this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
619 points (91.2% liked)

Memes

45688 readers
605 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (26 children)

It's not about prime real estate, it's about increasing the redundancy of humanity's survival. Two planets are better than one.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

In order to colonize mars, having a good space station in orbit would help out immensely. We're talking big enough to stretch out and hold a few hundred people.
The station would need to grow crops and have minor but flexible manufacturing.
At that point, why would you colonize mars vs just make more stations?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

For real, resource extraction is a big one. Finding ice means they can make, besides water, oxygen and rocket fuel. Not to mention that shelters for radiation are incredibly hard to make without a huge amount of mass, which we cannot efficiently get into orbit without a space elevator. Hence being able to extract it from the location of the colony, say dig into the ground or build thick walls with bricks made from soil, is necessary for long term survival of the inhabitants. I think it is cool that due to these reasons having air balloons over Venus might even be a better option due to it having a protective atmosphere.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can make a radiation field by running a large motor that would save you from the solar radiation.
In space you always have access to the sun. A cheap form of power. You need a lot more batteries if you're on the planet.

Venus is a much better idea over mars.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Didn't know that it was feasible to create a radiation field by running a large motor. Not that I doubt you, but if you have a source I would be very happy to read more about it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I heard about it on one of Isaac Arthur's videos. I can't remember which one, but the analogy he used was that earth's magnetosphere is essentially a big motor created by earth's metal core spinning. (Oversimplified) So you should be able to build a motor that would shield a station

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure, and theoretically we could do a lot of shit. Isaac Arthur isnt a scientist he's a edutainment YouTuber.

Creating our own magnetosphere is a little more complex or we'd have already done it, plus what happens if it fails? Where's your backup? You just gonna die when it shuts down?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Creating our own magnetosphere is a little more complex or we'd have already done it

There hasn't been a need for it until now, thats like expecting people to invent parachutes before aircraft

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

We've been to space and understood radiation for decades, we've known that any potential lunar colony would need radiation shielding for long term habitation and Mars as well, which as a nation we've planned on going to since the Apollo program was still flying.

You're making a false equivalency here, the aircraft has been around for decades we just don't have the financial backing in our space program to actually develop the technology. However, I can guarantee you that it's not as simple as "just make a big electric motor!" Or some enthusiast would have already done it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Arthur is literally a scientist.
He also does edutainment

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Space stations don't produce raw materials, even if they could self sustain their human populations with food grown onboard they'd require the resources of earth to build and expand, so they're still dependent on Earth.

A space station wouldn't make anything inherently easier, unless it was attached via space elevator just having a chunk of metal in orbit doesn't change how much energy you need to get things out of the gravity well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

You could have resources from asteroids. There's lots of options out there

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Mining is a big reason. And radiation shielding, as others have said.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Right now, even with water recycling systems, we still have to ship water to the ISS. A planet or moon also offers way more radiation protection by tunneling underground than any spacecraft at this time could provide.

I'd say we go for Deimos and Phobos first and set up mining operations there before spreading to the Martian surface. Their super-low gravity will make shipping materials easier. They essentially are natural space stations, just add infrastructure.

load more comments (21 replies)