Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

61% Positive

Analyzed from 1328 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#mars#earth#water#moon#technology#cosmic#humans#should#impossible#long

Discussion (32 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

cosmic_cheese•about 2 hours ago
This topic is a bit of a sore spot for me.

I would agree that any notion of a large martian settlement (much less a comfortable one that people actually want to live in) on any shorter timeframe is not realistic and that Mars cannot be treated as a "plan B" in the case of climate change making Earth uninhabitable, but total dismissal of the idea (as well as the idea that humans will forever [and potentially should] be permanently Earth-bound) rubs me the wrong way.

Yes, it's an unfathomably difficult and complex project that should not be in any way underestimated. Realistically, it will take many decades at minimum and probably in excess of a century. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted however, and it's not as if any of it will magically get easier in all the time spent not trying. This could wind up being a self-fulfilling prophecy sort of situation if it's allowed to be.

tforcram•about 1 hour ago
I see this a lot too and it's frustrating to hear. Yes, it's clearly a near impossible problem, but when has that ever stopped us before?

The alternative I seem to see suggested most often is that we should be dedicating more of our resources to maintain the status quo as long as possible, which honestly sounds more insane to me.

Maybe the timeline is much longer out, but we don't have an infinite amount of resources on this rock and if we don't figure out how to get off it before we run out of those resources we may be stuck forever. Accepting that as inevitable feels wrong.

lapcat•about 1 hour ago
> Yes, it's an unfathomably difficult and complex project that should not be in any way underestimated. Realistically, it will take many decades at minimum and probably in excess of a century.

I think you've vastly underestimated the difficulty and the timeline, ironically. It's unrealistic to use the words "decades" or "a century". On the contrary, that's the delusion.

Consider: more than 50 years after putting a few people on the Moon very briefly, we're no closer to a colony on the Moon. And rocket technology won't help at all. Among the problems: the Moon has very little gravity, and we can't handwave like Q, "just change the gravitational constant of the universe."

cosmic_cheese•about 1 hour ago
Even if that's the case, I still don't think it does anything to validate taking the defeatist route and not even trying.
Ekaros•about 1 hour ago
I is lot less question of can we, but should we. The amount of time and resources needed are most likely so extreme that most other use cases would be better.

Sometimes it make lot of sense not to even try. I mean technically we could save a few lives in northern countries during winter by heating all roads in such a way that there is no ice or snow... Doable maybe... But not worth trying...

EA-3167•about 1 hour ago
If you throw yourself off a cliff because only defeatists accept that they can't fly by flapping their arms, you aren't brave taking chances, you're committing suicide.

By the same token "we don't want to be defeated" isn't a good reason to create a planetary exploration timeline driven by false urgency. Mars isn't going anywhere.

lapcat•about 1 hour ago
What exactly does “trying” look like to you?

We have limited resources, and every investment is a tradeoff. We can play with rockets, but how does SpaceX solve the problem of humans living with much less gravity than Earth, for example? It seems to me that this is a vastly greater problem than traveling to another celestial body.

Has anyone ever conceived a child off the Earth, much less given birth or raised one? Don’t talk to me about space colonies until we’ve done that.

jodrellblank•about 1 hour ago
See also Idlewords’ essays “Why not Mars” and “The shape of a Mars mission”

https://idlewords.com/2023/1/why_not_mars.htm

https://idlewords.com/2025/02/the_shape_of_a_mars_mission.ht...

““”Twenty years of tinkering with the much simpler systems on the space station have brought them no closer to reliability. And yet to get a crew to Mars, we’d need to get this stuff working like a Swiss watch. Humanity does not need a billion dollar shit dehydrator that can work for three years in zero gravity, but a Mars mission can’t leave Earth without it.“””

and his article l’affair siloxane:

https://mceglowski.substack.com/p/laffaire-siloxane

And Charles Stross’ “The High Frontier Redux” (2007)

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2007/06/the-high...

“”” Mars is ... well, the phrase "tourist resort" springs to mind, and is promptly filed in the same corner as "Gobi desert". As Bruce Sterling has puts it: "I'll believe in people settling Mars at about the same time I see people settling the Gobi Desert. The Gobi Desert is about a thousand times as hospitable as Mars and five hundred times cheaper and easier to reach. Nobody ever writes "Gobi Desert Opera" because, well, it's just kind of plonkingly obvious that there's no good reason to go there and live.””””

ls612•12 minutes ago
“We choose to go to /s The Moon /r Mars / not because it is easy but because it is hard.”

Kennedy was describing one of the most fundamental ambitions; to try to achieve the impossible. Think pieces like this must betray their fundamental lack of any ambition whatsoever

EA-3167•about 2 hours ago
It’s an interesting article, but my advice is to skip the middleman and get a copy of the book discussed, ‘A City On Mars’. It’s entertaining, informative and well researched/cited. It’s also my go-to recommendation for people coming at this from a layperson/enthusiast perspective because the reasons why “colonize Mars anytime soon” is comical and an obvious lie once you dig in are complex. Unfortunately said reasons are multidisciplinary to the extreme so an overview in digestible form can be helpful for people who’ve been emotionally invested in this fantasy.
Simulacra•about 2 hours ago
Related, which some might find interesting:

"Packing for Mars" by Mary Roach

jmclnx•about 2 hours ago
When I was young, I thought going to Mars or the moon would be awesome. But I wonder if even living or Mars is possible, even if water is found.

I remember reading a while ago if water you drink distilled water and only distilled water long term, it will do you harm. I wonder if the same could apply to water on other planets ? IIRC, it has to do with minerals or something in water here.

Ekaros•about 1 hour ago
It depends on wholesale diet. As long as you get those minerals from some source such as food itself you are fine. Or you can simply add them in as needed.

This might also be one problem as whole. Whatever food you eat must cover all needs or be supplemented. So there is need to ensure that either sufficiently varied items to fill needs are shipped in or whatever is produced locally covers absolutely all needs.

ck2•about 3 hours ago
it's not just "fraught with risk"

it's physically impossible with current technology for humans to survive a trip to Mars and live on the surface

space really, really wants to kill life

cosmic rays will kill humans before they even make it to Mars

there is no current technology that shields from cosmic rays

we should appreciate the earth greatly for its atmosphere and magnetosphere that shields us from them

best emulation idea so far is to surround astronauts with several feet of water

but we don't have the lift capacity for that much water weight

the total time on the moon outside the capsule per person maximum was 22 hours

the astronauts kept seeing bursts of light even with their eyes closed

when NASA inspected the helmets there were microscopic groove where some had made it all the way through

cosmic rays are physical particles traveling near the speed of light

the bursts of light were their nerves and other cells being destroyed by the cosmic rays

it was happening to their brains and CNS too

mice exposed to simulated cosmic rays became slow and stupid

delichon•about 1 hour ago
> there is no current technology that shields from cosmic rays

Hydrogels.

https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Techn...

r3trohack3r•about 2 hours ago
> it's physically impossible with current technology for humans to survive a trip to Mars and live on the surface

You seem to say this as if it’s some sort of enlightened reason to “not”

Instead, I suspect for many, enumerating, quantifying and solving the impossible is precisely the reason we venture into the unknown.

criddell•about 2 hours ago
There are plenty of people who would trade twenty or thirty years of their Earth life for a final five or ten as a pioneer on (or in) Mars. I probably wouldn’t volunteer yet, but once I’m in my 60’s? Maybe… It’s one way of eliminating anxiety around living too long with dementia.
bot403•about 1 hour ago
Something nags at me the ideal mars astronaut would be more late 20s and 30s rather than 60/70.
WalterBright•about 2 hours ago
SubmarineClub•about 1 hour ago
It was “physically impossible with current technology for humans to survive a trip” to the Moon when the space race kicked off, too. The whole POINT of the space race was inventing the technology to solve those problems.

Space exploration nay-sayers really are the lamest people imaginable.

lapcat•about 2 hours ago
Although fact checking is essential, I doubt that it will make a difference here. It clearly doesn’t make a difference in politics or religion. Much of the enthusiasm for Mars colonization is based on science fiction rather than science fact, childhood dreams not adult practicality.

I think it’s important to hold Mars enthusiasts to specific timelines. What will humanity do in a hundred thousand years, or a million years, if it survives that long? Who knows. Humanity hasn’t even had agriculture for that long. The relevant question is, what will humanity do with regards to Mars within the coming decades? Let's be honest: nothing much. Elon Musk had made predictions about the future that have already passed and proven false. How many times will you allow him to kick the can down the road before you stop believing lies? Let’s also stop pretending that launching some rockets now will somehow prepare for the hundred-thousand-year future. The best way to get to that future is to preserve the only currently habitable ecosystem in the solar system, by immediately stopping pollution and global warming on Earth. Sadly, Musk is financially backing politicians who are doing the opposite.