Erik I love your optimism in this post. But while optimism is the best mental stance for a happy and useful life, it can result in naive battle plans. For example:
Re "Another possible obstacle is political regulation based on concerns around space privatization by billionaires" - yes, this is a likely and dangerous obstacle. The US government can kill the private space sector in the US anytime with unfriendly overregulation, and is all too likely to give in to cultural pressures against private spaceflight.
Musk & Bezos &co. should really consider preparing to move offshore just in case. I'm not joking.
To me the *only* thing that can keep the US on track to the Moon, Mars and beyond, is competition with China. Therefore, even though I dislike certain aspects of today's China, I'm a big fan of the Chinese space program. And if the West can't compete, then well, here's to China.
Erik I’m also an Up (and very proudly and unapologetically so), but perhaps stop using the terms Up and Down? They can be interpreted, um, differently, you know. Suggest Cosmists and Terrans.
Erik, it's really impressive how you've synthesized and focused this info into a digestible reading pleasure (versus just making one's head spin).
I'd love to see humans living on Mars, and if such a program succeeds, I think it will pay off in science and technology advances. (Perhaps adapting to Mars will facilitate adapting civilization to Earth's future?)
It seems there's a chain of things to pull off to achieve success. Isn't there some kind of analysis that mathematically / statistically determines the chances of success by factoring in the various dependencies? If there is, the result might be interesting. Perhaps the most likely "failure mode" would be in keeping to schedule?
Great piece. Has any work been done on the likely psychological effects on the pioneers of being removed from their home planet for long stretches/the rest of their lives?
No man has ever walked on the moon. A city on mars is a pipe dream. Get yer facts straight. Building future worlds based on current lies is pure madness.
Maybe I'm showing my background as a peak oil doomer, but I read through a bunch of the linked materials to try and learn more about how they plan to power this hypothetical city on Mars. I did not find anything substantial, but there are some 3D renderings that look like they contain solar panels.
Talking out my ass here since I don't know the numbers, but it seems powering a small city on Mars is a hefty burden to place on some solar panels. Water will need to be "mined" as ice, heated, and I assume purified. All living spaces need to be pressurized, which obviously costs energy. Plus you have to operate, I assume, some kind of technology to produce breathable air, right? And all on a planet farther from the Sun than Earth, meaning you get less energy per solar panel. Plus the dust storms on Mars would increase maintenance costs of everything, including the solar panels.
Maybe they'll ship nuclear reactors?
As an aside, I did not find any mention of the name Starbase Alpha in the NASA white paper, but thankfully it included a diversity and inclusion statement about how a NASA/SpaceX cooperation would increase opportunity for "marginalized and underrepresented groups" to participate in space programs. Maybe it's best if SpaceX did this one alone.
Erik I love your optimism in this post. But while optimism is the best mental stance for a happy and useful life, it can result in naive battle plans. For example:
Re "Another possible obstacle is political regulation based on concerns around space privatization by billionaires" - yes, this is a likely and dangerous obstacle. The US government can kill the private space sector in the US anytime with unfriendly overregulation, and is all too likely to give in to cultural pressures against private spaceflight.
Musk & Bezos &co. should really consider preparing to move offshore just in case. I'm not joking.
To me the *only* thing that can keep the US on track to the Moon, Mars and beyond, is competition with China. Therefore, even though I dislike certain aspects of today's China, I'm a big fan of the Chinese space program. And if the West can't compete, then well, here's to China.
Erik I’m also an Up (and very proudly and unapologetically so), but perhaps stop using the terms Up and Down? They can be interpreted, um, differently, you know. Suggest Cosmists and Terrans.
Erik, it's really impressive how you've synthesized and focused this info into a digestible reading pleasure (versus just making one's head spin).
I'd love to see humans living on Mars, and if such a program succeeds, I think it will pay off in science and technology advances. (Perhaps adapting to Mars will facilitate adapting civilization to Earth's future?)
It seems there's a chain of things to pull off to achieve success. Isn't there some kind of analysis that mathematically / statistically determines the chances of success by factoring in the various dependencies? If there is, the result might be interesting. Perhaps the most likely "failure mode" would be in keeping to schedule?
Great piece. Has any work been done on the likely psychological effects on the pioneers of being removed from their home planet for long stretches/the rest of their lives?
isn't the "How much space is enough?" chart in square meters? as opposed to the cubic meters given for Starship forward space?
Radiation risk needs a lot more work.
No man has ever walked on the moon. A city on mars is a pipe dream. Get yer facts straight. Building future worlds based on current lies is pure madness.
The irony of calling the "Downs" (esp. Bernie) progressives..
Maybe I'm showing my background as a peak oil doomer, but I read through a bunch of the linked materials to try and learn more about how they plan to power this hypothetical city on Mars. I did not find anything substantial, but there are some 3D renderings that look like they contain solar panels.
Talking out my ass here since I don't know the numbers, but it seems powering a small city on Mars is a hefty burden to place on some solar panels. Water will need to be "mined" as ice, heated, and I assume purified. All living spaces need to be pressurized, which obviously costs energy. Plus you have to operate, I assume, some kind of technology to produce breathable air, right? And all on a planet farther from the Sun than Earth, meaning you get less energy per solar panel. Plus the dust storms on Mars would increase maintenance costs of everything, including the solar panels.
Maybe they'll ship nuclear reactors?
As an aside, I did not find any mention of the name Starbase Alpha in the NASA white paper, but thankfully it included a diversity and inclusion statement about how a NASA/SpaceX cooperation would increase opportunity for "marginalized and underrepresented groups" to participate in space programs. Maybe it's best if SpaceX did this one alone.
> 1,677,950,000
This is a billion, not a trillion.