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

[phucheneh]

1) 10 is a different number from 11. 10 did not land on the moon.
2) Yes, it is indeed said to have hit...[looks up exact number]...39,897 km/h (11.08 km/s or 24,791 mph)...on the return slingshot from the moon.

 

[ManyBeers]

1) 10 is a different number from 11. 10 did not land on the moon.
2) Yes, it is indeed said to have hit...[looks up exact number]...39,897 km/h (11.08 km/s or 24,791 mph)...on the return slingshot from the moon.

Sorry disregard my post.

 

[Paratus]

I seem to post this every couple of weeks but interplanetary and interstellar travel may not be as far off as some think:

On the bleeding edge we have the Quantum Vacuum Plasma Thruster. Effective ISP in the millions, no on board propellant required. It will need electrical power and a lot of it. With a multi-megawatt nuclear reactor constant meaningful thrust should be available. It would reduce trip times to Mars from months to weeks and outer planets from years to a few months.

Functionally it pushes on the sea of virtual particles that QM says exists.

This assumes the laboratory experiments continue to check out and as space worthy prototype can be made.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_vacuum_plasma_thruster

The research team claims the "Q-thruster" utilizes the quantum vacuum fluctuations of empty space as a "propellant". The existence of quantum vacuum fluctuations is not disputed, because experiments with the quantum mechanical Casimir effect have unambiguously demonstrated that quantum vacuum fluctuations do exist. What remains to be proven is that these fluctuations can be utilized for this practical purpose.[1]

The Q-thruster operates on the principles of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), the same principles and equations of motion used by a conventional plasma thruster. The difference is that the Q-thruster uses the atomic particles spontaneously produced by quantum vacuum fluctuations as its propellant. The atomic particles produced by the fluctuations are subsequently electrically ionized to form a plasma. The now electrically charged plasma is then is exposed to a crossed electric and magnetic field, inducing a force on the particles of the plasma in the E×B direction, which is orthogonal to the applied fields. The Q-thruster would not technically be a reactionless drive, because it expels the plasma and thus produces force on the spacecraft in the opposite direction, like a conventional rocket engine. However, this action does not require the spacecraft to carry any propellant. This theory suggests much higher specific impulses are available for Q-thrusters, because they only consume electrical power and thus are limited only by their power supply's energy storage densities. Preliminary test results suggest thrust levels of between 1000–4000 μN; specific force performance of 0.1 N/kW, and an equivalent specific impulse of ~1x1012 s.[2][3]

On the OMGWTF Scotty! side is the Warp Drive experiment going on:

http://www.decodedscience.com/faster-speed-light-nasa-looks-warp-drive/40698

There are two sets of microscopic warp drive experiments planned at White’s Eagleworks laboratory.
In the current “low fidelity” experiment, NASA is using ordinary positive energy to try and warp local spacetime. A “White-Juday” interferometer splits a laser beam into two beams. Very high energy capacitors are placed around a small region of one beam.
“The light will go through that region as though it seems like a shorter distance.” Dr. White told Decoded Science. “So it takes less time for it to cover that region with the device on versus off.” When the two beams are recombined, detectors look for tiny changes in the interference pattern.
A future experiment will attempt to extract negative energy from the vacuum to warp local spacetime. “We have a line of technology called Q-thrusters, which works off the principle of pushing off of the quantum vacuum.” said Dr. White. “Q-thruster technology has invention disclosures in the NASA system.”
“We hope to adapt that technology to construct some test devices for our interferometer — to get closer to negative (energy and) pressure. This would get us one step closer to something that is non-trivial in magnitude.”

This would be huge, if it's possible. We know from the inflationary period after the Big Bang that space time can expand faster than light. So now the question is can we do the same.

 

[norseamd]

what about antimatter?

we already have some basic technological advances with antimatter

 

[Jeff7]

what about antimatter?

we already have some basic technological advances with antimatter

- It's a mass-efficient means of energy storage.
- I don't think we know how to properly harness the annihilation reaction. Gamma rays are nasty.
- It's currently the most expensive substance in the world. If I'm remembering right, it'd cost quite a few trillion dollars for one gram of antihydrogen.
- Good containment would be pretty important.

 

[Paratus]

Oh, I forgot to mention, this show has no chance of succeeding, unless succeeding is swindling folks out of money.

 

[Gibsons]

Nah. You'd just need a small room completely lined with HD OLED screens and whatever is the latest and greatest speaker and sound output. An entire generation of MMORPG players would gladly take the trip to Mars.

It would also help if a masseuse/therapist went along.

They'd need their own server, the lag from Mars would be brutal.

 

[norseamd]

They'd need their own server, the lag from Mars would be brutal.

at least 8 hours

 

[Jeff7]

at least 8 hours

Nah, less than that. Mars orbits out farther than Earth does, but not as far as Earth is from the Sun.
Earth to Sun and back is around 17 minutes.

Busting out a search engine....Mars orbits about 140M miles from the Sun.

So if Mars was almost opposite Earth in its orbit (not quite, so that the Sun isn't blocking communications), that'd be roughly 140M + 93M = 233M miles.
Under 42 minutes round trip, worst-case.
If they're at closest approach, then a little over 4 minutes.

In either case, most games or browsers would probably call that a timeout.

 

[norseamd]

Nah, less than that. Mars orbits out farther than Earth does, but not as far as Earth is from the Sun. Earth to Sun and back is around 17 minutes. Busting out a search engine....Mars orbits about 140M miles from the Sun. So if Mars was almost opposite Earth in its orbit (not quite, so that the Sun isn't blocking communications), that'd be roughly 140M + 93M = 233M miles. Under 42 minutes round trip, worst-case. If they're at closest approach, then a little over 4 minutes. In either case, most games or browsers would probably call that a timeout.

you were right

3 to 22 minutes from wikipedia

must have been thinking about another planet or something

 

[norseamd]

I seem to post this every couple of weeks but interplanetary and interstellar travel may not be as far off as some think: On the bleeding edge we have the Quantum Vacuum Plasma Thruster. Effective ISP in the millions, no on board propellant required. It will need electrical power and a lot of it. With a multi-megawatt nuclear reactor constant meaningful thrust should be available. It would reduce trip times to Mars from months to weeks and outer planets from years to a few months. Functionally it pushes on the sea of virtual particles that QM says exists. This assumes the laboratory experiments continue to check out and as space worthy prototype can be made. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quant...lasma_thruster

what about vasimr

 

[Paratus]

what about vasimr

Well VASIMR is even further along. They were supposed to have a test article ready to fly to the station some time around now. I'm not sure what happened to it.

Depending on the size of the reactor and vehicle, VASIMR can cut the trip time to Mars down to 1-3months.

I actually got to see a prototype a number of years ago, very cool.


Any serious exploration is going to require one of these advanced propulsion concepts and a multi-megawatt nuclear reactor. Until then we're stuck, LEO, the moon or within a few million miles of Earth.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I don't think we know how to properly harness the annihilation reaction. Gamma rays are nasty.

That's been looked into. The best idea seems to be a reaction motor driven by injection into water. A super steam engine of sorts.

 

[Jeff7]

That's been looked into. The best idea seems to be a reaction motor driven by injection into water. A super steam engine of sorts.

Oh god....the steampunk fantasies might be real!

 

[chihlidog]

Oh, I forgot to mention, this show has no chance of succeeding, unless succeeding is swindling folks out of money.

Except the show is sort of an afterthought. Merely a means of finance.

 

[Paratus]

Except the show is sort of an afterthought. Merely a means of finance.

I'm sorry but currently the price tag, for even a one way trip for a single person that has any chance of even just landing one live human is an order of magnitude or more likely several orders of magnitude more money than any potential TV show could raise.

 

[norseamd]

I'm sorry but currently the price tag, for even a one way trip for a single person that has any chance of even just landing one live human is an order of magnitude or more likely several orders of magnitude more money than any potential TV show could raise.

money is the least of their worries

 

[DigDog]

On the bleeding edge we have the Quantum Vacuum Plasma Thruster.

no we don't.

i understand the recent popularity of the michio kaku school of "any bullshit relatively possible is reality" thought, but please dont quote theoretical science as industrial fact. the correct process is design it, develop it, build it, promote it, not the other way around.

we have no technology - in an industrially producible shape - which can put people on mars.
sure we could starve the planet and throw everything at it like we did in the moon landings (and fingers crossed) but on the scale of a commercial enterprise, this is not feasible.

this new mars thingie is exactly the same bs as the mining of asteroids a few months back - it's a thinly veiled scam, designed to attract high risk investors, people who generally do not have the specialised scientific knowledge to understand why theoretical science isn't reality.

fyi a clue would be anything requiring nuclear power, since nuclear reactors dont output electricity, but heat, and require some sort of exchange system (i.e a turbine) to provide any power. making one sufficiently small is beyond us and getting one into orbit is just a pipe dream, today.

If not, then simply the promotion of a IP is enough to make the brand into something valuable: imagine product, claim developement/research, sell the t-shirts.

 

[Paratus]

no we don't.

i understand the recent popularity of the michio kaku school of "any bullshit relatively possible is reality" thought, but please dont quote theoretical science as industrial fact. the correct process is design it, develop it, build it, promote it, not the other way around.

we have no technology - in an industrially producible shape - which can put people on mars.
sure we could starve the planet and throw everything at it like we did in the moon landings (and fingers crossed) but on the scale of a commercial enterprise, this is not feasible.

this new mars thingie is exactly the same bs as the mining of asteroids a few months back - it's a thinly veiled scam, designed to attract high risk investors, people who generally do not have the specialised scientific knowledge to understand why theoretical science isn't reality.

fyi a clue would be anything requiring nuclear power, since nuclear reactors dont output electricity, but heat, and require some sort of exchange system (i.e a turbine) to provide any power. making one sufficiently small is beyond us and getting one into orbit is just a pipe dream, today.

If not, then simply the promotion of a IP is enough to make the brand into something valuable: imagine product, claim developement/research, sell the t-shirts.

Well let's see. Where shall we start with this diatribe.

How about the "pipe dream" flying nuclear reactors.
You know the ones we and the Russians flew since the 60's.

From Wikipedia

SNAP-10A was launched from Vandenberg AFB by an ATLAS Agena D rocket on April 3, 1965 into a polar low Earth orbit altitude of approx. 1,300 km. It is in a retrograde orbit. Its nuclear electrical source, made up of thermoelectric elements, was intended to produce over 500 watts of electrical power for one year.[2][3] After 43 days, an onboard voltage regulator within the spacecraft — unrelated to the SNAP reactor — failed, causing the reactor core to be shut down, after reaching a maximum output of 590 watts.[4][5] The reactor was left in a 700-nautical-mile (1,300 km) earth orbit for an expected duration of 4,000 years.[6] In November 1979 the vehicle began shedding, eventually losing 50 pieces of traceable debris. The reasons were unknown, but the cause could have been a collision. Although the main body remains in place, radioactive material may have been released.[1][4] Many further nuclear reactors were sent into space in Soviet RORSAT satellites; also, radioisotope thermoelectric generators have been used.

The US-A programme was responsible for orbiting a total of 33 nuclear reactors, 31 of them BES-5 types with a capacity of providing about two kilowatts of power for the radar unit. In addition, in 1987 the Soviets launched two larger TOPAZ nuclear reactors (six kilowatts) in Kosmos satellites (Kosmos 1818 and Kosmos 1867) which were each capable of 6 months of operation.[1] The higher-orbiting TOPAZ-containing satellites were the major source of orbital contamination for satellites that sensed gamma-rays for astronomical and security purposes, as radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) do not generate significant gamma radiation as compared with unshielded satellite fission reactors, and all of the BES-5-containing spacecraft orbited too low to cause positron-pollution in the magnetosphere.[2]

So note that these are Nuclear Reactors not RTGs. While the power output is low we started work on a 100KW reactor for the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter back in 2005.

JIMO was to have a large number of revolutionary features. Throughout its main voyage to the Jupiter moons, it was to be propelled by an ion propulsion system via either the HiPEP or NEXIS engine, and powered by a small fission reactor. A Brayton power conversion system would convert reactor heat into electricity. Providing a thousand times the electrical output of conventional solar- or RTG-based power system, the reactor was expected to open up opportunities like flying a full scale ice-penetrating radar system and providing a strong, high-bandwidth data transmitter.

Using electric propulsion (8 ion engines, plus Hall thrusters of varying sizes) would make it possible to go into and leave orbits around the moons of Jupiter, creating more thorough observation and mapping windows than exist for current spacecraft, which must make short fly-by maneuvers because of limited fuel for maneuvering.

Unfortunately it was canceled, but not before they spun up Westinghouse Naval Reactors. I've got a family member who works there.

Now as for the Q-thruster. I've already said this is research work, but it's hardly bullshit.

They're using well known theories on mangnetohydrodyamics, which are used in currently operational plasma thrusters, to push on virtual particles. Virtual particles are predicted to exist by quantum mechanics. They were confirmed to exist back in the 40's by the Casmir experiment.

Momentum is conserved by the equal and opposite reaction of the particles and thruster. Energy is conserved because the particles still annihilate. Kinetic energy of the thruster will be less than the electrical energy put in.

Once more this thruster is currently being tested in the laboratory. If the experiments continue to show progress they'll manufacture a prototype to try on the ISS.

The group hopes that testing the device on a high-fidelity torsion pendulum (1–4 mN at 10–40 W) will unambiguously demonstrate the feasibility of this concept. The team is maintaining a dialogue with the ISS national labs office for an on-orbit detailed test objective (DTO) to test the Q-thruster's operation in the vacuum and zero-gravity of outer space.[1]

The warp field experiment is much more speculative. However, the theory behind it does not violate relativity. It's also based on the observed behavior of the universe. The cosmic microwave background radiation and recently discovered gravitational waves both confirm inflationary theory. Inflationary theory says that space-time expanded faster than the speed of light.

The experiment is required to verify or falsify the theory. If it works out then we can move on to industrial production. If it doesn't the theory or test article will have to be modified.

As it turns out this basic research is being done at my place of work and u have friend who's involved.


While I agree the show is a scam and said so already, my point is the technology required to go to Mars or elsewhere is farther along than most people think.

What's missing is the political will and corresponding budget to fully develop it.

 

[norseamd]

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?

 

[silicon]

Just curious. I know they're serious and I have to admit, I am really pulling for this to actually work. They have some serious brainpower and clout behind them and let's be honest .... TV is where the money is. I think it's the most viable plan out there right now for getting to Mars.

I'm just curious, since there doesnt seem to be a whole lot of popular interest, how many of you would at least watch the TV show?

https://www.mars-one.com/

EDIT:Cliff's Notes for those who arent familiar with Mars One.

- Non-profit based in Europe. Aims to send a manned mission to Mars (one-way trip) by 2023.

- Financing is planned to be mostly through media revenue. THey plan to make it a sort of reality show following the selection, training, and actual mission.

- Serious brainpower on-board with this. Realistic plan of the mission and the technology and equipment needed.

I have some doubts as to the viability of this program. Mars is a hostile environment and those that go there will need to live totally within the shelters. Going outside means having to suit up. man was not meant for such restrictive living. As in any new colony they have to consider many things, law and order, spiritual needs, hospitals, schools. All very hard to do in the martian climate. And just to arrive on mars is 9 month voyage. Can they land safely? many ifs in the formula and will our level of technology support this?

 

[norseamd]

I have some doubts as to the viability of this program. Mars is a hostile environment and those that go there will need to live totally within the shelters. Going outside means having to suit up. man was not meant for such restrictive living. As in any new colony they have to consider many things, law and order, spiritual needs, hospitals, schools. All very hard to do in the martian climate. And just to arrive on mars is 9 month voyage. Can they land safely? many ifs in the formula and will our level of technology support this?

there is no way they can support colonists who are not even trained in professional spaceflight indefinatly on the surface

there is too much to worry about to survive

i guess they plan on sending more supplies but there are almost always some problems with anything that have to be worked out before we can have a perfect mars colonization

this would already be hard enough with professional astronauts

 

[AViking]

This whole thing reminds me of the South Park episode where they send an Orca to die on the moon.

 

[DigDog]

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.

 

[JTsyo]

Even beyond the volume of gases required it's impossible because mars core long ago lost it's dynamo effect such that it doesn't produce a magnetic field like Earth's core. Therefore no protection from solar wind = bye bye any atmosphere we try to produce.

If you can pressurize Mars's atmosphere it would take thousands of years for the solar wind to strip it. Giving you time to replenish or work on something new.

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.