Surface areas: Israel versus the planet Mars

Post Reply New Topic

The lower gravity on Mars makes using ultralight materials for construction much more feasible. I think in the beginning some temporary structures with maybe some kind of inflatable dome with reflective materials (to shrug of some of the radiation) could be useful. They could then begin making bricks and other materials for a more permanent underground structure. Using as much tele-operation of mining rovers as possible to avoid surface radiation could also be a good idea.

Also, any labor not done by robots would probably be best done at night since the sun is the primary source of radiation.

That's a very good point. The similar day length on Mars will certainly make life there much more adaptable than many other planets

There is no dark side of the moon, really. In fact, it's all dark.

Quite. Only 39 mins more for length of day, an axial tilt of 25° (which may be beneficial for plants if any surface greenhouses are able to be built with sufficient radiation protection, otherwise I think solar arrays on the surface ought to be used to collect energy to be stored in batteries and used for the general power situation in addition to powering lights for sub-surface greenhouses) and an escape velocity which is faster than people can run make Mars a good long term colony. Ruveyn is right though about the moon being the logical first step, especially in considering the length of travel time should anything go wrong that isn't instantly catastrophic.

However, it would be interesting to see if Heinlein's notion about the moon declaring independence would ever happen. Really though, any space colonies, once no longer dependent upon Earth for basic necessities, would probably want autonomy from the Earth's government... and who could blame them with how the Earth is governed. Kim Stanley Robinson in Red Mars though did convey a good point about people being essentially the same no matter where they are, however having independent governments is better, in my opinion, than having a central government which would be bound to be as corrupt or more than any smaller one.

I think nuclear power is also useful. The planet is already quite radiation bathed so I don't see much worry about the effects. It could be a potential place to try out radical designs of nuclear reactors that people feel are too dangerous to do on Earth or near the Earth
I'm really hoping that Austin's Stone Aerospace succeeds in their goal at beginning lunar mining by 2015. If major development of the moon begins within the next ten years, there could be larger space stations being built using lunar resources in the Lagrange points within a much shorter time. It would also mean a much sooner time frame for exploration of Mars & the asteroid belt.

Nuclear power would allow for less solar panels to be targets of any meteor showers or dust storms, however I would imagine that Earth would raise a fuss about a colony with the potential to develop nuclear weapons and it may be proscribed initially.

The worry about radiation would be for biological life, such as humans and plants. If the plants die off from being gamma rayed, then there is reliance upon less efficient technology for scrubbing CO2 as well as dependence due to necessitated food supplies.

The Stone Aerospace sounds rather awesome. I hope they get their program running. That would be an excellent start to the development of a real space industry rather than the current campground in low earth orbit otherwise known as the ISS.