick hulls will be something to see.
72
posted on
03/24/2004 10:18:39 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: LibWhacker
It kills me that they were so close to actually doing this 40 years ago!Now we have much better technology. We can control the thing better, plus we have more warheads than we'll ever need. I guess the warheads were not so many back then.
73
posted on
03/24/2004 10:21:51 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: Piltdown_Woman
Your not the only one who is ready.
74
posted on
03/24/2004 10:23:17 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: GeronL
Yes, I definitely wouldn't want to start off putting a large crew at risk. We'd have to work our way up to really large ships and enormous cargos. But nuclear power is so unbelievably powerful, power is hardly a consideration. The only limit on size and weight I can foresee is a humdrum engineering one . . . How big and heavy could the superstructure be and still be able to withstand the enormous forces? Pretty big, I think, considering how well our aircraft carriers, etc. do in heavy seas.
What amazes me is how much it all sounds like pure science fiction, yet it's achievable right now!
To: GeronL
Your not the only one who is ready. I'm ready. I KNOW I couldn't tolerate being confined in a tin can with several other people for two years (but that in effect seems to be what we're planning to do in the current Moon/Mars plans -- It's crazy). However, I could do just fine on an aircraft carrier! :-)
To: LibWhacker
If the hull is 3 feet thick, solid steel? Maybe with titanium on the outside, with some lead lining for extra radiation shielding. I wonder how big the, um, whats the word, keel would have to be? A big one would be monstrous alright.
I reckon the first manned version would be about the size of the space shuttle? It would only need to prove the technologies and the control systems. I guess after the big ones are built the small one could be a long-distance crew transport or something.
I could just imagine a huge one on a mission past Pluto that would take several years. The cargo capacity would definitely allow it.
77
posted on
03/24/2004 10:38:33 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: LibWhacker
In a large one there would be room for recreation, probably have room for some sports. I could imagine there could be huge revolving portions of the ship that would create some artificial gravity too.
78
posted on
03/24/2004 10:40:12 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: RadioAstronomer; GSHastings; KevinDavis
79
posted on
03/24/2004 10:48:58 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
To: KevinDavis
More crap from the agency of really expensive pop-bottle rockets, they knew about dihydrogen monoxide being present in the martian atmosphere from spectral photography a long time ago, so if its in the atmosphere why wouldnt it be on the surface.Anyone who thinks this is something new is just a fool this crap is a diversion and pouring good money into this stuff is just ridiculous. NASA should be developing platforms to deliver nukes to the Asian continent from space
thereby trumping any of Chinas hegemonic plans!
80
posted on
03/24/2004 10:51:45 PM PST
by
claptrap
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson