Manned exploration of our solar system

[Tennis]

our future is not with this planet. the sooner you realize this the faster we will expand as a species. We already waste billions on stupid shit on this planet.

This sounds like the logic of those who are buying that one way ticket to Mars.

[minteK917]

in order to get there they need a refueling station in orbit, the moons regoloth has heaps of fuel ready to be refined and put in tanks. You need somthing between the moon and the A belt for problems or shore leave, and that would be mars. Possibly smelterys there or a a lagrange point between there and the A belt so your not wasting fuel sending unrefined unpure ore to earth.

Its unlikely anything we send to the asteroid belt is ever manned for a very long time. This can all be automated. The effect on human body from lack of gravity just makes anything deep space with any frequence or long term unviable.

[Theodarzna]

I think the fact its techtonically locked will inhibit this problem more than most. Venus is a big example of greenhouse gas's run amok.

It would be challenging, but Venus does have a lot to be desired. Its the same size as earth, the solar rays hitting it provide ample power, ect. Humans growing up on or floating above Venus will be able to travel to earth. Humans growing up on Mars will eventually never be able to go back to Earth.

[Osmeric]

so your saying we need to pour more money into space to make it cheaper, which is the first step of going to these places, we wont get there on current tech, but we wont get the tech to go there without develping it.

What I'm saying is Apolloism is a noxious and retarded philosophy. We don't do anything by conducting hugely expensive flags-and-footprints spectacles except waste money and buff political egos.

Getting the cost of space activities down and everything will change. Most importantly, movement into space will happen organically, by private efforts aiming at making money, not by centrally orchestrated Potemkin space programs that cannot grow because they are so profit-negative.

[Zeta333]

What I'm saying is Apolloism is a noxious and retarded philosophy. We don't do anything by conducting hugely expensive flags-and-footprints spectacles except waste money and buff political egos.

Getting the cost of space activities down and everything will change. Most importantly, movement into space will happen organically, by private efforts aiming at making money, not by centrally orchestrated Potemkin space programs that cannot grow because they are so profit-negative.

and we dont start to get that price down by giving nasa the little amount of budget it has. We start by pouring money into it like we did in the 60s. These things dont shit out of thin air. Space x is doing great work, but imagine what it could do with an entire country behind it. imagine if more countries had thier own version pushing our space tech to the edge.

[Osmeric]

and we dont start to get that price down by giving nasa the little amount of budget it has. We start by pouring money into it like we did in the 60s. These things dont shit out of thin air. Space x is doing great work, but imagine what it could do with an entire country behind it. imagine if more countries had thier own version pushing our space tech to the edge.

No, giving NASA more money will not get costs down. The entire culture at NASA (and its porkmeisters in congress) is inimical to that effort. Look at how much NASA spends to develop a launcher vs. SpaceX. The NASA cost models said SpaceX could not possibly have done what they did for what they spent, and yet there is Falcon 9 with a seventh recovered first stage.

[Bathory]

I'm working with Space X to develop a means to mine NEOs. 1st one up there is the world's first trillionaire. Waste of resources? Not a chance.

[Zantos]

Its just not a viable thing right now to consider. We have several problems to overcome before manned exploration is possible. Such as just being able to get home to record results.

[Berengil]

Awesome level of interest. Thanks for replying, everyone. Looking forward especially to Skroe's thoughts.

BTW, don't discount the motivating factor of national pride. It got the US to the Moon with 1960s tech.

Of course there's the way out there possibility that one of the Mars probes spots something that needs direct human study.

[Nihilist74]

It would be smarted to advance robotics and computer AI first so that we can develop robots that we can send to the moon, mars and the asteroid belt. Program them to build space stations and space ships out of natural resources. develop AI that can help us with difficult math and science questions to help us with energy production and engineering.

[Mihalik]

I don't know what I am talking about/I'm trolling

The point about space exploration is that as long as humanity is a single planet species are extinction changes are relatively high, but as soon as we become a two planet species the chances are essentially halved. This is the primary medium to long term consideration.

A more important short to medium term consideration is that space exploration drives scientific and technological progress, delivering countless spin off technologies from communications, material sciences, computer sciences, biotechnology etc.

Oddly the technologies that we need to save our planet from the ravages of industrialization are derivatives of the space age things like renewables, climate science, energy conservation etc.

If you aren't trolling, but you honestly mean what you are saying, than you are simply speaking out of a profound and remarkable ignorance, comparable to that of creationists and flat earthers.

[Osmeric]

The point about space exploration is that as long as humanity is a single planet species are extinction changes are relatively high, but as soon as we become a two planet species the chances are essentially halved. This is the primary medium to long term consideration.

It's difficult to imagine a disaster that would render Earth less habitable than any other place in the solar system already is. So I don't see what this buys, survival-wise.

A more important short to medium term consideration is that space exploration drives scientific and technological progress, delivering countless spin off technologies from communications, material sciences, computer sciences, biotechnology etc.

Spinoffs are mostly grossly exaggerated bullshit. Not entirely, but you should be extremely skeptical of these claims. Things like "ICs came from the space program" evaporate when examined closely.

Oddly the technologies that we need to save our planet from the ravages of industrialization are derivatives of the space age things like renewables, climate science, energy conservation etc.

See spinoff comment above. We're getting renewables because of decades of sustained investment in renewables, not because only space engineers are smart enough to discover secrets.

If you aren't trolling, but you honestly mean what you are saying, than you are simply speaking out of a profound and remarkable ignorance, comparable to that of creationists and flat earthers.

You should first determine if you yourself are spewing doctrinaire ignorance before accusing others of doing the same.

[Auxora]

I think the main focus is all on Mars right now and less so (other than probes/satellites) to other planets. Mid-2030's for a manned mission to Mars is last I heard for a target, with 2050's the earliest for any sort of base. Then manned exploration of Mars and getting over all of the obstacles of humans living in an hospitable place that far away would be the next challenge (at least 20 years, and NASA said probably the rest of this century). So that covers at least the next 60-90 years if all goes well.

Mercury and Venus both get to over 800 degrees, and Mercury also goes down to over -250F at night. So that's a long ways off, getting heavy vehicles or suits somehow capable of withstanding that all the way there. That would probably be in the 2100 range at the earliest and to be honest probably after the lifetimes of most folks alive right now, so that's more of a late lifetime of the next generation thing.

[yetgdhfgh]

There is no point in sending man missions to mercury or venus cause as the bear said this porridge is too HOT!

No our resources need to be sent to Mars.

Mars is the future of humanity and the sooner we stamp our mark the better!

[Deleted]

Why send humans when you can send robots. I don't think there will be a manned space mission to colonise a planet in my life time.

[Paulosio]

Waste of resources. We need to fix the issues that our beautiful planet faces not spend billions sending a couple privileged people for a grand tour.

This video does a good job of explaining why I don't agree with that opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJG86JBoqhk

[ringpriest]

Been thinking about this subject for awhile , as I've spent most of the last two days dealing with a family issue and not had much computer time.

...

Wild cards I think are Venus and Mercury. I could see a manned flyby of Venus that inserts a spacecraft into orbit for a few weeks, drops numerous satellites into orbit, and takes lots of cloud-penetrating radar pictures of the surface. Landing is out of the question for humans I think until we have Hulkbuster armor. Venus is a hellhole on the surface, but it does at times come closer to the Earth than Mars.

One interesting aspect of Venus: earth-normal atmosphere is a lifting gas in the Venusian atmosphere.

This idea dates back to the Russians in the early 1970s. The surface of Venus is far too hot, and the atmosphere too dense, for Earth life. However, our air is a lifting gas on Venus with about half the lifting power of helium on Earth. A habitat filled with normal air will float high in the dense Venus atmosphere, The atmospheric pressure there is the same as Earth sea level (1 bar). Temperatures are perfect for Earth life too, just over 0°C.

Also, just as weather balloons naturally rise to their operating level high in our atmosphere - so it works in the same way for our habitats on Venus. They float at a level where the pressure is equal inside and out, and can be of light construction. It is arguably the most hospitable region for humanity in our solar system, outside of Earth itself.

Venus cloud colony habitats can draw on our experience of buildings for the Earth surface, especially Buckminster fuller type lightweight domes. In this way, humans perhaps could colonize floating colonies just at the tops of the clouds of Venus. The surface of Venus is harsh in the extreme, way outside the range of habitability for any known form of Earth life. However, the environment at the cloud tops is surprisingly habitable.

The surface of Venus resembles Hell, but certain strata of its atmosphere are, at first blush, far more congenial than Mars. (Okay, I confess - I just really like airships. )

In the long run, I don't have great hopes for the whole "monkeys in a can" method of space exploration - the universe is harsh, we break easily and require a massive support system - barring massive physics breakthroughs, I don't think we're going much of anywhere. Maybe the AS we create or become will eventually fulfill all our dreams of exploration, and more; either way, I think it's worth trying and hope we can pull it off and leave our cradle.

[Polyxo]

There isn't really a good reason to do manned exploration for the most part. For any one thing you're trying to do, involving people makes it exponentially harder.

[munkeyinorbit]

Doesn't sound like these writers are very qualified for this topic.

I mean..

University of Southern Mississippi
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), Digital Media, Discourse Analysis

SUNY Brockport
Master of Arts (M.A.), English Language and Literature/Letters

Keuka College
Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), English Language and Literature/Letters

Not to mention these aren't even renowned or well reputed universities.

OK professor. What about this topic makes you angry? What technologies can you see us not having in 50 years? Why is it a waste of time sending Humans instead of Robots? I am sure you have a lot more to say instead of just trying to tear people down. Don't tell me you also voted for Trump? That would embarrass me.

[Logwyn]

This sounds like the logic of those who are buying that one way ticket to Mars.

Some bought one way tickets to the Americas a time ago as well. There is similarity in the two, space travel and colonizing outside of Europe after Columbus.

You find a reason someone will make a ton of money and we'll be there not in decades but in months. There is number of benifits that came out of the space race between the USA and USSR. I don't see why more couldn't be found or invented.