|
green bars? where they serve alcoholic health drinks and smoothies?
kale liqueur with cauliflower on the rocks please sir ... make it a double smoothie!
after many otherwise intelligent sounding suggestions that achieved nothing the nice folks at Technet said the only solution was to low level format my hard disk then reinstall my signature. Sadly, this still didn't fix the issue!
|
|
|
|
|
I do read a fair amount of SciFi, but consider them science fiction. The author is free to ignore any law of nature, any technical problems, and may assume whatever issue "solved two thousand years ago". Most (high quality) SciFi does not aim to solve practical issues, but to create a setting for discussing a large set of other, usually non-technical issues.
So while I might pick up that Mars series (I am not familiar with it), what I am curious about this time is the Science part rather than the Fiction part.
|
|
|
|
|
Generally, that is true. KSR is a little different in that he describes the science behind most of his premises. David Brin does that quite a bit too since he is in fact a scientist.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Sidetracking a little here: I will say the same about James P. Hogan. I have a Comp.Sci Masters degree and 40 years of experience, judging his books from the perspective of a computer expert. I picked up the 1979 "The two faces of tomorrow" again not too long ago, and it still holds up. "Realtime Interrupt", 16 years later (but 25 years old today) still raises essential questions that cannot be pushed aside. (And a few of my collagues, to whom I have recommended the book, have had nights of bad sleep, essentially because the comp.sci parts still holds water after 25 years.
As a computer professional, I know that the issues are real. People with less background tend to laugh it off as more or less pure fantasy. If I read books too far out of my own field of expertise, I would like to have other experts confirm the realism. For a Mars settlement, there are so many issues that it would take a large flock of experts in different areas to confirm the realism of it.
That is what Weisman did with "The World Without Us". While he wrote the text, and is fully responsible for it, in every chapter he leans heavily of one or more top experts in the field. (Hogan also use to include thanks in he preface to those experts that have read through the manuscript to verify that there are no factual errors or impossibilities in the story.)
|
|
|
|
|
A little farther aside - have you read anything by William Gibson? He was writing about virtual worlds decades ago. In the movie "Hacker" they called the supercomputer the Gibson in honor of him.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Neal Stephenson too. In 1992, who'd have thought of a cyberpunk world where some rich dude is buying up ancient Sumerian artifacts for nefarious purposes? (Snow Crash) And yet, here we are.
|
|
|
|
|
KSR wrote what was reasonably solid hard SF at the time in designing the initial colonization ship and terraforming program; the biology stuff (anti-aging and brain reset) used to help keep some characters alive for centuries was always a bit iffier. The bigger issue at this point is just that he started writing in the 80's and some parts of his science/tech have become dated since. ex the first Mars ship was build out of US and Soviet Space Shuttle external tanks, and he totally missed the last 20 years of laptops and then phones providing computers everywhere.
Caveat, it's been at least 15 years since I last read the books.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
One person is seven or eight trees’ worth in terms of oxygen. But distance from the Sun will definitely be a factor here.
Martian polar caps are mostly CO2, no luck here. Maybe there is some frozen water underground. Or you can get some water from comets if you can make them crash on Mars.
Sun will be our only energy source so electricity will power everything.
|
|
|
|
|
Tomas Takac wrote: Martian polar caps are mostly CO2, no luck here.
Scientists may not have reached an agreement, or your sources may be outdated, or Wikipedias sources may be outdated: Wikipedia states, in the introduction to the "Mars" article: "The two polar ice caps appear to be made largely of water".
This is so far from my own field of expertise that I will file both alternatives under "Some say this, some say that".
|
|
|
|
|
I checked Wikipedia and the permanent polar caps are made of water ice. The seasonal cover is from frozen carbon dioxide which sublimes in summer. I didn't know that. So you are right, there is enough water for a colony, but you'd need to melt it and transport to the colony in pipe I guess.
I read somewhere there might be underground deposits of water ice which can occasionally melt during summer and even flow on the surface for a while. I don't have any reference for that however.
|
|
|
|
|
Tomas Takac wrote: One person is seven or eight trees’ worth in terms of oxygen.
Thanks! That directly answers one of my intial questions.
Of course this is only a microscopic fractions of the questions that must be answered to build a Mars colony - but on the other hand, the answer has a great value here on earth as well!)
|
|
|
|
|
Fred Pohl's Man Plus covered most of the problems, years decades ago.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
May be an interesting read - but it is classified as science Fiction, not a science.
I pointed to "The World Without Us" because it is classified as Science (although somewhat popularized). The author (and his informants) have not take the freedom to ignore nature's laws when they are a hindrance for the progress of the story.
I haven't read Man Plus, and the book may have a general respect for scientific knowledge, but when it is labeled as fiction, you cannot be certain of it. (And, the Wikipedia article does not give any impression of this story carrying any realism. E.g. the brain is one of they body's major consumers of oxygen, and that will prevail even if you create an artificial body.)
|
|
|
|
|
You're obviously not familiar with Pohl's work. He used to research more stringently than 99% of astronomers, and make up less cr@p than 100% of them.Member 7989122 wrote: the brain is one of they body's major consumers of oxygen
It also consumes (AIRI; can be checked) between 70 and 95% of all the glucose you ingest, depending on what you're doing, and harvesting monosaccharides is a tad more destructive to the plants than just letting them produce O2.
Just find a list (there are probably hundreds of instances of them on-line) of nutritional needs at the biochemical level, and you'll easily be able to roughly classify them according to difficulty.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Ever notice how there's entire flock of people who fawn over every word Elon says without thinking about what he's saying? Yeah, this is one of those cases.
All marketing. No substance.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: All marketing. No substance.
I don't know about that. While I'm absolutely no fanboi of his, he did deliver on electric cars. And reusable rockets. And his tunnel boring machine.
Any one of these is a lot more than most of his critics may have delivered.
|
|
|
|
|
He said he'd put a million people on Mars by 2050. He didn't say they'd be alive when they got there. It's probably feasible now to put samples of the cremated remains of 1 million people on a vehicle and have it soft land on Mars.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: It's probably feasible now to put samples of the cremated remains of 1 million people on a vehicle and have it soft land on Mars.
If crooked politicians can vote the graveyard, why can't Elon? 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Per Douglas Adams, send the hairdressers and phone sanitizers first .. Oh! and the politicians.
(no offence to hairdressers intended)
Live long and prosper
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: Can anyone put me on the right track?
420. That is the number Musk derives all his claims from.
|
|
|
|
|
I do believe you are overthinking the problem.
Q: Will Musk succeed at putting even one person on Mars by 2050?
A: No
There. Thinking done.
|
|
|
|
|
No objection.
Myself, I never considered to be anywhere in the neighbourhood of realism. Not by a magnitude or two. But when you meet the fanboys, you often wish you had a checklist to point to, displaying 24 main reasons why the project is completely unrealistic, each of the 24 points certified by an internationally recognized expert.
Okay, okay, I know: Internationally recognized experts don't have a clue when you try to defend your own job in the coal or oil industry; then the experts are just talking bullshit. If you are working with Ovibos moschatus[^], you do not want that work to be turned down, either. But a list of 24 well argued objections would be welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Next question: How many plants does it take to produce a ton of oxygen a day? Obviously, a huge pine tree will produce more than, say, a tomato plant. I guess that plants will have to double as both oxygen and food sources; there wouldn't be room of huge forests within that plastic bubble. Do food plants vary a lot in their oxygen prodction capabilities? With Mars being roughly speaking at 1.5 times the Earth's distance from the sun, solar radiation is at 40-45% of Earth levels; I guess that could affect the photosynthesis.
with the use of solar energy collectors and artificial lighting, Earth-like levels can be replicated or increased. but will the 'soil' support terrestrial vegetation ?.
Live long and prosper
|
|
|
|
|
There's non-biological ways to produce oxygen. A few years back I got interested in recycling of CO2 back to O2, and there's multiple paths to do that. There's also other ways to get O2, like by disassociating water.
However, as raddevus pointed out about the biosphere project, making a long term viable environment is hard. The more closed, the harder.
|
|
|
|
|
It takes significant amounts of energy to tear up the bonds between the C and the O2 (and the process is far from 100% efficient). It is like "paying back" the energy you gained by burning the carbon, or the hydrogen.
If you want to do that by electricity from solar panels (with an efficiency in the low 20s - most PV panels sold today are below 20%) you must cover enormous areas with PV panels. We need to calculate the size. And the energy cost of shipping them from earth - I don't think we can expect neither to find the raw materials nor to establish a production plant for PV panels on Mars.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
