Avatar feed
Responses: 9
LTC Stephen F.
2
2
0
I concur with you SSgt Robert Marx. In some areas physicist Stephen Hawking has demonstrated wisdom especially in experimental physics.
On the other hand, when he weighs in on social or moral areas he tends to be foolish IMHO.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SSgt Robert Marx
SSgt Robert Marx
>1 y
In my opinion he crossed the line on civil discourse many years ago. He brandishes people of faith as illusory and believers of fantasy. He went so far as to start a group that assists former Christian ministers who renounce the faith. To be charged with supporting myths does not affect me as much as social ostracism and costing academicians their jobs due to faith in God.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
2
2
0
SSgt Robert Marx Those leaving will be those traveling to MARS for the first time in the 2030 time range - this will be a 10 to 20 year mission if it succeeds, so they all need to be young and healthy. In my opinion, we should have started a colony on the Moon already and claimed a portion of it as United States territory. I can tell you that China and Europe are already talking and planning to set up a station on the Moon, so should we. Therefore, PVT James Strait is correct it will be only a handful to begin with, but if they can reporduce the oxygen, water, and food to sustain there will be more in the future. Just my Star Trek imagination at work LOL!
(2)
Comment
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
>1 y
PVT James Strait - Roger that and I believe everything that is on the Internet too James! LOL - Good Morning by the way!
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Robert Marx
SSgt Robert Marx
>1 y
Mars' atmosphere is entirely too thin for terrestrial plants to flourish. Hothouses would do the trick. The Martian topography is quite rugged and I have read that it is feasible to build adobe structures without kilns. I have read from a few books that claim terraforming Mars is feasible by introducing terrestrial bacteria and other one-celled organisms. A true feasibility study, probably under international review, would be necessary to try to determine if Mars would be receptive to terraforming. There could be Martian lifeforms of a unique sort that have not been identified or even encountered. An environmental impact survey might determine if bringing earth life forms to Mars would be wise. Altering Martian development might not be in human interests. If lifeforms have developed over there, they would best be left alone.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSgt Christopher Brose
2
2
0
This is one of those things that sounds better in your head. What Hawking proposes is possible in a sci-fi movie. In real life, the odds of successfully transplanting humanity to another planet would be statistically indistinguishable from zero.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SSG Environmental Specialist
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
Totally agree, right now using solar sails, man could only achieve one fourth the speed of light, at that speed to leave this solar system and make it to the next closest would take hundreds of years. Until someone comes up with technology like stars wars or star trek we are not going any farther than this solar system.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Christopher Brose
SSgt Christopher Brose
>1 y
SSG (Join to see) - You are absolutely right, but that only begins to scratch the surface of reasons why the endeavor would fail. We would have to design something that would absolutely not fail for hundreds of years (good luck with that!). We would need to either put people in suspended animation and then successfully reanimate them in hundreds of years, or have people live their lives en route to their destination -- and that means having enough air and water for the trip, and being 100% efficient in the recycling of both; providing their own food/clothing/medical care/etc., including some way of not having their bones deteriorate in zero gravity. They would need to have a sufficiently bio-diverse ecology both in the beginning and at the end of their trip, including plants and animals (Noah's ark was freaking HUGE, and Noah didn't have to worry about air or water), and of course the bone deterioration in zero gravity applies to animals also.

At the end of their trip, they would need a way to get all those people and plants and animals to the surface of whatever planet they end up at -- either in one trip, or in multiple trips, meaning they would have to get from the surface back into orbit on their own. They would need to be able to adjust the atmosphere of an entire planet, and they would need to set up a shelter big enough to house all those plants and animals until such time as the atmosphere is breathable.

And they would need to hope like crazy that the assumptions going into putting this whole thing together are correct (a planet with something close to earth's gravity, at the right distance from a sun that provides the right amount of the right kinds of light and radio energy, with an earth-like atmosphere and water.) If they get to where they're going and discover there's no water, their only option is to go somewhere else and hope there's water at their new destination. (If they happen to luck out and find a planet that has both water and breathable air, they'd better hope nothing there is waiting to kill them.)

And of course, all this is going to cost us. We need to pay for making all this stuff, and by "we", I mean the United States with a few other countries contributing a pittance. We would need to get all the stuff into orbit and assemble it there, and hope it doesn't get destroyed by space junk before it ever even leaves earth's orbit.

I could go on and on and on, but you get the idea.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close