Page 40 of 41 FirstFirst ... 3038394041 LastLast
Results 1,171 to 1,200 of 1223

Thread: How long until we have colonize Mars?

  1. #1171
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    A one-way trip is not on the table for any existing space or science program. I am not sure why it would even be suggested.
    I was wondering the same thing. Guess it was to illustrate a point that getting home again is where the expense comes in.
    Do good work. óVirgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  2. #1172
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    I was wondering the same thing. Guess it was to illustrate a point that getting home again is where the expense comes in.
    Well, it would stink to have the budget fail while the astronauts were still on Mars! But who knows these days.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  3. #1173
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    A one-way trip is not on the table for any existing space or science program. I am not sure why it would even be suggested.
    Motivation to grow potatoes?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  4. #1174
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Motivation to grow potatoes?
    Ah, of course. The proposed Direct Astronaut Mars Option Navigation: Project D.A.M.O.N.

    How many movies has he been rescued in, again?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  5. #1175
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    NASA needs to pursue “aggressive” development of space nuclear propulsion technologies if the agency wants to use them for human missions to Mars in the next two decades, a report by a National Academies committee concluded.

    https://spacenews.com/report-recomme...n-development/
    Do good work. óVirgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  6. #1176
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    Mars rovers safe from lightning strikes, research finds. The friction of colliding Martian dust particles is unlikely to generate big electrical storms or threaten the newly arrived exploration vehicles or, eventually, human visitors.

    https://phys.org/news/2021-02-mars-r...lightning.html
    Do good work. óVirgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  7. #1177
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Mars rovers safe from lightning strikes, research finds. The friction of colliding Martian dust particles is unlikely to generate big electrical storms or threaten the newly arrived exploration vehicles or, eventually, human visitors.

    https://phys.org/news/2021-02-mars-r...lightning.html
    We've been operating surface probes there for half a century with no clear detections of lightning. Is their next report going to be on the tsunami risk?

  8. #1178
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    We've been operating surface probes there for half a century with no clear detections of lightning. Is their next report going to be on the tsunami risk?
    "No clear detection" is no guarantee. We like to avoid unpleasant surprises when considering possible human habitation.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  9. #1179
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    "No clear detection" is no guarantee. We like to avoid unpleasant surprises when considering possible human habitation.
    Are you serious? Do you apply that criteria when you walk out the door here on Earth?

    It's close enough. Lightning is clearly not a notable hazard on Mars.

  10. #1180
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    Lightning is clearly not a notable hazard on Mars.
    Yes, that's what has now been determined. Before this we were just guessing.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  11. #1181
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Yes, that's what has now been determined. Before this we were just guessing.
    No, before this we had actual real-world observations that it was so. Now we just have a study showing that it's not a hazard in little glass tubes that imperfectly simulate the environment of Mars. The latter is much closer to "guessing" than the former.

  12. #1182
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    No, before this we had actual real-world observations that it was so. Now we just have a study showing that it's not a hazard in little glass tubes that imperfectly simulate the environment of Mars. The latter is much closer to "guessing" than the former.

    No, we had a lack of observations. I stand by my statement.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  13. #1183
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    We've been operating surface probes there for half a century with no clear detections of lightning. Is their next report going to be on the tsunami risk?


    I kind of agree that it seems like a lot of effort to test something that doesnít seem to be a big problem. And as you said, they were just using a laboratory model that may well replicate conditions on Mars.

    I have a suspicion, and I am saying this as a person who writes press releases on research papers... My suspicion is the research is probably not just about safety but about modeling atmospheric phenomena in exo-atmospheres, but that in the press releases they played up the safety issue because itís easy to understand and thus likely to generate press coverage (and attention on science Internet forums)!
    As above, so below

  14. #1184
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    I have a suspicion, and I am saying this as a person who writes press releases on research papers... My suspicion is the research is probably not just about safety but about modeling atmospheric phenomena in exo-atmospheres, but that in the press releases they played up the safety issue because it’s easy to understand and thus likely to generate press coverage (and attention on science Internet forums)!
    So to test this hypothesis, I went to the paper, and although I can't access the full text, I did read the abstract, and indeed there is no mention at all about safety. The abstract is just describing it as an interesting phenomenon and the research as something that will contribute to an understanding of the Mars atmosphere. I think it would be easy enough to ask the authors about that.
    As above, so below

  15. #1185
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    We test, we verify. It's a reasonable thing, IMO, to check that we may have simply missed something in intermittent and widely scattered snapshots of Mars.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  16. #1186
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    We test, we verify. It's a reasonable thing, IMO, to check that we may have simply missed something in intermittent and widely scattered snapshots of Mars.
    So you are saying that my reading of the abstract was wrong and that it was primarily a safety study rather than basic science based on previous studies. I could only read the abstract, but perhaps there was something in the paper that says something I couldnít see?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  17. #1187
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    So you are saying that my reading of the abstract was wrong and that it was primarily a safety study rather than basic science based on previous studies.
    You seem to be attributing intentions to me based on something other than my posts.

    I mentioned nothing about you or what you said. I was replying to what cjameshuff posted. My fault for not quoting, I think.

    Basic experimental science is what I was talking about. We experiment, we simulate, we check and re-check results. I never mentioned safety as a concern.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  18. #1188
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    No, we had a lack of observations. I stand by my statement.
    So, better get on with studying Mars tsunamis then? You're being absurd. There is nothing at all reasonable in pretending that there's any significant threat from lightning on Mars.

  19. #1189
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    I mentioned nothing about you or what you said. I was replying to what cjameshuff posted. My fault for not quoting, I think.
    Yes, perhaps the problem is that you made your post right after mine, without quoting. I think it's better if you make clear what post you are responding to...

    However, you also said.
    I never mentioned safety as a concern.
    And yet, in post 1178, you said:
    We like to avoid unpleasant surprises when considering possible human habitation.
    That's not about safety?
    As above, so below

  20. #1190
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Basic experimental science is what I was talking about. We experiment, we simulate, we check and re-check results. I never mentioned safety as a concern.
    OK, understood. So I understand that when cjameshuff said:

    We've been operating surface probes there for half a century with no clear detections of lightning. Is their next report going to be on the tsunami risk?
    You replied:

    "No clear detection" is no guarantee. We like to avoid unpleasant surprises when considering possible human habitation.
    But what you really meant to say is:

    "I think the research was just about experimental science, and wasn't about safety."

    Then you should have said so in the first place.... It would have made things much easier to understand.
    As above, so below

  21. #1191
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Stop putting words in my mouth. If you have questions about what I mean, ask me what I mean.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  22. #1192
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    So, better get on with studying Mars tsunamis then? You're being absurd. There is nothing at all reasonable in pretending that there's any significant threat from lightning on Mars.
    Why is this such a big deal to you? We run experiments all the time. We want to test our models. "We didn't miss seeing lightning in our brief local glances of Mars' surface" is a model.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  23. #1193
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Stop putting words in my mouth. If you have questions about what I mean, ask me what I mean.
    Again, you didnít quote... Could you quote so we can know what this is a response to?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  24. #1194
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    Again, you didn’t quote... Could you quote so we can know what this is a response to?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    To you specifically, to the world in general. It pushes my buttons like nothing else to have someone reinterpret my statements and add their own meanings without actually asking me.

    I don't mean to be insistent about this but I have my own communications issues, it's hard enough for me to be sure someone understands me when it's just my own words.

    As for the specifics of my post # 1187, I doubt I made sense, because my brain goes all wonky when I get upset and makes me prone to overstatement. So I probably did say things that are not viable.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  25. #1195
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    To you specifically, to the world in general. It pushes my buttons like nothing else to have someone reinterpret my statements and add their own meanings without actually asking me.

    I don't mean to be insistent about this but I have my own communications issues, it's hard enough for me to be sure someone understands me when it's just my own words.

    As for the specifics of my post # 1187, I doubt I made sense, because my brain goes all wonky when I get upset and makes me prone to overstatement. So I probably did say things that are not viable.
    Sorry, iím not trying to be overly argumentative, thatís really not my goal, but I really donít understand what I wrote that was putting words into your mouth. If you can point out the place I can go back and see what I was misinterpreting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  26. #1196
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    As for the specifics of my post # 1187, I doubt I made sense, because my brain goes all wonky when I get upset and makes me prone to overstatement. So I probably did say things that are not viable.
    Thanks for clarifying, because that might make it easier to understand things. What is it that makes you upset and prone to overstatement?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  27. #1197
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    To you specifically, to the world in general. It pushes my buttons like nothing else to have someone reinterpret my statements and add their own meanings without actually asking me.
    Sorry to repeat myself, but I donít think anyone likes that. I donít like it when people reinterpret my statements, so I try not to do it to others. So Iíd like to know where I did it to you, so I can be more careful in the future.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  28. #1198
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    Sorry to repeat myself, but I don’t think anyone likes that. I don’t like it when people reinterpret my statements, so I try not to do it to others. So I’d like to know where I did it to you, so I can be more careful in the future.
    Well, "So you're saying" and "But what you really meant to say is". Telling instead of asking, at least that's how it comes across to me.

    How about "What did you mean by", ""what are you saying here" or "could you clarify this"?

    Sorry to be so pedantic, but this is a trigger issue to me.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  29. #1199
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Well, "So you're saying" and "But what you really meant to say is". Telling instead of asking, at least that's how it comes across to me.

    How about "What did you mean by", ""what are you saying here" or "could you clarify this"?

    Sorry to be so pedantic, but this is a trigger issue to me.
    OK, in post 1189, I wanted to ask:

    In post 1178, you wrote:

    We like to avoid unpleasant surprises when considering possible human habitation.
    And in post 1187, you said:

    I never mentioned safety as a concern.
    What did you mean by saying that you never mentioned safety as a concern?
    As above, so below

  30. #1200
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    38,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post

    What did you mean by saying that you never mentioned safety as a concern?
    I was mistaken.

    To make my point clearer, I'll say even if human safety were not a concern, even if we never set foot on Mars, my view is that experimentation to verify a hypothesis based on intermittent localized observation of surface conditions would still be justified. The hypothesis being that there's no lightning on Mars.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

Similar Threads

  1. Is Ceres easier to colonize than Mars?
    By Ronald Brak in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 2013-Jan-04, 07:12 PM
  2. Microscopic Worms May Help to Colonize Mars
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2011-Dec-01, 03:00 AM
  3. Should we colonize and or terraform Mars if life is found there?
    By banquo's_bumble_puppy in forum Life in Space
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 2011-Jul-27, 05:36 PM
  4. when man does colonize Mars..
    By WaggaWaggaGuy in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 2004-Mar-10, 08:24 PM
  5. Should humans colonize Mars?
    By Superstring in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 2002-Oct-24, 09:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •