SpaceX Mars City Buildings / Plan

[kerbiloid]

9 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

if you look at Siberia and Canada - those are two places that will actually benefit from higher global temperatures

They definitely and catastrophically won't.

1.
Cold bogs accumulate carbon of dead plants without rotting and releasing as CO2. It gets buried as turf.
Cold bogs of Sib & Can are what the terrestrial  life is breathing with.
Tropical jungles do nothing in sense of air. Every tree rots in a couple of weeks and all its carbon returns to the atmosphere as methane and carbon dioxide.
Zero carbon balance. If cut them all, the only disadvantage will be that those places will turn into desert.
While warming of cold bogs will stop hiding carbon underground and dramatically shift the equilibrium in Venusian direction.

2.
There is a lot of methane from rotten plants stored as hydrates/clathrates under cold boggy ground.
The warming would release all that methane very fast.

Siberia and Canada are cool by design. The last what humanity needs is making them warm.

Edited February 23, 2021 by kerbiloid

[tater]

Lousy doodle I made ages ago:

The orange color is regolith. On the roof it's as thick as is required, though perhaps water or other storage is in the roof, or on some external walls.

Normally you see habitats in the Expanse, etc, on the sides of cliffs on Mars, with windows facing the view. This of course means those window spaces get the isotropic GCR coming in.

If, instead, you place a surface habitat facing a crater wall, hill, etc (as crappy doodle above), as long as the line of sight intersects that hill, you can have an outside view that is arbitrarily large, and ~100% radiation protection. The farther away the hillside, the longer the overhang required.

If some wider vistas are wanted, then do a similar overhang, but a wider vista. Your radiation levels will increase in that room, but perhaps it's a space where people spend SOME time, but not loads of time. A place you might eat at occasionally, or just a scenic view room. There can be radial walls as well, so the incoming radiation is just in the long field of view.

With any overhang at all, there is substantial radiation reduction, however, vs the flux in space.

If you imagine a habitat that is shielded to 100% on all sides, and then has a window opening on one side, floor to ceiling glass on that wall—the radiation exposure is a subset of the baseline deep space exposure—50% on the surface, the ground as shield. Deep space is 50-300 Gy/year (can transiently go 10X higher). So standing on the surface, you're at 25-150 Gy/yr.

Back to our hab... vertical incident radiation never comes in, nor any other on that 180° side of the sky. We're now at 25% of deep space, or 12-75 Gy/yr. Not great for that room, but the solid angle of the view really matters. If the view is inset so that you only see a 45 degree arc out from the window side to side, then we're down to 6-38 Gy/yr in that room. Overhangs can start buying decent reductions here, as can even distant terrain rises (nearby hills, mountains). My clerestory windows facing the mountains (awesome views) have just a sliver of sky, and often none visible depending on where you stand, and that's with maybe a 20cm overhang.

I honestly think outside views are pretty possible, and would go a long way to making such a place less awful to live in. Real windows are better than screens.

EDIT: blue line is LOS for incoming radiation, blocked by landscape.

 

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by tater

[kerbiloid]

On Earth an open space means air and life.
On Mars an open space means vacuum and death.

I'm not sure if Martian dwellers prefer view of deadly plains rather than safe multistorey caves (moll atriums).

Upd.
Just make the atriums enough large to disable stereoscopical view and parallax, put them on visual infinity, and move the ceiling up out of normal horizontal view.

Edited February 23, 2021 by kerbiloid

[NFUN]

32 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

They definitely and catastrophically won't.

1.
Cold bogs accumulate carbon of dead plants without rotting and releasing as CO2. It gets buried as turf.
Cold bogs of Sib & Can are what the terrestrial  life is breathing with.
Tropical jungles do nothing in sense of air. Every tree rots in a couple of weeks and all its carbon returns to the atmosphere as methane and carbon dioxide.
Zero carbon balance. If cut them all, the only disadvantage will be that those places will turn into desert.
While warming of cold bogs will stop hiding carbon underground and dramatically shift the equilibrium in Venusian direction.

2.
There is a lot of methane from rotten plants stored as hydrates/clathrates under cold boggy ground.
The warming would release all that methane very fast.

Siberia and Canada are cool by design. The last what humanity needs is making them warm.

yeah yeah that sucks for the planet, but would be p cool for siberia and canada

[YNM]

32 minutes ago, NFUN said:

yeah yeah that sucks for the planet, but would be p cool for siberia and canada

idk, this was Calgary on the February 8th :

Spoiler

'Average low' in February is only -11.4 degrees C by from wiki. This seems like it's already way lower than that.

Meanwhile record high (36.5 deg C) came in only two years ago in the summer.

41 minutes ago, tater said:

I honestly think outside views are pretty possible, and would go a long way to making such a place less awful to live in. Real windows are better than screens.

Seems like a pretty good idea, earthen insulations don't have problems with fire either, only complication is that they're pretty heavy but if we can get them to stick together it can be a structural(ish) dried stucco instead.

Edited February 23, 2021 by YNM

[kerbiloid]

I'm fully disagreed with the "outside view is best" pov.

Tell them that the desert outside is a better view than their oasis inside.

Spoiler

You like the outside view just because you can get out and run by car with a fresh wind.

There is now fresh wind on Mars.

Same solid walls and large internal gardens is what all of them need.

Oh, a galery to ensure that the desert is still here and stays unchanged, except the dust whirls.

See the rich hotels in poor countries. Do the tourists suffer too much inside the walls?

Edited February 23, 2021 by kerbiloid

[SunlitZelkova]

Is a "[insert location in space] colony" even legal?

Legal definition of colony-

"In International law, colony refers to a dependent territorial entity subject to the sovereignty of an independent country, but considered part of that country for purposes of relations with third countries. The country occupied by the colonists is also called a colony. ..."

https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/colony/#:~:text=In International law%2C colony refers,of relations with third countries.&text=The country occupied by the colonists is also called a colony.

From the Outer Space Treaty of 1967-

"outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means;"

https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html

You could build a base that happens to be self-sufficient and has hundreds of crew members, but building a "colony" is currently illegal. A "city" might be ok though.

On the other hand, I think it is a bad idea to build such a "pseudo-colony". Subjecting your citizens to whatever ad hoc laws the company managing the "city" has sounds awful.

If there is going to be colonization in space, I think it should be done with the following plan-

• Withdraw from the Outer Space Treaty
• Establish colonization program and laws, the former under the government
• But, all of the technology development and the building and maintaining of the city itself will be done by private companies. The government is purely there as an administrative entity and gives no funding.

How was North America colonized? Did private entities just go there themselves and start building villages and ports, or was there government help? Studying that is also a good idea alongside looking at Antarctic bases.

Despite all of this, I personally think colonization in space will never happen. Destruction/massive damage of the space industry in a war or some disaster seems more likely to happen first at this moment in time (in my personal opinion). I would like to emphasize this is my personal opinion and everyone else is free to think what they want.

If humanity does succeed in building a colony on Mars, I hope that whenever someone decides to start planting apple trees, they play the Soviet song about such an activity while they do it.

[YNM]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Is a "[insert location in space] colony" even legal?

Legal definition of colony-

"In International law, colony refers to a dependent territorial entity subject to the sovereignty of an independent country, but considered part of that country for purposes of relations with third countries. The country occupied by the colonists is also called a colony. ..."

Pringles doesn't even meet the FDA standard for a potato chip (actual guidance) and it's still selling well as what people want for "potato chips".

Whatever name you want to call it, that's up to whatever loophole exists in the books. For one, spacecrafts are treated the same as aircrafts and ships. Is a lunar lander, while landed and stationary, a "spacecraft" ? What about a lunar rover ? Hab cylinders for a lunar habitation ? Whole assembled lunar habitation ? Who knows... it'll be up to for when someone actually act on it legally.

Edited February 23, 2021 by YNM

[JacobCooper]

On 2/22/2021 at 4:12 PM, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Have you seen the surface?  Concrete bunkers and subterranean tunnels would likely be a better fit. 

 

Aside from putting up small research stations - I think it unlikely to colonize Mars.  We've certainly not colonized Antarctica (and are not likely to, any time soon). 

I understand the desire to have a breeding population on another rock - but as others have mentioned, people do not upend their lives and move to unbelievably different environments for simple egalitarianism. 

Now, if Perseverance discovered a vein of Impossiblium that will power FTL drives, and it turns out that people willing to do incredibly dangerous mining are certain to get rich... An entire economy of support and prey will spring up over night resulting in a colony. 

 

I know that bunkers are the best solution for Mars surface, I just quote what Musk have said

[tater]

Average total radiation exposure on Earth is ~0.62 rem/yr, so Mars unmitigated GCR exposure is ~25X Earth dose. Other exposures then need to be added to that, obviously. So you probably need to aim to decrease GCR exposure in a hab by 30X to have some margin?

I haven't looked into the factthat while incredibly thin, there is SOME radiation mitigation by the martian atmosphere, and the reduction is maximal at grazing angles to the surface—so the "roof overhang" concept can result in long horizontal views that only allow GCRs in that have maximal interaction with the thin martian atmosphere.

[YNM]

5 hours ago, tater said:

so the "roof overhang" concept can result in long horizontal views that only allow GCRs in that have maximal interaction with the thin martian atmosphere.

Really depends on how much FoV do you want left, though. If it's just a slit then you'd be better off with artificial display or something.

Edited February 25, 2021 by YNM

[tater]

26 minutes ago, YNM said:

Really depends on how much FoV do you want left, though. If it's just a slit then you'd be better off with artificial display or something.

One, it need not be a "slit" in the sense I think you mean. Just wide and horizontal.

I have windows about 45 cm high over a maybe 8-9m length of house, and they are under a ~45 cm overhang. The view in my case is UP, since there's a mountain behind me, but if they were at eye level facing west, they'd serve well for a view many 10s of km in that direction.

Screens don't cut it. If people are to live there, they will want real windows.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

8 hours ago, tater said:

Average total radiation exposure on Earth is ~0.62 rem/yr, so Mars unmitigated GCR exposure is ~25X Earth dose. Other exposures then need to be added to that, obviously. So you probably need to aim to decrease GCR exposure in a hab by 30X to have some margin?

I haven't looked into the factthat while incredibly thin, there is SOME radiation mitigation by the martian atmosphere, and the reduction is maximal at grazing angles to the surface—so the "roof overhang" concept can result in long horizontal views that only allow GCRs in that have maximal interaction with the thin martian atmosphere.

Offhand - do you have an idea of where Perseverance is on the map provided? 

 

I also presume that this is analogous to, if not in fact, a terrain altitude map? 

[tater]

Yeah, largely a function of altitude.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Do we know where Percy is?

[StrandedonEarth]

35 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Do we know where Percy is?

[tater]

It's at ~18° Lat, and 77° Long.

The right side above is the opposite side of Mars as Perseverance. It's probably in the yellow area on the upper part of the left image where it meets the blue/green in Isidis (maybe in the blue/green?). The big white blob on the right is Olympus Mons, with the other large volcanoes SE of it. The big blue blob left is Hellas, and Isidis is the light blue above it a ways.

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by tater

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

36 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Not on that map... and why is Tian?  It has not left orbit.

 

Edit - sorry - it's the spot listed as Mars 2020, right?  Another site shows it being between Opportunity and Viking 2.  Edit, again: yes... it is in the Isidis basin - what is listed as Planitia on this map.

 

Still - why are there Chinese landers there; I thought the currently orbiting mission was China's first.  Am I wrong about that?

34 minutes ago, tater said:

It's at ~18° Lat, and 77° Long.

The right side above is the opposite side of Mars as Perseverance. It's probably in the yellow area on the upper part of the left image where it meets the blue/green in Isidis (maybe in the blue/green?). The big white blob on the right is Olympus Mons, with the other large volcanoes SE of it. The big blue blob left is Hellas, and Isidis is the light blue above it a ways.

 

Being in the blue-green makes sense if you are searching for a shoreline.  This map really gives an idea of where the oceans might have been.  Mons is the white circle all by itself?  Holy frijoles!  That would have been a worldkiller.  I figured it was part of the old hotspot.

 

The deep blue is Hellas?  I'll have to look into that; another world-killer impact?  Would have become an enormous sea.

Edit: ZHEESH!  Hellas is 9k meters deep.  That thing had to have happened after Mars lost its atmosphere and most of its water.  Insane crater!  Hellas Planitia - Wikipedia

 

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[StrandedonEarth]

Well, for the Chinese there’s an (a) and a (b), and I think it’s only one lander, so I guess those are the main and backup sites, in case of dust storms or Marvin 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

So - I spent some time looking at the Isidis Basin - and there's a lot to be excited about by that site.  I'm wondering, however (having scanned around a bit) why something in the Chryse Planitia wasn't chosen.    The Kasei channels look like they had much greater (and probably earlier) hydro features.

Kasei Valles topolabled - Chryse Planitia - Wikipedia

 

Anyone know if there are any planned missions going here?

[YNM]

7 hours ago, tater said:

I have windows about 45 cm high (...) under a ~45 cm overhang.

That's an FoV of 45 degrees. You said you want a grazing incident angle only, which I'm sure 45 degrees isn't 'grazing'.

Spoiler

1 hour ago, StrandedonEarth said:

for the Chinese

45 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I'm wondering, however (having scanned around a bit) why something in the Chryse Planitia wasn't chosen.

Mind which thread we're in, guys.

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by YNM

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

18 minutes ago, YNM said:

Mind which thread we're in, guys.

Fie.

 

[tater]

29 minutes ago, YNM said:

That's an FoV of 45 degrees. You said you want a grazing incident angle only, which I'm sure 45 degrees isn't 'grazing'.

At my house... and the mountain is taller than that so unless I am standing very close to the windows, I see rocks (3 km tall rocks, lol).

For Mars the overhang would be longer, obviously.

Many of the 3D printed Mars structure concepts have an inner pressure vessel with windows, and an out shell spaced away from the inner some distance with holes in it that line up with the windows. This is effectively forcing the view line of sight down a tube of sorts.

 

 

 

[YNM]

Just now, tater said:

For Mars the overhang would be longer, obviously.

And that would limit the FoV further.

With windows size isn't all of it. FoV matters. I have a small room, with a small window, but since I'm so close to it the FoV is larger.

[tater]

6 hours ago, YNM said:

With windows size isn't all of it. FoV matters. I have a small room, with a small window, but since I'm so close to it the FoV is larger.

You'd see far away, with no sky with a deep enough recess.

Or just looking through a tube.

Here in NM, traditional houses have walls about a meter thick. You can have quite large windows that have no lateral view at all once you're a step or two to the side.

Anyway, I think it is entirely possible to make real window openings that mitigate exposure. Just don't put beds next to them, lol.