[space] Is Mars-one a scam?

[rkman]

Here's a similarly stupid idea. http://www.buildtheenterprise.org

Seems a throwback to carco cult logic; 'If we build something that has the visual appearance of the thing we want to make, it will function like the thing we want to make.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult

[lajoswinkler]

Yes, there's a striking resemblance to it.

[Seret]

Seems a throwback to carco cult logic; 'If we build something that has the visual appearance of the thing we want to make, it will function like the thing we want to make.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult

Or the spaceship the aliens built in Galaxy Quest:

AKA: It doesn't matter if it's stupid, it has to be the same as the one on TV!

[NeoMorph]

Actually getting them to Mars is easy... Getting them to Mars ALIVE is going to be hard. Just look at the data from Curiosity's radiation detector that recorded the the radiation from Earth to Mars.

Nasa's Curiosity rover has confirmed what everyone has long suspected - that astronauts on a Mars mission would get a big dose of damaging radiation.

The robot counted the number of high-energy space particles striking it on its eight-month journey to the planet.

Based on this data, scientists say a human travelling to and from Mars could well be exposed to a radiation dose that breached current safety limits.

This calculation does not even include time spent on the planet's surface.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22718672

So they get to Mars and start dying. The need to get to a hospital quick so they just nip out to the local hosp... oh... no hospitals on Mars.

Before they get to Mars they need a plan for radiation protection. A huge heavy ship with the outer skin of the ship full of water may be a help but those high energy particles are slipper suckers. I think they need to remote deploy at least 80% of the equipment to Mars BEFORE any human even STARTS the journey. Basically send a hospital to Mars for emergencies. Then they need to send a load of storable food. Boxes and boxes of something like MRE packs just in case the airponics fails. Back up seed stock... back up of the backups...

Yup... I think it may be doable but they need to do it belt and suspenders style (ie heavy on the "What if X happens". Those that said "Well they said they couldn't go to the moon and they did it" really need to learn to use a star map because the Moon is right in our backyard while Mars is several trips around the equator.

It's not the level of radiation but the amount of time you are exposed to that radiation that is the problem. If they had a drive that could shorten the journey to the time of the Apollo 11 then it is doable.

[czokletmuss]

Yup... I think it may be doable but they need to do it belt and suspenders style (ie heavy on the "What if X happens". Those that said "Well they said they couldn't go to the moon and they did it" really need to learn to use a star map because the Moon is right in our backyard while Mars is several trips around the equator.

I recommend using this site to visualize the distances we're talking about: http://www.distancetomars.com/

[lajoswinkler]

The RAD data revealed an average GCR dose equivalent rate of 1.84 milliSieverts (mSv) per day during the rover's cruise to Mars. (The Sievert is a standard measure of the biological impacts of radiation.) This dose rate is about the same as having a full-body CT scan in a hospital every five days or so.

We get a bit more than 2 mSv each year in normal circumstances. That's average. There are regions on Earth where the doses are greater and there are regions where they're less than that. Getting 1.84 mSv/day is like getting a cranial CT scan every day. Few days and you're ok. You get a tiny bit more chance of developing cancer, that's it.

The more you're exposed to it, the greater the chance of developing some illness.

One year of exposure is around 670 mSv or 0.67 Sv. Now that's a lot.

Mars astronauts would all get cataracts later in their lives. No doubt about that.

Some (most?) of them would develop one of numerous types of cancer. Not all of them are equally dangerous.

[Diche Bach]

We get a bit more than 2 mSv each year in normal circumstances. That's average. There are regions on Earth where the doses are greater and there are regions where they're less than that. Getting 1.84 mSv/day is like getting a cranial CT scan every day. Few days and you're ok. You get a tiny bit more chance of developing cancer, that's it.

The more you're exposed to it, the greater the chance of developing some illness.

One year of exposure is around 670 mSv or 0.67 Sv. Now that's a lot.

Mars astronauts would all get cataracts later in their lives. No doubt about that.

Some (most?) of them would develop one of numerous types of cancer. Not all of them are equally dangerous.

Does that prognosis include or discount the possibility of strong solar flares, like the ones that knocked out MARIE?

Ironically, in the Autumn of 2003 after a series of particularly strong solar flares MARIE started malfunctioning, probably as a result of being exposed to the solar flare's intense blast of particle radiation. The instrument was never restored to working order.

Just guessing that the rates of radiation exposure being talked about here are the ambient 'background' exposure that is inevitable without major shielding. Add the prospect of significant acute episodes of solar (or I suppose even cosmic?) radiation and instead of astronauts who are at increased risk of chronic illness later in life, you may well have astronauts suffering from acute radiation sickness?

[lajoswinkler]

It discounts any anomalous scenarios. In case the Sun freaks out, they're toasted, in the terms of developing cancer(s).

I'm not sure about the acute sickness because I don't know what are the doses involved. It says here (http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/srs.html) that during the worst solar radiation storms passengers in high flying airplanes might receive around 100 chest x-ray equivalent doses. That would be around 200 mSv.

So that's few hours of exposure close to tropopause. I have no idea what would be the doses outside Earth's magnetosphere. Most of the time Moon is outside of it.

My guts says weak to mild acute radiation sickness. Possibly above 1 Sv in few hours.

Edited September 3, 2013 by lajoswinkler

[iDan122]

Actually getting them to Mars is easy... Getting them to Mars ALIVE is going to be hard. Just look at the data from Curiosity's radiation detector that recorded the the radiation from Earth to Mars.

So they get to Mars and start dying. The need to get to a hospital quick so they just nip out to the local hosp... oh... no hospitals on Mars.

Before they get to Mars they need a plan for radiation protection. A huge heavy ship with the outer skin of the ship full of water may be a help but those high energy particles are slipper suckers. I think they need to remote deploy at least 80% of the equipment to Mars BEFORE any human even STARTS the journey. Basically send a hospital to Mars for emergencies. Then they need to send a load of storable food. Boxes and boxes of something like MRE packs just in case the airponics fails. Back up seed stock... back up of the backups...

Yup... I think it may be doable but they need to do it belt and suspenders style (ie heavy on the "What if X happens". Those that said "Well they said they couldn't go to the moon and they did it" really need to learn to use a star map because the Moon is right in our backyard while Mars is several trips around the equator.

It's not the level of radiation but the amount of time you are exposed to that radiation that is the problem. If they had a drive that could shorten the journey to the time of the Apollo 11 then it is doable.

They plan to send 6 pods every year, to make sure at least one gets there. They will grow food and maybe, in the future, even breed animals for meat. Because of you sceptics we will never go to Mars, but if we believe we can do something, it is doable. Kod isnt that evil to not let us go to Mars.

[Charzy]

To make sure one gets there. Right. And the other five?

How do you expect them to raise animals on Mars, anyway? There's no land to graze. There's nothing. It's a barren, radioactive, inhospitable desert.

[SargeRho]

The radiation on the 6 month trip is survivable, given recent discoveries in radiation shielding properties of polyethylene. The radiation on the surface of Mars, according to Curiosity, is comparable to the radiatio in Low Earth Orbit.

As for breeding animals: Greenhouses. Some types of grass I think are fairly good oxygen producers.

[lajoswinkler]

The radiation on the 6 month trip is survivable, given recent discoveries in radiation shielding properties of polyethylene. The radiation on the surface of Mars, according to Curiosity, is comparable to the radiatio in Low Earth Orbit.

As for breeding animals: Greenhouses. Some types of grass I think are fairly good oxygen producers.

Can you link the news on polyethylene?

Greenhouses require fertile soil. Mars doesn't have a single grain of it. In fact, its regolith is proven to be an oxidizer, hence no organic molecules have been found so far.

Soil requires fertilizing. Complications, complications, complications.

Edited September 4, 2013 by lajoswinkler

[sparty48]

I will go to mars with a spaceship propelled by bad news. Give me a million dollars to do it.

[Kerbface]

There will be no breeding animals on Mars (or at least any early settlements). Livestock is an utter waste of resources because you have to grow plants and then feed them to the animals. They'd just have to live with a vegetarian diet once their Earth-brought supplies run out.

[WestAir]

I imagine food won't be that big of an issue. What can't be grown in greenhouse can be shipped via supplies, and what can't be grown nor shipped won't be necessary for survivability.

Water will be an issue, as will radiation. [A permanent residence in a place where 6 months gives a person their life-long recommended occupational dose of ionizing radiation doesn't sound sustainable.]

Medicine and care will be another issue. [Giving birth, bacterial infections, and inevitable death of crew will overstress even the most well-tuned small group.]

The largest issue, however, will be psychological. [A submarine crew can "man through" a several-month voyage under the sea, with no contact with the outside world. For a life-time? Beyond realistic.]

Personally, I have a hard time configuring the method in which mankind will ever actually create a permanent offworld colony: Be it on Mars, Titan, the Moon, or LEO. I'm only 23, so I hope I'm young enough to see the beginnings of such a colony: If only so I know HOW they manage to do it.

[Kerbface]

The thing that gives most of the lifelong reccomended occupational dose of radiation is mostly the trip there and back, on the surface, it's a significantly smaller issue on the surface plus there's plenty of dirt to help deal with it. Additionally, this reccomended dose only gives a 3% increase of cancer risk, and that's based on more concentrated doses in the first place.

As for water, if they use it as the primary radiation shielding on the way there, they could bring some of it down. Water can be recycled plenty of times though I'm sure some would be lost to evaporation over time, so they'd want to find some way of either getting it from the atmosphere or making sure they land near an area where ice-water is accessible.

If people were to go with the life-time colony route, I expect it'd be a multi-step process that builds the base up to a fairly significant size, at least eventually 20 people or something.

[loknar]

I see a lot of hate for Mars-One. With some oversight, the risk of scam can be avoided. It is still a long time before the due-date so of course the project is mostly on paper for now.

But what Mars-One represents is a manned missions to Mars that is only 500 times closer than anything from NASA.

I'm all for it. Humanity needs the science and space experience at any cost.

Sending more than 40 people, yet alone thousands is useless at this point though.

[Devo]

I see a lot of hate for Mars-One. With some oversight, the risk of scam can be avoided. It is still a long time before the due-date so of course the project is mostly on paper for now.But what Mars-One represents is a manned missions to Mars that is only 500 times closer than anything from NASA.I'm all for it. Humanity needs the science and space experience at any cost.Sending more than 40 people, yet alone thousands is useless at this point though.

500 times closer to anything from NASA sure, but probably 1000 times more likely to burn up and splash you in the ocean. I'm all for any space exploration, but if you guys can't see this as another get rich quick scheme, then you are in need of some serious coffee.

[jwenting]

I see a lot of hate for Mars-One. With some oversight, the risk of scam can be avoided. It is still a long time before the due-date so of course the project is mostly on paper for now.

But what Mars-One represents is a manned missions to Mars that is only 500 times closer than anything from NASA.

I'm all for it. Humanity needs the science and space experience at any cost.

Sending more than 40 people, yet alone thousands is useless at this point though.

1) Mars One is not a US thing, it's a European NGO.

2) Given the lead time of the mission, they are way too close to ever make it.

3) They're infinitely far away, that's much further away than NASA who at least have design studies underway for a rocket that COULD MAYBE do it IF it were ever built.

4) Given the nature intended for Mars One, they need that many because they need to be self sufficient which means sending thousands. Which is just another reason they can't succeed.

[loknar]

I knew that Mars One is a european NGO.

They seem to have a roadmap, at least. And if properly regulated, if they find problems they will re-schedule or adjust or cancel the mission.

Trusting private corporations seems absurd but we have no choice. Look at current world governments..

[rkman]

if properly regulated

Regulated by who / by what organization?

[IGottaTellYa]

I praise the positivity and would like to see it happen, but think a wedge of realism needs to come back to the project team their goal and how much raised so far - I wold love to see this as much as others, but just don't see the funds being acquired. It's not a scam, as others put it, a massive pipe dream, with a slim chance of success.

I know conditions a lot more different, but expected to see a moon base or training center by now in the grand scheme of thing - they can learn lessons in that construction there and launch from space to save on lift off costs - that said, maybe we are all waiting for the space evaluator to be in place before that is feasible.

Exciting times never the less, I fear we won't see much development in this space in our life times, but heres hoping!

Have to admire the drive for the different independent Mars teams trying to do this kind of thing. Better to have a go and not achieve it than be so negative nothing ever progress. However, like others, I deep down think they won't get the funding, which is the failing or so many different projects these days!

Maybe they should invest a hacker to steal $1 off every back account on the planet and be the first criminals in space :0)

[jwenting]

I'd rather trust a private party than a government, but not this private party. Too much smoke and mirrors, too little reality to show, and the boss didn't put in any of his own money.

If the founder of such a venture doesn't even trust his own money in it, why should I trust him with mine?

And yes, that goes for governments too, except there I have no choice as I'm forced at gunpoint to pay and they call it taxes.

[Mr Shifty]

And yes, that goes for governments too, except there I have no choice as I'm forced at gunpoint to pay and they call it taxes.

Why do you, on every post, inject politics? Could we please have this be a place where we can just discuss ideas on the merits without resorting to tribal signifiers and chest-thumping?

[Javster]

That sort of funding (donations and merch) can a game or small business going, but not a completely new venture into completely unknown territories. It would be slightly more realistic (read: less insane) if it was a space travel holiday plan of some kind. Suborbital flight into space for a few minutes. But MARS?? REALLY??