Is it a suicide mission?
Even if it’s extremely dangerous, with a very high probability of not surviving it, I think that’s a gross mischaracterization. A suicide implies a plan to do something that will intrinsically result in death, not take high risks for some other goal.
Hmm.. this doesn’t show up on the front of the blog.. I only got here by your link on Twitter. Intentional?
Bill Kaufmann seems to think a “suicide mission” and a “death wish” are the same thing.
They’re not, and he misquoted Robert Thirsk by equating them.
Now it does show up on the front of the blog.. I guess this is the same commenting bug that I’ve seen on the blog for months and months now – some comments only appear after another comment is posted – this is the first time I’ve seen it affect a post on the front page, but presumably that’s because you so rarely link to them before someone has commented.
Hey Trent, what’s with the get up in the new photo, you get married, were the best man, went to the prom?
Married in February.
Congratulations!!!!!!!
Yes, congratulations indeed, Trent.
Can we extend our condolences to her? 😉
I always suspected you were a stupid bugger and now you’ve proved it.
(Yeah, OK, I’m a stupid bugger too)
“A suicide implies a plan to do something that will intrinsically result in death, not take high risks for some other goal.”
I agree…but a suicide *mission* is typically accompanied with some goal. Like when Randy Quaid flew that F-18 into the alien mothership at the end of Independence Day.
A trip to Mars need not be a suicide mission, but given that its intended to be a one way flight with no long term sustainability, I think the Mars One scheme is.
TV shows usually only last a few seasons.
I don’t think anyone outside the space advocate community takes Mars One seriously. If the Netherlands did they would have to, under the Moon Treaty they signed, be working with the other Moon Treaty nations to organized a Mars Regime as required under Articles 1, 4, and 11 to provide the legal framework needed for it. The fact that they are not says a lot about how much creditability it has.
I’m not sure some people, particularly luddites, would recognize the difference between a one way mission and a suicide mission.
A suicide implies a plan to do something that will intrinsically result in death
Living will intrinsically result in death.
Lving on Mars will be no different, in that respect.
Most if not all the people who migrated out of Africa all those years ago never returned. Were they on a suicide mission? Most of the millions of people who migrated to America over the centuries never returned to their homelands. Were they on a suicide mission?
I agree that the technology to settle on Mars is immature and unproven. The odds of long-term survival aren’t all that great. Still, there is some chance of survival, unlike a kamakazi mission.
True, but in those cases humans the transitions were either gradual, as with out of Africa, or folks were going to environments were humans already existed. It was known that both survival and reproduction, the two requirements for sustained settlement, were possible. In short they were in an environment the human body was mostly adapted for, or with only minor technology (fire and clothing) could survive in. And they had the option of returning if they wanted to. In fact I have seen estimates that about 10 percent of the 17th Century English settlers did return to England.
By contrast Mars is a radically different and very hostile environment. The low gravity may well make reproduction impossible not to mention the possible negative long term effects on the humans that go there. And even if humans survive it, the low G may impact critical food plants needed for sustainable survival. The problems that we already know about for long duration zero-g exposure in orbit raises the question if they will even be able to leave the lander once it reached the surface. It may well require them to live in it for days before being able to stand up and walk out with a heavy space suit. Most Mars settlers are really over looking all the recent reports from research being done on the ISS of the negative impact of Zero-G. Some of the effects may well extend to low G environments as it is becoming apparent that just as human beings need a specific range of atmospheric gases and pressure to function they likely also need a specific range of gravity. Actually it should be no surprise that the further you remove humans from the conditions on the Earth surface the greater the impact on human physiology. Yet the Mars Now! crowd seems to just ignore the research supporting it just because it is inconvenient to their belief system, which as Rand often points out for climate research is not science.
The great advantage of the Moon is that its close enough that the negative impacts of Zero-G doesn’t really have time to set in before you reach it and its close enough the settlers would be able to return to Earth if they became seriously impacted. Actually an even greater advantage of the Moon is that because of its proximity to Earth its possible to build a settlement to gradually and fully explore the medical issues of low gravity before committing to a one way trip.
I will take folks like Bas Lansdorp, Elon Musk and Dr. Zubrin a lot more seriously when they recognize the need to learn more about the impact of low gravity on human systems and sponsor/support research missions to the Moon to learn about it. The cost of bio missions to the Moon are only a fraction of the amounts needed to go to Mars and could easily be done with off the shelf systems. The only reason I see for the Mars folks ignoring doing them is the extreme tunnel vision they have about Mars based on the old science fiction images of it, tunnel vision that will needlessly cost the lives of the settlers and discredit the entire idea of space settlement. To go to Mars without making an serious effort to under the impact of low gravity environments on humans and critical food plants is what makes it a suicide mission.
folks were going to environments were humans already existed
Obviously Thomas, some had to go first.
Going to the moon to find out if we can live on mars is just a way to avoid going to mars.
We already know we can live in low gravity. It’s a total red herring. Finding out if we can live on mars requires us to live on mars.
We already know we can live in low gravity.
We don’t know long-term effects, and we don’t know if we can either conceive or gestate.
We do know some effects and do know how to mitigate them. Thomas keeps talking about zero G which is another thing entirely.
It’s a risk. Somebody wrote a book on the subject. But humans have never lived in a one g environment, only nearly so.
The difference between zero G and some G is profound (ask a rocket scientist trying to relight an engine.) The difference between some G and some other non crushing G, not so much.
Let’s find out?
The difference between some G and some other non crushing G, not so much.
That’s an assumption, based on basically zero data, when it comes to biology, and particularly human biology. The proper way to find out is to build a gravity lab, not send people to Mars.
“We do know some effects and do know how to mitigate them. ”
I don’t think we know how to mitigate them. We have some ideas and some tactics to use in the short term for some of the problems that pop up. There are so many things that we know nothing about or our knowledge is partial.
“Let’s find out?”
I agree but let’s not minimize the risks. You can’t have informed consent if the risks are minimized rhetorically.
Not based on zero data. I understand that’s just a touch of hype to make the point. Jesus did the same thing so you’re in good company.
Consider ullage motors. They demonstrate the significant difference between zero G and some small amount of acceleration. That difference is huge compared to the difference between adaptable accelerations.
But even the most dire predictions are just not that bad. They provide no real argument against finding out from direct experience. Send marines to adapt and overcome or any other non wimps.
There is a centrifuge sitting in storage on the ground ready to go to ISS that could answer some low g questions for us, at least for mouse gestation.
Ken,
You don’t have a clue do you?
Yes, we know humans are able to survive a few days in low gravity especially when they have only a short exposure to Zero-G m but that is not surprising as they are able to survive a year or so in Zero-G. But survival and sustainable are two very different things. However we also have good evidence humans will not be able to reproduce in Zero-G, and we don’t know anything about the probability of successful reproduction in low Gravity. We also don’t know how many of the effects of Zero-G will be present in low gravity over similar durations.
Mars will only be of value if humans are able to survive their for multiple generations. That is what makes it different from all the examples you provide. They were in environments on Earth which humans are structured to live in. That is not the case for any other body, planet or Moon, in the Solar System.
Here’s a clue… equating physiological adjustments with it can’t be done is ridiculous.
“Ken,
You don’t have a clue do you?”
Of course he has a clue. He is just enthusiastic like the rest of us space cadets.
Ken,
Ah, mind over matter. So you are planning to fly up to 50,000 ft without an oxygen mask?
Obviously to avoid this looming catastrophe, the president should appoint a panel of experts to look into what legislation might be necessary to prevent the private sector from sponsoring such unnecessary risk taking and exploiting the most vulnerable amongst us, the mentally ill.
Nah, not necessary. The courts will take care of it when the next of kin sue the firms and billionaires involved. And any “hold harmless” papers the settlers signed will be tossed out when its determined they overloaded this fundamental factor.
To put it in a simple example, imagine telling folks you will take them for a flight 50,000 in the air in an open cockpit without first determining if they will need additional oxygen. That would be a suicide mission in any sense of the word. Yes, that is exactly what these Mars advocates are proposing.
Mars One is a suicide mission that can be fixed so that it is not. I estimate their media plans will only generate about 25% of their goal. This somewhat mitigates their suicide mission status as they will not get to the point of actually sending anyone. But they do have a good chance of getting a reality show going. So what if we make a deal to take their colonists in exchange for some commercial time?
I will be talking to a trust attorney tomorrow.
Ken,
It should be a very educational experience. But unless they are aware of the specialize area of space law it will be pretty useless. A touch stone will be if they ask you if you have gone to NASA about your idea. If they ask that then you know they don’t have a clue about space law or space settlement.
However if you are interested I could put you in touch with an attorney in Colorado who actually is informed about such things.
People believe many things that are not true. Often it takes a crackpot to expose the nonsense. I may not get anywhere with my first lawyer. If so, I will get referrals. Christopher Columbus was such a crackpot.
People don’t believe in individual liberty today (even when believing they do.) Mars is a chance to remind them. All the discussion of property rights tend to ignore that it is a natural right a moral imperative and all the lawyers on earth have no standing.
BTW, I would like to bring a copy a Rand’s PDF with me. I’ve got nine minutes to get that printed,.
You do know he was trying to reach Asia, not discover a New World? And the advisors to the Queen were correct, it was too far for the ships available at the time.
Thomas, I’m 55. They still taught history back in grade school when dinosaurs (like me) roamed the earth. I know what Columbus was looking for and Magellan had ships like his.
If, as I believe will happen, the initial colonization missions to Mars – and other places, for that matter – are private, for-profit affairs, the degree of pre-departure risk retirement undertaken will be settled by market forces. Elon’s talking-point price of a half million $US isn’t likely to attract too many takers who utterly lack sense or a desire to do reasonable due diligence on the matter of staying alive en route and on the ground on their new home mudball of choice. With the notable exceptions of show people and pro athletes, to be sure, there aren’t a lot of people with frivolous disregard for their own future health and welfare who can also write a check for a cool half-mil.
The “steerage” ticket price is likely to dictate the degree to which potential emigrants insist on demonstrations and trials of the sort Thomas M. would prefer. There will be a certain number of starry-eyed adventurers in the early days who will actually crave the spartan, Oregon Trail-type experience of pioneering. They are likely to be young, successful early in life and looking around for – literally – new worlds to conquer. They will be willing to run more risks than older, more deliberate types who’ve lived long enough to acquire a more measured sense of their own vincibility. As in the settling of the Old West, they are likely to have a fairly high casualty rate.
But most of those who could, at least in theory, afford to pay for passage would be citizens of advanced industrial economies here on Earth – America foremost among them – who are middle-aged, sober and comfortably-fixed. They will only be tempted to relocate to another celestial body if it resembles, at a minimum, an outer space version of a Del Webb community. Given near-future robotics and fabrication technology, I think the transition from a hardscrabble martian Deadwood to something more like Leisure World might take a surprisingly short time.
How much will the MCT cost to launch? To get to his $500k ticket price would mean $50m total. Based on the F9 and FH I’d say it would be more like $500m. Musk just wants to sell tickets but that doesn’t get us a land rush (even at the lower ticket price which doesn’t include a costly space suit.)
My goal is to get that land rush at $150m per colonist where they all arrive with assets to pursue there dreams. If I can get anywhere near doing that… imagine what I could do at $5m per colonist?
My first question for the lawyer today will be… How can you trust a trust?