Mars One. How many of you think it will work?

[norseamd]

The biggest issue I would think would be experience. All we know is about how to keep humans alive in low earth orbit. going from there to Mars is a huge step. 10 years isn't enough time to build up the experience by doing something on the moon. I think the best option for Mars would be to first send robots that build the structures, make sure everything is stable and then only send colonists.

unfortunatly they seem to only think about doing it in a short time frame and ignoring what everyone else is thinking which would include building the structures first with robotic stuff and then also build that under protection from radiation

 

[Paratus]

2Kw of power for a plasma thruster? yeah ok. also, good luck with the shielding.
but seriously, you confuse again theory with production. we have the technology to fly around by jetpack or hovercar, but we do not use it because they are not industrially feasible - one uses a buttload of fuel, and the other is dangerous and inpractical. and also uses a a buttload of fuel.

as i have written previously: yes, we *could* put people on mars, if we really wanted to and who cares about the risks. but there is no way a commercial enterprise can do so because the technologies necessary are not industrially feasible today. or, in plainspeek,

you cannot go to the hardware store and buy "component needed for thing".

technical applications of science simply do not work that way. we knew how an atomic bomb would work, but it took them what, four years to discover how to make the bomb explode. this is with fermi and hopp' at the helm and the US throwing all the money they had at it.

one thing is a "reasonable theory", another is reality. example:

it got said before, the idea of using WoW players isn't that bad, why bother with astronauts. you can find them easily, who cares if they die, and the chance they will survive is higher than zero. it's a possibility, it's just not realistic. nor is anything else realistic in this project.

i understand you have the scientist's enthusiasm at the potential of science, but remember that cynicism always wins out in these situations. with large projects, even when we have all the resources, manpower and technology, it still takes effort to bring these together without fucking up, and even then it doesn't always work.

still, i'm sure they will sell tons of t-shirts.

It's not necessary to tell me how difficult it is to pull of a large scale space project. I've spent most of the last 14 years helping assemble the International Space Station. I also spent a year working Constellation which was supposed to go back to the moon. It was cancelled.

I'll also let you in on a secret. Most of our equipment is NOT commercially available. It's all special built by Boeing, Lockheed, etc. Even the COTS stuff we buy has to be certified by NASA folks. Which costs time and money.

What I'm trying to share here, is that basically all the technology required to get a crew to Mars and back is out of theory and in some form of development. What's lacking is budget and political will.

This show, however, has no chance at all of being successful. Unless success is scamming money out of scientifically illiterate people.

It's interesting you use the manhattan project in your argument. My argument is that most of the technology we need is passed the Chicago Pile moment. Quite a bit is past the atomic bomb testing phase as well.

 

[Paratus]

small fission reactors are fully feasable at this time and there was a full scale program at one point

with what paratus put up it seems that at least some fission reactors have been put into orbit

they are most certainly considering how to use small fission reactors for the upcoming space expansion

the question is how fast will it go

will we have a small lunar outpost by 2030?

I don't want to lead you astray here.

It's true we've launched small nuclear reactors in the past, but no one is seriously funding development as far as I'm aware. The electric propulsion guys are mostly aiming at testing using the ISS or small satellites, both solar.

Again it comes down to funding and political will.

 

[norseamd]

I don't want to lead you astray here. It's true we've launched small nuclear reactors in the past, but no one is seriously funding development as far as I'm aware. The electric propulsion guys are mostly aiming at testing using the ISS or small satellites, both solar. Again it comes down to funding and political will.

yah but i know that they have been considered about how to power a lunar or martian outpost

so they are in long terms plans even if no one is producing them