mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 days ago
lot of big ‘ifs’ involved: re: the moon specifically -
if we can find water, we can make fuel and oxygen, instead of lifting both out of earth’s gravity well. this could unlock a gigantic generation of probe exploration for much cheaper launch costs. and perhaps even human habitation, and later, human travel to mars etc.
mars - I don’t see any good reasons to rush humans to mars, it would be a stunt at best. the distances involved and the amount of resources they’d have to schlep are daunting with current technologies.
so maybe a reason to start robotic exploration of the moon, specifically lunar lava tubes for potential habitation and shaded craters where water ice might be recoverable.
none of it should take our priority off of stopping climate collapse tho. let’s keep the only space ship we’ve got habitable first.
foodandart@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
More to the point, no human has yet left the safety of earth’s magnetic field. The moon is well inside it and that is why the astronauts could go there, and come back and not end up riddled with cancer.
Mars has no magnetic field so going there and coming back will be a trip that likely incurs a shortened lifespan.
Will need to sort the diseases that come of solar radiation exposure first.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 days ago
yeah the cosmic bg radiation on the trip is gonna be… rough.
can be ameliorated with shielding, and if you’re going to mars you’re gonna wanna cart along a shitton of water (can be used for fuel or oxygen or drinking) so that may work out…
decreasing the transit time is critical, so constant thrust engines like NERVA can cut the risk down by making the trip faster…
but the why remains most for me: why do we feel putting humans on mars is worth it? the risks are manifold:
contaminating mars with more earth stuff, and now with human gut biome (astronauts will poop, and they ain’t bringing it all home)
one nasty solar flare and you run the risk of ending the mission right there - shielding be damned, a nasty one could cook all kinds of important tech.
the cost is astronomical (badum-tss) and the return - ? fuzzy at the very best. we’re NEVER going to terraform mars in the next couple hundred years, and terrestrial life would need all the perchlorates scrubbed from everything, all for what - maybe a week running around taking pictures and digging around in soils already sampled by rovers that are still running? and your point it’s got no magnetosphere so you’d live in a lava tube? pfft… why? we can live in lava tubes on the moon lol.
I just don’t see any why that justifies it.
Moon has utility, mars is a waste of time and resources imho.