Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How settling Mars could create a new human species

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#91

Post by Kurimo »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #16
azdle wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the Outer Space Treaty [1]: > The treaty explicitly forbids any government from claiming a celestial resource such as the Moon or a planet.[3] Art. II of the Treaty states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means". However, the State that launches a space object reta…

Yes, and countries can, and do, remove themselves from treaties when they feel it is in their best interest. The most critical one in our time was the anti-ballistic missile treaty which the US withdrew from in 2001. If a country felt they could control access to and maintain control over, a celestial body I could imagine them withdrawing from the treaty and claiming that body as their own. [1] http://www.nytimes.com…

It's pretty hard to secure a border crossing in a country, let alone an entire planet.

Planets are noted for, among other things, being rather large.

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#93

Post by mc32 »

Kurimo wrote: post #91
ChuckMcM wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and countries can, and do, remove themselves from treaties when they feel it is in their best interest. The most critical one in our time was the anti-ballistic missile treaty which the US withdrew from in 2001. If a country felt they could control access to and maintain control over, a celestial body I could imagine them withdrawing from the treaty and claiming that body as their own. [1] http://www.nytimes.com…

It's pretty hard to secure a border crossing in a country, let alone an entire planet. Planets are noted for, among other things, being rather large.

Here they would not be defending other terrestrial intruders but rather space invaders from earth, so they'd be reasonably sure where to look out for coming troublemakers. On the other hand, they could be in a precarious position if their habitat isn't terraformed (not needing intensive energy to keep things habitable, thus a weak point in sustainability).

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#94

Post by M_Grey »

tomp wrote: post #50
M_Grey wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean... if a Mars colony really pisses people off, I imagine you'd hear the phrase, "Nuke them from orbit" bandied about a lot.

This would probably go both ways. In fact, as Earth has so many satellites (GPS, communication, etc), you could simply "nuke" the orbit.

It could, but that assumes an incredibly advanced Mars which can produce interplanetary weapons and launch without detection. Earth would also have the benefit of being able to withstand the event without total destruction, while presumably life on Mars would be in a relatively small area. You could wipe out a city on Earth, but you you could wipe out life on Mars.

Eventually though? Hell yes. Same with asteroid belt colonies and mining, especially when you consider the tech to exploit asteroids and the tech to steer on at Earth would look pretty similar. Presumably the limiting factor on such aggression would be the long-term dependency on Earth for supplies that couldn't be fabricated offworld, foodstuffs, and so on. At first, for at least a couple of generations, you'd also have the strong connection to the homeworld, I assume.

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#95

Post by irremediable »

erispoe wrote: post #62
irremediable wrote: post #43

I highly recommend Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. Great scifi books about a vaguely realistic Mars settlement, and the cultural/biological changes that occur.

I never could get beyond the first dozens of pages, I was very annoyed by the way Robinson paints broad group of people as having homogeneous traits (the "arabs" living in a martian kasbah and depicted as backward people). Does it get past that?

Did you start with the first book? I wouldn't have thought it would start with that stuff, because Mars isn't colonised at the start of the series.

IMO it is better than that most of the time, in any case.

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#96

Post by ChuckMcM »

Kurimo wrote: post #91
ChuckMcM wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and countries can, and do, remove themselves from treaties when they feel it is in their best interest. The most critical one in our time was the anti-ballistic missile treaty which the US withdrew from in 2001. If a country felt they could control access to and maintain control over, a celestial body I could imagine them withdrawing from the treaty and claiming that body as their own. [1] http://www.nytimes.com…

It's pretty hard to secure a border crossing in a country, let alone an entire planet. Planets are noted for, among other things, being rather large.

On the plus side, planetary distances are so large you know for a long time that someone is coming to your planet. So you have time to prepare a reception.

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#97

Post by lxmorj »

nbadg wrote: post #68
artmageddon wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe in 1000 years Mars will be nice. Wouldn't terraforming take much, much longer than that? Assuming it were possible(which doesn't seem possible due to lack of a magnetic field, as another commenter pointed out)

Atmosphere stripping due to solar wind is a natural process that takes millions of years. Atmospheric production is a deliberate process limited only by available energy and raw materials. And, of course, the economics. But the point remains: you absolutely can densify Mars' atmosphere, and you won't have to worry much about it until you get to the point where you start running out of raw material to replace the very…

It might not take that long given the right tech. You'd need a legit fusion reactor, and enough material to build an long mass ejector and start shooting 0.01c ice pellets into the outer solar system, driving the rest of Ceres toward Mars. The same mass ejectors could be tuned to bombard Mars with ice at a much lower speed later, if needed for terraforming.

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#98

Post by lxmorj »

gnode wrote: post #71
hourislate wrote: post #30

It looks like we have to overcome the technological hurdles of creating gravity and some kind of shielding (invisible) that can protect humans from radiation. Steady power would be required. Curious if wind power could be used. If Musk could send a rocket to Mars that was basically a huge wind turbine that would anchor itself and unfold its blades, couldn't it create enough power to provide for a small contingent of…

Artificial gravity can be created with a centrifuge, and pretty much anything with mass will shield you from radiation. Currently making a centrifugal spacecraft lined with radiation shielding would be too costly. The cost efficiency of rapidly reusable spacecraft could make such solutions to these problems affordable.

Use an asteroid?

Re: How settling Mars could create a new human species

#99

Post by kwhitefoot »

edblarney wrote: post #83
artmageddon wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe in 1000 years Mars will be nice. Wouldn't terraforming take much, much longer than that? Assuming it were possible(which doesn't seem possible due to lack of a magnetic field, as another commenter pointed out)

1000 years or a million - it's irrelevant I think. After 1000 years of evolution and progress, we may have very different ideas about everything we understand. We might possibly abandon Mars 'terraforming' for going to 'ready to go' planets that we can access further away. Humans are not very good at planning at that horizon. The only group that does that is the Catholic Church. The big Cathedral in Cologne, Germany…

> The big Cathedral in Cologne, Germany took 700 years to build.

Yes, but: I doubt that they planned it that way.

Post reply on HN