Going to Mars

[stratman]

Reading Erin's good news left me thinking, Fellow Audioholics, should we go to Mars? Is there a good point to going besides ego? Will we really discover anything that will be world-changing, say a new form of fuel? I understand the benefits are usually reaped by the consumer from R&D required for solutions to problems in the ultra-tech world, such as the military or NASA. My understanding, from what I've read and watched on Discovery, such a trip will cost billions, plus an eventual base to be constructed on the moon. Is it your opinions that the benefits will outweigh the costs/dangers? Or should robotic missions be the only option to be used?

 

[Joe Schmoe]

The biggest issue to me is psychological. How can the astronauts be cooped up together in that tiny capsule for such an immensely long time without going insane and/or killing each other?
As for the long-tem plan (colonization), I don't think we have the right to colonize another planet until we prove that we can be halfway decent stewards of this one. As things stand now, we are not even close.

 

[Audioholics]

We should, in reality, never have gone to the moon. While we got technology advances out of it - and will with a Mars Mission - what has it netted us?

So we can microwave food, drink artificial fruit juice and have faster computers... is this stuff that has improved the quality of life? Sometimes I wonder.

I'd sign on a lot more easily if we didn't waste so much pork-barrel money elsewhere.

 

[stratman]

Tang and microwaves, put that way it makes the endeavor look inconsequential, but I think you might be correct. Really what have we gained from Moon exploration? I'm sure there are some of you guys better versed in this, but did we get our money out of it? I also realize that the 60s was the peak of the cold war/space race and given the times going to the moon might have been psyche therapy for the country, especially after Sputnik. Now times are different, the economy is shaky (and that's putting it mildly), we have pressing problems at home, do we really need to put people in Mars, just because Japan, Europe and China say they're going? Could this be a scare tactic by those nations in order to spur us on? And then they tag along as a "partner?" I hope I'm not sounding too paranoid. I've noticed how many "partners" send their astronauts using our vehicles, do they pay NASA (us taxpayers) for this? Or is it part of some goodwill "lets get everyone in on this, we'll worry about the costs later" routine. From what I've read NASA isn't doing too well either, as far as meeting budgets and producing results. If we can use NASA's brilliant brain-power and focus it down here for just a bit, can you imagine what these guys can do. I don't know if we have this yet, but it might be a good idea for this country to develop a close-knit scientific over-seeing bureau to co-ordinate science/technology. Wouldn't concentrating our efforts be more productive in the long run, in whatever endeavor we might find ourselves in, be it space exploration, alternative fuels, medical, educational, etc? Maybe Mars should wait?

In the pursuit of answering my own quetions, I found these two different sites that look interesting as far as tech and advancement of our way of life:

http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/history_center/

http://www.todaysengineer.org/2006/Mar/rand.asp

 

[Audioholics]

Wouldn't concentrating our efforts be more productive in the long run... alternative fuels, medical, educational, etc

Bingo. Put the collective brains together to figure out how to get us off oil dependency... or increase battery efficiency and shelf-life... or harness solar energy in a way that is actually feasible (ie you'd want to put up panels in your back yard cause you could power your whole 150A-service house and run it off batteries at night.)

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Bingo. Put the collective brains together to figure out how to get us off oil dependency... or increase battery efficiency and shelf-life... or harness solar energy in a way that is actually feasible (ie you'd want to put up panels in your back yard cause you could power your whole 150A-service house and run it off batteries at night.)

I agree 100%. Of course, solutions to all other problems, however effective, will be irrelevant unless we solve The Problem: Overpopulation.
The planet can barely sustain the current population. If it doubles again, the ecosystem is almost certain to break down entirely.

 

[stratman]

I agree 100%. Of course, solutions to all other problems, however effective, will be irrelevant unless we solve The Problem: Overpopulation.
The planet can barely sustain the current population. If it doubles again, the ecosystem is almost certain to break down entirely.

Joe, I'm going to break it to you gently: we don't have an over-population problem, parts of Europe right now are facing dangerous negative growth birth rates, mainly France and Spain, which has led their respective governments to pay cash incentives for couples to have more kids, China's population has always been controlled for political reasons, Africa which seems to be the poster country for over-population is being decimated by an AIDS pandemic, the eco-system is more resilient than what people think, nature balances itself. I don't want to get into stats and figures, as this thread is really about the relevance of going to Mars and it's impact on us.

 

[Rickster71]

Did someone say? Tang was "artificial fruit juice"
I'll have to draw the line if you guys say anything derogatory about Velveeta!

 

[stratman]

Did someone say? Tang was "artificial fruit juice"
I'll have to draw the line if you guys say anything derogatory about Velveeta!

Well maybe they can send Velveeta to Mars, as a sort of space-age glue.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

we don't have an over-population problem.

Wow. Just wow.
I guess you really are a caveman!

 

[Pyrrho]

Wow. Just wow.
I guess you really are a caveman!

Joe Schmoe, it is just a matter of semantics; what you call a breakdown of the ecosystem, stratman calls the resilience of nature simply balancing itself.

 

[Pyrrho]

We should, in reality, never have gone to the moon. While we got technology advances out of it - and will with a Mars Mission - what has it netted us? [emphasis added]

So we can microwave food, drink artificial fruit juice and have faster computers... is this stuff that has improved the quality of life? Sometimes I wonder.

I'd sign on a lot more easily if we didn't waste so much pork-barrel money elsewhere.

Interesting choice of words, given that the computers you mention made possible the Internet and this web site. Are you saying this web site isn't worth having, and does not improve our quality of life?

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Interesting choice of words, given that the computers you mention made possible the Internet and this web site. Are you saying this web site isn't worth having, and does not improve our quality of life?

I do enjoy the internet. As a draftsman, however, I would have much higher job satisfaction without AutoCAD. It may be slower, but there is something about drawing by hand, at a table, in pencil or ink that operating a mouse can never approximate. (I have no doubt that there are many other jobs that people feel the same way about.)

 

[Audioholics]

I loved hand drafting. It's so much more... artistic.

 

[Audioholics]

Interesting choice of words, given that the computers you mention made possible the Internet and this web site. Are you saying this web site isn't worth having, and does not improve our quality of life?

I'm saying that "progress" is not always a good thing. I wouldn't have cared if it took another 20 years to get us to the point where, in my view, most people can't sit still for 5 minutes, go outside and play, read a book for enjoyment, or avoid 24-hour news uninterrupted on TV. Or how about only one spouse having to work to support the family while the other stayed home watching the kids and taking care of the home. Fathers coming home before 5:30 every night and sitting down at the dinner table with the family... Once the norm, now it's the exception.

Progress isn't always a good thing. It's certainly not a priority in my life. If it means I'd have a different job right now, who cares.

The promise of computers helping our lives has turned into a big fairytale. All it's really done is caused us to work longer hours and set higher goals.

Remember the song "Working 9 to 5"? That song was made in 1980 when it used to be the norm.

 

[Pyrrho]

I'm saying that "progress" is not always a good thing. I wouldn't have cared if it took another 20 years to get us to the point where, in my view, most people can't sit still for 5 minutes, go outside and play, read a book for enjoyment, or avoid 24-hour news uninterrupted on TV. Or how about only one spouse having to work to support the family while the other stayed home watching the kids and taking care of the home. Fathers coming home before 5:30 every night and sitting down at the dinner table with the family... Once the norm, now it's the exception.

Progress isn't always a good thing. It's certainly not a priority in my life. If it means I'd have a different job right now, who cares.

The promise of computers helping our lives has turned into a big fairytale. All it's really done is caused us to work longer hours and set higher goals.

Remember the song "Working 9 to 5"? That song was made in 1980 when it used to be the norm.

Sorry, you seem to be taking my comment more seriously than it was intended. For what it is worth, I agree that not everything that has been called "progress" is a good thing. But in my opinion, several of the problems you mention are not a matter of technology, but of greedy companies trying to squeeze workers for all they can get out of them. The reason one person often cannot support a family financially is because of companies not paying well enough for it. And that is also the reason for the long hours (well, and also so many people spend their time on line instead of doing their jobs ).

 

[Joe Schmoe]

If I could see some way that going to Mars could improve the human condition, I would be in favor of it. I really don't, though.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Progress isn't always a good thing. It's certainly not a priority in my life.

In an ideal world (which this is certainly not), we could pick and choose the areas in which to make progress. Think of how awesome it would be to have modern medical, entertainment, and communications technology without overcrowded cities, traffic jams, modern warfare, etc.

 

[stratman]

In an ideal world (which this is certainly not), we could pick and choose the areas in which to make progress. Think of how awesome it would be to have modern medical, entertainment, and communications technology without overcrowded cities, traffic jams, modern warfare, etc.

I thinks it's called Utopia, as long as man is on Earth we will have all of the above.

 

[Tarub]

Fill out the questionnaire and lets all the Audioholics members be part of the first human colony on Mars starting 2014.

http://www.google.com/virgle/index.html