Hacker News Reader

Comment by reynhaim | Hacker News Reader

Mankind undertakes numerous endeavours where the benefits might be non-existent or very indirect. I would argue that when it comes to colonising Mars, we're looking at the latter case.

First rather obvious thing is that building the colony requires a great deal of technological advancement, which in turn creates employment throughout society from research positions to supply chain vacancies. These advancements might also lead to commercial successes which in turn create even more employment and likely an increase in the quality of life.

Second it is a huge inspiration for a lot of people. The very idea that we can conquer space is something that makes me feel shivers. At the same time it is art, testament of the good parts of our species. That romantic notion might end up inspiring many young folk to take careers in fields that contribute to the betterment of mankind.

View on HN

No I totally get that. My point is if we want to get to that lofty goal of space exploration and colonisation, then our own Moon really is the obvious choice. The supply chains, the technology, the achievement is no smaller than it would be on Mars. For some reason people threat it as almost "too easy" which is obviously completely nonsense. We should built and maintain a permanently inhibited base(colony?) on the Moon before venturing out all the way to Mars. Surely having a visible colony so close to us would be a huge uplifting achievement to all of mankind.

The bottom of the ocean is perhaps less glamorous, but it's no less technically challenging - the risks of having a permanent base on the bottom of the Mariana Trench would be huge, but we could try living there permanently, growing our own food, conduct research etc - it many ways it's more similar to space exploration than many people think.

You raise a good point. Start with the low hanging fruit before leaping to the apex. Walk before sprinting.

The Moon is very difficult as the long days result in extreme temperatures. Daytime temperatures can reach 253.4 degrees Fahrenheit (123° C). Covering a large area in a reflective surface can dramatically lower that, but the Apollo missions only worked because they stayed for a few days near lunar dawn.

There are ways around this, but the moon is a harsh mistress.

Make the first colony one thin, long pipe across the entire surface. The difference in temperature would provide a steady flow of air at the average temperature.

This is probably completely ridiculous for reasons obvious to someone who knows what they're talking about.

Ok, so... we've been doing all that for a hundred years, and the result is we turned our planet into an unlivable oven.

It requires some amazing mental gymnastics to call global warming the "result" of going to space. Exploring space has given us plenty of real word benefits, like communication links and weather satellites

From a pure technology standpoint an under sea mining colony seems like a better first step. Like Mars internal combustion engines are useless and constant supplies of oxygen are required. Resource wise the ocean covers more land than the surface of Mars or the moon and it’s within shipping distance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com