-
Ask a question and get free supportUnlock new privileges and see hidden discussionsWin prizes and earn reputation
-
Question of the day ~ How often do you braai?
-
Afristay giveaway.Win a 2-night stay for two people at an establishment of your choice with R1,000 in spending money. Enter here.
Sign up with GoogleSending people to Mars...
- Thread starter xrapidx
- Start date
mercurial
MyBB Legend
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,902
mercurial
MyBB Legend
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,902
mercurial
MyBB Legend
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,902
Hell yeah.
xrapidx
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2007
- Messages
- 40,312
If I was retired
RiaX
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
- Messages
- 7,211
No. I wont be able to survive with slow internet
HavocXphere
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2007
- Messages
- 33,155
With current tech we can't protect astronauts adequately either way tbh. Shortest possible time in space is currently ~1000 days for a Mars trip (thats return). Thats pretty much suicide. Solar flares are powerful enough to knock out entire power grids here on earth...despite us having an atmosphere & being shielded by the earth's magnetic field. In short its a sht-load of energy.
So until we find a way to prevent extra crispy astronauts we're not going to mars. Shouldn't take too long until the tech is ready though.
To answer the question: Return trip will be easier. We can maybe keep someone alive for 1000 days in space soonish...but the rest of their lives is still quite a long way off until thats possible.
There is another solution though: If you can find a way to get there dramatically faster then you can skip a lot of troubles & just accept the remaining risks. For that we'd need something like Mach 100 though...with current tech we can't get a person much higher than Mach 20 safely.
So until we find a way to prevent extra crispy astronauts we're not going to mars. Shouldn't take too long until the tech is ready though.
To answer the question: Return trip will be easier. We can maybe keep someone alive for 1000 days in space soonish...but the rest of their lives is still quite a long way off until thats possible.
There is another solution though: If you can find a way to get there dramatically faster then you can skip a lot of troubles & just accept the remaining risks. For that we'd need something like Mach 100 though...with current tech we can't get a person much higher than Mach 20 safely.
The moon has no atmosphere.
Actually ~1/4 of a rocket will suffice (compared to earth launch).
According to NASA the moon does have an atmosphere. Insignificant, but it has one.
http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=15724
Crusader
Expert Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,912
Actually the tech does exists to shield astronauts, it's just very cumbersome and would be hellishly expensive to lift up in a rocket. You'd have to shield the spacecraft with a combination of lead, water and plastics. Increasing the weight of any spacecraft exponentially. This shielding would also not be 100% effective, it would just considerable reduce the radiation exposure.
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2006
- Messages
- 23,995
I'm not going in to space until they invent plausible artificial gravity. Being weightless for a while is probably very cool, but I'm pretty sure it gets hell annoying after a while (especially on the length of trip to Mars).
RiaX
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
- Messages
- 7,211
Yes the shielding they use is only effective for short periods of time. What really protects them is the drugs an astronaught takes before flight that counters radiation. However its not good enough for extended periods of time.
Easy to make artifical gravity you just got to spin, however microgravity is extremely bad. Most likely none of us here will survive a trip to space. Even for a short period of time, our CVS will collapse in that conditions. Remember you have to be an extremely fit person to go to space.
Easy to make artifical gravity you just got to spin, however microgravity is extremely bad. Most likely none of us here will survive a trip to space. Even for a short period of time, our CVS will collapse in that conditions. Remember you have to be an extremely fit person to go to space.
HavocXphere
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2007
- Messages
- 33,155
Realistically it would have to be some type of energy field to do the shielding. i.e. Duplicate the magnetic field that shields us here on earth. That tech does not exist yet. But yes, technically lead & water would work too though the weight would kill the travel speed, leading to longer exposure & back to square 1.
RiaX
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
- Messages
- 7,211
That wont save you from UVc radiation
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2006
- Messages
- 23,995
Yes I was going to also mention I'm not fond of radiation either
Regarding centrifugal force to create gravity, the fact is that it's not really gravity and is cumbersome to implement to use in a complex craft design. It's definitely is the solution for now, but I was thinking along the lines of actual graviton manipulation, if that ever even becomes remotely possible. Would be sweet.
RiaX
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
- Messages
- 7,211
The only way you can do that is to warp space-time fabric. The earth itself barely warps the fabric, earth's gravity is due mainly to the roation on the axis. Only things like the sun warp space time significantly. A man made craft isnt going to be able to do this. Secondly our knowledge of gravity stops at the theorized graviton, even if correct then could create gravity my manipulating those sub atomic particle however then ship is going to need a particle accelerator. I say just make the ship a cyclinder and the crew cabin like a gyroscope type thing and let it spin
I wonder if that would work though? :/
I wonder if that would work though? :/