Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Staying on Terra Firma
For many years, a main goal of NASA has been to send a man humans to Mars. In fact, it seemed right after the moon landings to be the next logical step in space exploration. I was a youngster when the Gemini and Apollo missions were big news. I watched the first moon landing live on television. I remember the drama of Apollo 13 (as well as the movie).
I watched the original Star Trek series when it first aired, and went to the movie theater twice to watch Star Wars when it was first released. It seemed like anything was possible. We were going to invent Warp Drive and go faster than the speed of light! The universe was ours to explore!
But it’s not. We are not going to the stars. The distances are much too great. We might be able to send people to Mars, but the other planets are very unlikely destinations. They are too far and if we could get to them we would find that the environments we would encounter would make it impossible for us to visit much less live – even with technology we could possibly develop.
We have picked Mars because it is one of two “close” planets. Venus has a poisonous atmosphere so that is out of the question. And we have always had a much greater fascination with Mars (the god of war) than with Venus even though Venus is ‘hotter’. (Pun intended.) But Mars is not that hospitable either. It has little or no atmosphere and its gravity is too small to hold any kind of atmosphere we could live on much less to grow crops on. So we would have to take both air and food to Mars, enough to sustain the crew through the trip. (Building some kind of colony seems impossible.) That would take an enormous payload. The rocket ship would be huge and extremely expensive.
There is another possibility, I am told, and that is to grow the food on the ship. What else does the crew have to do but grow stuff during a months-long trip? This is not a quick trip to the moon. It would be a huge, extremely expensive expedition. And it would be far too dangerous for anyone to make. It would be unwise for the bravest, even the ones with “the right stuff”. There are risks worth taking and there are foolish risks. This falls into the latter category.
I know that NASA scientists know all about the dangers. The reason that I know is that I personally know a few of them myself. There is a NASA base about five miles from here. Two of them have done work for the Space Station. They all seemed convinced that people will make it to Mars someday. But what they cannot tell me is why we would want to go. Some speak of the fact that we would gain scientific knowledge. Others say that we would benefit greatly from the technology developed to make the trip. About the former, I would agree, but would the expense outweigh the possible gains?
I think that whatever gains we might get from persons traveling to Mars would be much less than even just the financial outlay. I especially do not think that the gains would be worth the risk to human life. I am not a snowflake. I know that great progress comes at great expense and often the cost of many human lives. I am not completely risk-averse. But the cost must not outweigh the gains. In other words, the cost/benefit analysis, if it can be done, seems to tell us that there is no good reason for humans to go to Mars. A lot of the knowledge that might be gained we can get by sending instruments and robots to Mars to find out what we can. And I am not saying that we shouldn’t do that.
Additionally, there is the opportunity cost of such a quest. We really need our best scientists to work on other things at home to make life on earth better. I would rather have them in other research or private industry to increase the living standards not only for us but for the developing world. Science has given us a tremendous amount already, but this pandemic has shown us that there is much more to do. Let’s concentrate on continuing our progress here on earth and not waste resources on a not-very-fruitful but fascinating goal. I think we ought to get our heads out of the clouds and realize that science fiction can be entertaining, but it is not realistic. We are here on earth and we are staying here. I have not mentioned religion yet, but I must. As a Christian, I know that God made this earth for us to live on and to have dominion over. He did not give us Mars to live on. He did not give us the moon to live on. He gave us the earth. Let’s stay on it.
[I am sure that my Ricochet friends will correct any errors of scientific fact, but I do not think that it will change my thesis.]
Published in Technology
I was assuming that a Mars mission would be in inter-planetary space already, the escape velocity I was referring too was solar system escape velocity. A crew on one of these missions that didnt enter Mars orbit would be on a slow boat to nowhere – with no hope of escape or resupply.
A constant-boost mission would have to achieve the same velocities as regular impulsive missions would.
I understand that. I don’t think we have the technology to reach solar escape velocity. The vehicle might become a comet, I guess.
I think that reaching higher velocities is implicit in the concept of constant boost.
Actually 5 objects have been launched out of the solar system.
Pioneer 10 – 1972
Pioneer 11 – 1973
Voyager 1 – 1977
Voyager 2 – 1977
New Horizons – 2006
As far as I’ve ever heard/read, none of those were “launched” out of the solar system, they were sent to loop around at least one planet such as Jupiter, and the “slingshot effect” is what actually gave them the necessary velocity.
Yes they used gravity assists to pick up velocity – less than what had been calculated. There is actually a physics problem/mystery, because the voyagers are 1000s of miles off course.
The Voyagers where launched because NASA noticed a once in a 200 year alignment of planets that would allow a gravity assisted tour of the outer solar system.
I dont think New Horizons used any gravity assists – it flew directly to Pluto in 9 years. Gravity assists generally seem take you a little out of your way for the boost.
OK, I didnt think New Horizon took any gravity assists solely because it got to Pluto in 9 years. It seems that the gas giants where in the right position to give the New Horizon a timely boost.
My guess is they planned it that way.