Space Travel: Where will we be by 2070?

[Borklund]

I think you're blowing it way out of proportion. Nobody will be forced to go to Mars One. Death will be a very real possibility for those who volunteer to go.

[rb22]

Seems very ambitious for a private company to do this, having only just got back some good radiation data from MSL (pretty harsh levels) I just hope they know what they're doing!

[Nibb31]

I think you're blowing it way out of proportion. Nobody will be forced to go to Mars One. Death will be a very real possibility for those who volunteer to go.

Taking only volunteers doesn't make it any less unethical. Sending people on a one-way trip to another planet is sending them to die a very ugly death for just a TV show. Getting companies to pay for commercials and people to watch the volunteers slowly die on TV is even more ugly.

[Kayaking4autism]

Anyway, I think that chemical energy (unless you count batteries) is on its way out... it will either have a much lesser presence by 2070 or will have virtually gone completely. In its place will be early forms of Fusion energy (how about a rocket powered exclusively by a controlled fusion reaction? Much like Orion but with much less nuclear fallout), more renewable energies (some much more efficient and effective ion thruster designs), and perhaps some very early matter-antimatter solutions.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34989[/ATTACH]

Believe me I'm as frustrated with the lack of progress in deep space exploration as you are and I think warp drive is a bunch of hocus pocus but I believe a polywell based deuterium magnetothruster is very do-able as an upper stage, Bussard reckons for breakeven fusion you'll need at least a 3m in diameter "wiffleball" and he never successfully did an exhaust for the million degree waste helium exhaust whereas I think it could both make power and the helium waste could be the propellant.

I'm working on it.

I propose a pulsed polywell design that in one instance holds and ignites a wiffleball and there need to be very carefully sequenced capacitor banks ready to fire and if one fails a computer MUST immediately re-organize which cap bank is firing and which is charging so at hundreds of hz can ignite/eject/ignite/eject the deuterium to helium wiffleball/wifflejet transition.

Won't work in atmosphere

Its also possible this will ONLY work in outer space because how else can you eject a superheated ionized gas without letting air into a reactor that will charge the ions and negate the effects of the liquid helium cooled yttrium barium copper oxide magnetic rings?

Right now you'll laugh at me saying this is science fiction, but I'm sure it will work.... eventually.

[Borklund]

Taking only volunteers doesn't make it any less unethical. Sending people on a one-way trip to another planet is sending them to die a very ugly death for just a TV show. Getting companies to pay for commercials and people to watch the volunteers slowly die on TV is even more ugly.

It would make it less ethical if they were forced, no? So logically it stands to reason that it is more ethical to have people volunteer. How is this any different from watching people who are alive on TV shows today, on earth? You know they'll die eventually - everyone does. Noone is suggesting that their slow deaths would be broadcast. Again - you are blowing this aspect of Mars One way out of proportion.

[MmPMSFmM]

*sigh* This won't get us anywhere, does it?

Edited October 19, 2012 by MmPMSFmM

[MmPMSFmM]

If we all are this pessimistic about it, this won't succeed for sure. You have to keep in mind; It's another giant leap for mankind. By the Humans with a conscience, Humans that know what they are doing... The television show is just to get money, our major problem is the rich people being miserly. If they weren't that miserly, and they would sponsor Mars-One the TV show wasn't required. However if they succeed they will open a whole new era.

[Tommygun]

Mars One will never happen. TV doesn't get the kind of money needed to start a Mars colony.

Corporate sponsors are not going to give away billions of dollars on a money losing venture.

Also keep in mind that most people stop watching the Moon landings after a few missions.

The people behind Mars One from what I understand are the same people that started Biosphere 2, that is, a group of theater actors.

They are good at publicity, but the engineering challenges and financial realities are outside their expertise.

I think this is one of those stories that are popular in the press, but will go nowhere.

TV’s 10 Most Profitable Shows.

10. “Modern Family†($2.13 million per half hour)

9. “Mad Love†($2.59 million per half hour)

8. “Big Bang Theory†($2.75 million per half hour)

7. “Desperate Housewives†($2.61 million per half hour)

6. “Dancing with the Stars†($2.72 million per half hour)

5. “Grey’s Anatomy†($2.75 million per half hour)

4. “Glee†($2.8 million per half hour)

3. “Two and a Half Men†($3.24 million per half hour)

2. “The X-Factor†($5.5 million per half hour)

1. “American Idol†($6.64 million per half hour)

[Accelerando]

I think there will be mining of metals from NEOs within the next 20-30 years, probably only starting on a small scale. But the business model for that is extremely profitable. There's enough metal in a small asteroid to make any money hungry idiot drool over what his bank account would look like after harvesting that one asteroid.

Profitability has much less to do with the amount of metal in the rock than how much it costs to move it around... the venture will only be profitable if you can actually mine it and get it back for less than it pays off. Frankly, barring some very reliable (tried and tested in its operating environment) equipment and good, cheap delivery technology, I don't think space mining is going to be a thing for some decades more than 30 years... at least not until space elevators are developed. The mining machines, especially the first pioneering ones that are meant to sell the idea in full, really can't afford to fail, yet I expect that any interplanetary mining venture will require much more complex equipment to be launched at once and for one mission than has ever been sent beyond Earth orbit before.

And any repair mission will cost at least a significant fraction of what it took to put the original equipment there in the first place... won't it?

I suppose if reliable mass drivers are developed, or ion engines used to freight the payload between Earth and the asteroids, it could be doable within a shorter timeframe...

Edited October 19, 2012 by Accelerando

[Tommygun]

I've always wondered what the environmental issues would be of minding off world and getting the minerals to Earth.

There are two ways to get the materials down: drop them like a controlled slow meteor landing or fly it down.

On an industrial scale you would have tens of thousands of smallish re-entries giving off smoke and pollution as they come down with the first method.

The second way would be slow and expensive and you have to send the lander back up.

[The Stinger]

Mars One has nothing to do with Biosphere one. Mars One is a Dutch company.

You are forgetting that Mars One will be a world wide broadcast.

If you look at the amount of money the Olympics brings in, than it should be possible.

To be fair, it might not get the kind of broadcasting revenue as the Olympics.

If they can get 1/10 of it, then they would be well in business.

The reason why I applaud Mars One is not due to the television part of it, it's because they dare to do it.

It's what countries should dare to do, instead of spending it on stuff which doesn't help mankind in anyway.

[Borklund]

Profitability has much less to do with the amount of metal in the rock than how much it costs to move it around... the venture will only be profitable if you can actually mine it and get it back for less than it pays off. Frankly, barring some very reliable (tried and tested in its operating environment) equipment and good, cheap delivery technology, I don't think space mining is going to be a thing for some decades more than 30 years... at least not until space elevators are developed. The mining machines, especially the first pioneering ones that are meant to sell the idea in full, really can't afford to fail, yet I expect that any interplanetary mining venture will require much more complex equipment to be launched at once and for one mission than has ever been sent beyond Earth orbit before.

And any repair mission will cost at least a significant fraction of what it took to put the original equipment there in the first place... won't it?

I suppose if reliable mass drivers are developed, or ion engines used to freight the payload between Earth and the asteroids, it could be doable within a shorter timeframe...

I don't agree with you. Planetary Resources would nudge the asteroid gravationally toward the moon, capture it in stable orbit, mine it there, and then send the materials to Earth from there. The cost (in energy) of going from the Moon to Earth is small, especially if they also manage to set up fuel depots in space - also harvested from near earth asteroids rich in water. I'm not saying such an operation could be undertaken right now with current tech, but it is certainly possible in theory, and is bound to happen within 30 years. Planetary Resources will launch their first spacecraft soon, and steadily work their way up to the swarm spacecraft who would operate on an asteroid. The gravity tug is a question of mathematics, and is a solveable problem. The rest is just building spacecraft.

[Tommygun]

Mars One has nothing to do with Biosphere one. Mars One is a Dutch company.

Sorry, I was trying to remember an article from a few months back.

Those numbers you posted are titled as "revenues", do you have any that list profits?

[Shadownailshot]

Profitability has much less to do with the amount of metal in the rock than how much it costs to move it around... the venture will only be profitable if you can actually mine it and get it back for less than it pays off. Frankly, barring some very reliable (tried and tested in its operating environment) equipment and good, cheap delivery technology, I don't think space mining is going to be a thing for some decades more than 30 years... at least not until space elevators are developed. The mining machines, especially the first pioneering ones that are meant to sell the idea in full, really can't afford to fail, yet I expect that any interplanetary mining venture will require much more complex equipment to be launched at once and for one mission than has ever been sent beyond Earth orbit before.

And any repair mission will cost at least a significant fraction of what it took to put the original equipment there in the first place... won't it?

I suppose if reliable mass drivers are developed, or ion engines used to freight the payload between Earth and the asteroids, it could be doable within a shorter timeframe...

I also disagree. Profit has a lot to do with how much and what kind of metal is in the 'roid. If there's more metal there than it costs to get it back to the surface... then you've made a profit. There is a business model there. I think someone will try it within the next couple decades. I would love to start a business doing that.

[The Stinger]

Sorry, I was trying to remember an article from a few months back.

Those numbers you posted are titled as "revenues", do you have any that list profits?

It depends on which organization. If it's a sponsor, then you wont make any profit through it.

Their only gain is to keep the competition out.

If I remember correctly security made a profit during/after the paralypics.

The economy of the UK will get a boost of $26.4 billion by 2017. (source)

The IOC is non-profit.

[Shadownailshot]

About Mars One, no, none of the people that are planning this have much, if any, expertise in engineering, exo-biology, exo-geology, astronomy... or probably anything that you would need to survive an extra-terrestrial colony. But they've secured contracts with the important people. I know one for sure is SpaceX. I'm not sure who the others are.

[LukeTim]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34989[/ATTACH]

Believe me I'm as frustrated with the lack of progress in deep space exploration as you are and I think warp drive is a bunch of hocus pocus but I believe a polywell based deuterium magnetothruster is very do-able as an upper stage, Bussard reckons for breakeven fusion you'll need at least a 3m in diameter "wiffleball" and he never successfully did an exhaust for the million degree waste helium exhaust whereas I think it could both make power and the helium waste could be the propellant.

I'm working on it.

I propose a pulsed polywell design that in one instance holds and ignites a wiffleball and there need to be very carefully sequenced capacitor banks ready to fire and if one fails a computer MUST immediately re-organize which cap bank is firing and which is charging so at hundreds of hz can ignite/eject/ignite/eject the deuterium to helium wiffleball/wifflejet transition.

Won't work in atmosphere

Its also possible this will ONLY work in outer space because how else can you eject a superheated ionized gas without letting air into a reactor that will charge the ions and negate the effects of the liquid helium cooled yttrium barium copper oxide magnetic rings?

Right now you'll laugh at me saying this is science fiction, but I'm sure it will work.... eventually.

I dunno... perhaps I'd laugh at you saying this is science fiction if I had understood a word you just said.

[Shadownailshot]

I dunno... perhaps I'd laugh at you saying this is science fiction if I had understood a word you just said.

He's talking about a theoretical space drive. I believe he's talking about the Bussard Ramjet.

[NASAFanboy]

I don't know, but I know where I will be.

The view is so great from the moon.

[Holo]

There'll be lots of transhumanism, 200 man bases on Mars and the Moon, and a tiny outpost on Callisto as part of the first manned mission to the outer solar system.

EDIT: For further detail, the 200 man base on the Moon will be mainly oriented around Helium-3 mining and radio astronomy. The Mars base, on the other hand, will be purely scientific, doing tests such as the long term habitability of mars. The tiny outpost on Callisto is doign many scientific tests whilst it waits for the phase angles.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Holo

[Nibb31]

Are we going to necro all the dead threads from October just because that's the latest backup date ?

[Rune]

Are we going to necro all the dead threads from October just because that's the latest backup date ?

I'm trying to create some new ones, but apparently I've been bumped down to newbie category when all my posts went up in a puff of smoke. And I was going to put the first thread on Kepler's new findings! But now I have to wait for a mod to approve it

[Scotius]

Hurry up mods! I've seen some pretty diagrams from Kepler on Planet Hunters website - there are new planets, yay!

[Holo]

Are we going to necro all the dead threads from October just because that's the latest backup date ?

They're on the front page .