Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Carlee — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 03:38:40 GMT

Does anyone have any good astronomy/physics sites that are good to go to, because I am 13 and very intresed in those.
Thank you,
Carleedawn

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Chris Eldridge — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 16:52:03 GMT

People of a calm demeanor with some meditational practice are probably best suited for such close quarters. A-typical test pilot-types might be too dominating over such time spans. A person who is any good at meditation can literally sit through the most noisy, calamitous, and distracting situations as if it was a calm, breezy, summer afternoon.

I'm not sure this would be a realistic test of what a true mission would hold for the chemistry of the people. Mars Society volunteers (from what I know) just show up on the day the project begins, whereas, a true NASA crew would have already spent many months (years?) training together for the mission. Thus, the NASA crew would have already “gelled” (or discovered potential conflicting personalities) before the launch date ever arrived.

Robert Zubrin has done a tremendous amount to promote Mars, to which we are indebted to him. However, I’d give him a lot more credibility if he just acknowledged that (for now) robots are the best way “to explore” Mars. A Mars mission could suck planetary science dry of every last dollar it has and I don’t think a true explorer would wish that. If who you are as a person can change when a better idea comes along (despite how much you’ve invested in previous efforts), nothing can ever stop us.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Bobby — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 21:17:58 GMT

This would be a tremendous challenge for anyone, I don't care who you are. I might like to try somthing like this, but frankly I doubt they'd accept me, even though I am the atypical hands-on kind of guy .

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Loren, Bay Area, California — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 22:20:06 GMT

So they're supposed to stay "in sim" at all times, except when being chased by those nasty Martian polar bears. Sweet!

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Don Hilliker, Onaway, MI — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 16:49:15 GMT

Well: I have said this before, and it needs to be said again. This goes back to the show on his first hab attempt which failed to deploy correctly. This IS NOT science. This is nothing but playing the parts that sound fun while ignoring all of the little details like how to get that kind of mass to the site. Before we waste time on the cute fun stuff, we need to have the infastructure to deliver the stuff to whereever it is needed. When the first hab crashed and needed lots of help getting set up, that shows just how far from reality he is. In the real world, had they been depending on that hab, all would have been DEAD because they are only worried about the fun and sexy parts of the program, not the nuts and bolts of how to get it done. The media does all a disservice by presenting this kind of trash as science

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Jeff Doehring, Mesa, AZ — Sun, 03 Sep 2006 23:33:33 GMT

People think that this is fun and games, but the fact of the matter is, this is for science, to test one's limits possibly to the edge, to see how you react. I personally would not want to be a lab rat. Four months does not seem like a long time, however, think of being isolated for four months, and then decide if you can handle it or not. Chances are, you can't.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Mike N, Santa Rosa, Ca — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:13:44 GMT

Hands on engineering is something that is needed in a situations like this. A scientist is great in the lab but in an improptude environment, even if its on earth requires adaptation and skills that will help the team survive. Testing how people will respond to a given environment is important from both the mental as well as the physical stand point. Where do we sign up?!

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Bill — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:25:38 GMT

If we can put a man in a machine to land on the surface of mars walk around and pick up rocks and then blast off the surface and come home, then we can put a robot in the same machine, roll around pick up rocks and then blast off the surface and come home. Why waste tax payer dollars for a manned mission? Do it with a robot first, and if you accomplish it, then send a person. When we were fist putting things into orbit, a man wasn't the first thing was it? I don't think so.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

A. Lisa Swift — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 04:33:56 GMT

I think there's room for both kinds of research, and my reasoning has to do with the differing purposes of the research.

First, how can you build the necessary transport for all the mass involved if you don't know in advance how much mass you need to transport? The amount of water necessary for survival, for living comfortably, and to allow for a disastrous loss of a major containment module is at present unknown. This mass is a major portion of the overall mass needed to be allowed for when calculating fuel, size of booster, size of vehicle, etc.

Second, I doubt that any of the critics calling this research "fun" and "sexy" has ever considered the type od "space suit" these people will be living in during their out-of-doors explorations. Current technology gives us space suits that are enormously heavy, hard to manouever, and difficult for bending, not to mention having ridiculously primitive sanitary facilities and odor-elimination systems. And I'm talking about the latest in NASA equipment. What's fun and sexy about having to explore an unknown area in one of those?

Third, what kind of ground transportation for Mars exploration will they need? Something along the lines of a moon buggy? A self-contained, pressurized RV? Both? How will we know without researching the needs ahead of time?

Robots are fine, but there are some of us who would rather go there and see things for ourselves. I am one of them, though I know I don't have a chance of going, or even being a part of one of the research groups. Why? I am neither scientist nor engineer, I'm too old, too fat, and disabled. 'Nuff said?

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

John C — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:08:12 GMT

In response to Carlee Dawn:
As you're entering high school, make sure you study your Math and Physical Science especially hard, if you want to be an Astrophysicist or Planetary Scientist. Make sure not to neglect your other other subjects! Your discoveries will not be worth much if you can't write about them! But excellence at these are essential. As a GREAT source of inspiration I would recommend ESPECIALLY Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" series. If all else fails I'll lend you mine, but ask your science teachers first.

There're many good Planetary Science websites (use Google to find them; look up "Hubble Space Telescope", Mars Rovers", "Cassini" for examples...). These have lots of neat stuff on them, but you have much Math and Science to learn before you'll be able to understand them fully.

Best of luck, young lady!

In re "HabSims": DH has this right. I don't like to 'put down' people, like Mars Society, who are enthusiastic about space travel, but "Mars Station", like "Bio-Dome" before it, puts the cart WAY ahead of the horse.....

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Michael Hicks — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 11:45:55 GMT

Hail the Explorers!

In every age there are those who cast their gaze to the far horizon and those who see only the wolf at the door. In our time, many say that America's best days are behind her. That the human race has failed of its promise, and that the earth itself has begun an irreversible decline.

If our civilization still exists in a few centuries, they will writr about this period in history in one of two ways: either to revile us as the self-centered idiots who utterly trashed the planet, or to celebrate us as the ones who resolved to give Mars to our children.

So. How do YOU want to be remembered?

* * *

'Tis not too late to seek a newer world
to push off, and sitting well in order
smite the sounding furroughs.
For my purpose holds to sail beyond the sunset
and the baths of all the western stars until I die.

It may be that the gulfs will wash us down.
It may be we shall reach that Happy Isle and
meet the great Achilles whom we knew.
For though much is taken, much abides.

And though we are not now that strength
which in old days moved earth and heaven,
that which we are, we are.
One equal temper of heroic hearts
made weak by time and fate
but strong in will:
to strive, to seek, to find,
and not to yield.

(Tennyson, "Ulysses")

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

James, Springfield, TN — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:27:01 GMT

Good to know that some people still have hope for the future. I hope that we as a species do not give up on what we do best----- push the limit of our knowledge and dreams ever so farther.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Gerry Williams, San Diego, CA — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 16:50:21 GMT

Robots are fine, as far as they go. Mars Exploration Rover "Opportunity" has been on Mars for 930 days and has traveled over 5.61 miles. "Spirit" has been there for 951 Martian days and has gone 4.27 miles. Both have been doing science and reconnaissance all along the way.

A person in a spacesuit could have done the same as each robot in one day, in addition to travelling in more hazardous and steeper terrain. A person would also be able to find unusual things that pique their imagination and curiosity and explore them on the spur of the moment.

The best machine to explore Mars is a human being.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 23:24:06 GMT

Gerry Williams,
I don't think your comparison is a fair one. Sure, humans riding in a dune buggy can cover a lot of terrain, but so can a dune buggy robotic rover with several robotic arms and a far greater suite of instruments – far more actually, and the rover would never have to return to the same location, which would have already been explored in the first week.

-----

In fact this brings up another point of contention I have with the Mars Society plan. When I first heard Robert Zubrin’s plan to keep building up important equipment at a main landing location after each successive mission, it sounded like an amazing idea. That was until I realized that such a central base is not mobile and would serve even less scientific value as time went on. When we fly to a planet we want to land in dozens of places all over the planet such as at both of the poles and many craters and river valley. These places are thousands of kilometers apart and one central base would get old real quick.

PS. For the price of sending humans we could land a robotic M1 tank on Mars with a mission that lasts decades. Similarly, if you say we could use a flying craft on Mars to get explorers out further and further, than I’d say we could use the same "flying craft" as an even better robotic mission.

If your true intention is to promote colonization than promote it. Don’t try to convince us falsely that “humans are explorers and only they can do the job.” I’m sure that if a probe was available to Lewis and Clark they would have much rather have sent that first - to get a look around - then to head off into the “great unknown” without a clue as to where they were going.

I actually would believe that the people in this country would just as soon agree to a colonization plan (regardless of cost) as they would to some high and mighty exploration plan - perhaps even more so. Thus, hiding your intentions gets us nowhere. Apollo proved we can do anything we want. We do not need another example.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

John C, Fairbanks, AcK — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 00:29:45 GMT

Here again, I must point out that the one-to-one comparison of a Mars Rover with a human geologist is INAPPROPRIATE. For the cost of even the cheapest (and least capable) human mission to Mars, we can have 100-200 MERs roving Mars. Second, a human geologist in what passes for a 'spacesuit' has nowhere near the abilities of a human on Earth. A space-suited human could barely even get back up if they fell down under Mars' gravity; the assertion that a human could accomplish in a couple of days what the rovers have, so far, is pure fantasy.

While I share the conviction that people must eventually go to other planets (to live, not to simply go plant a flag!), people are the wrong choice for doing planetary exploration.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Chris Eldridge — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 20:45:28 GMT

I certainly see Garry’s point that "A person would also be able to find unusual things that pique their imagination and curiosity and explore them on the spur of the moment." There is a delay involved with current robotic missions that is a hindrance. However, robotic missions have their advantages in this regard as well. As a rover scans the surrounding terrain, it can see in a variety of wavelengths and at far greater levels of magnification than a Mars walker. This ability gives scientific “teams” on the ground a far greater ability to decide where to go next than a sole explorer on Mars.

It also seems that the most easily accessed water ice in the solar system - apart from Earth - might be on the planet Ceres in the asteroid belt. Mars certainly has water but it is a gravity well (making it hard to get to and from) without any beneficial protection from Ultraviolet light (at least on the surface). Thus, perhaps if we wished to establish an off-world library of DNA, knowledge, and living people, it would be best in a space station around Ceres, not on Mars.

Large space station-based colonies have other advantages that the moon and Mars do not have, and that is the ability to get out of the way of an asteroid strike. It is very unlikely that an asteroid would strike the exact location of a Martian outpost, but the surface of Mars itself can translate the force of a very large impact across many thousands of miles, whereas a space colony would not feel anything at all from a near miss.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Alan Boyle — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 01:44:21 GMT

Carlee Dawn's question is probably among the most important here... Looks like this Astronomy for Kids site might be a good prospect:

http://www.dustbunny.com/afk/

And for stargazers, Heavens-Above is a must:

http://www.heavens-above.com/

I'd agree that NASA has a whole bunch of great sites ... mars.jpl.nasa.gov, saturn.nasa.gov, photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov, spaceflight.nasa.gov ... and then there's the Hubble Web sites:

http://www.hubblesite.org
http://www.spacetelescope.org

On the physics side, here's a good place to start:

http://www.physicscentral.com/

... And some other fun links to check out:

http://www.haverford.edu/physics-astro/songs/
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/
http://www.compadre.org/informal/
http://www.ems.psu.edu/%7Efraser/BadScience.html
http://www.simplyscience.com/physicalslinks.html
http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/
http://www.nyelabs.com/

Got any other suggestions? Add to the comments...

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 03:11:35 GMT

The Cosmic Log and MSNBC are the only sites I’ve ever needed :) I've learned to pay close attention to those links you have each day on the log and wonder how you keep up and find them all on top of what amounts to writing an article a day.

Thirteen years old is a tough age to keep an interest in a topic not generally accepted by fellow teens. My recommendation to people of all ages is to be aware of the "subtle" interests you have throughout your life and pursue them. You don’t just wake up with a passion for wanting to play the guitar, learn astronomy, of make hardwood furniture. You start with a small interest and test the waters of each. Ultimately, you find true heartfelt interests that last a lifetime. Having a "point of focus" in your life that completely engulfs you (History, Science, Music, Art, Crafts, Nature, Auto Mechanics) makes you better in every other topic that you will ever come across! You learn how to learn, you learn how to teach yourself, and you learn just how involved each and every topic tends to be regardless of how simple they appear on the surface. The universe awaits those who dare to open their eyes!

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Texrat — Fri, 08 Sep 2006 03:20:36 GMT

"Well: I have said this before, and it needs to be said again. This goes back to the show on his first hab attempt which failed to deploy correctly. This IS NOT science. This is nothing but playing the parts that sound fun while ignoring all of the little details like how to get that kind of mass to the site. Before we waste time on the cute fun stuff, we need to have the infastructure to deliver the stuff to whereever it is needed. When the first hab crashed and needed lots of help getting set up, that shows just how far from reality he is. In the real world, had they been depending on that hab, all would have been DEAD because they are only worried about the fun and sexy parts of the program, not the nuts and bolts of how to get it done. The media does all a disservice by presenting this kind of trash as science" -Don Hilliker

You completely miss the point. Try taking that obvious chip off your shoulder and re-examine the effort with a bit more objectivity. Of course this is scientific, in great part if not in whole. Just because you disagree with the man or the premise doesn't change that. Your assertion that a hab failure would result in death "in the real world" (assuming you meant Mars) is disingenuous: far better to learn what works and what fails BEFORE actually putting people at risk.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Frank Glover Rochester, NY — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 23:47:48 GMT

It should also be noted that NASA itself does similar things, even with robotic systems:

http://www.spaceref.com/
news/viewsr.html?pid=22025

...if certain things aren't going to work, wether humans or machines, you want to know that on Earth, not on-site.

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Tony Rusi, Seattle Washington — Fri, 15 Sep 2006 23:55:23 GMT

My problem with this experiment is the fidelity of the simulations. The fake space suits don't model the real situation on Mars well enough to have any meaningful results. ILC Dover's space suits are near ten million a pop, and they are not designed to provide thermal insulation in the thin martian atmosphere. Nuytco Research of Canada can actually make a fully functional space suit that would be useful on Mars for 100,ooo a pop. I would say to Zubrin, it is time to up the fidelity of your simulations and go Canadian!

Signing up for an Arctic Mars

Jane, Southern Mississippi — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:44:51 GMT

I remember Biosphere in Arizona years ago. I don't remember what they were practicing for, though. It didn't work, but I thought it was a neat idea at the time.