Mars Family Robinson

Hi,

I was basically reacting to Bill's post:

*I think everyone is really missing a point here. Its not the crazies
the governments of earth have to worry about, its the legitamate
authorities. After fifty or sixty years of rule from Earth, renegade
colonies might decide to form their own United States of Space, and
when the people who will lose trillions through confiscation, or
destruction will have nothing to threaten a colony that can bomb earth
to the stone age because it controls space, while the earth
authorities will be unable to get the missles off the ground.

Every colony the human race has ever created has revolted. The space
colonies being completely independant, and completely invulnerable,
while controlling weapons that could make the human race extinct would
become very powerful very quickly over shadowing the earth governments.*

I agree with Bill. Very soon Earthlings are going to loose management control to the persons out there, unless the spacehabs are dependent on basic things like food and water from Earth. The construction of the SPS that is envisioned can proceed in two ways. 1) With everything more or less fabricated on earth and transported out there or 2) The major items fabricated from material obtained from the Moon or Asteroids. In scenario one, Earth will continue to have management control, in scenario two Earth will loose management control very soon. The guys out there will break loose as soon as possible, and since most will be highly trained engineers they will figure out how to survive without help from Earth. Only, I think the confrontation will come at a very early stage, so it is unlikely that missiles will fly. Yes, Earth will have the Nukes to knock them out while they won't have these weapons (initially), but on the other hand they would have mastered space in a way that landlubbers on Earth will not be able to comprehend. Nuking them will be just like nuking the whales - who are true masters of the sea. Pointless.

Also, whether Earth retains control or not will depend on the proximity to Earth. Far off colonies like Mars and or say O'Neil concepts in orbit around Jupiter (to take advantage of the copious amount of water available on Europa), will declare independence very early. Breaking off will not mean there will be no trade; trade will continue where possible and required. It is also possible to survive without trade. Remember, Britain and U.S.A, respectively, forced trade on China and Japan, when they were not very interested in it. The trade carried out by the East India Company, initially, was centered around getting the people in China addicted to the opium grown in India and getting the people in India addicted to the tea grown in China. A lot of modern trade also has the same flavour - hence the growing resistance to Globalisation.... USA too, once had the Monroe doctrine!

The other points:

1) The O'Neil concept.........

Construction of O'Neil concept habs will definitely be required sooner than later. Conceptualising such an habitat will be of immense benefit to Earth, since it will aim to recycle everything, reducing to a minimum make up amounts of water and other basic raw materials. (In India, our fields are being rendered unproductive due to excessive application of chemical fertilisers, and we are yet to figure out how to bring back the waste generated in Cities back to the farms!).In the distant future O'Neil concept habs/spacecrafts will have to be built, since they will be required to make the journey to the distant stars. (This indeed should be the ultimate goal of colonisation of Space. To disperse the human population and create the conditions which existed just 200 years back, which allowed, so many different races and cultures to thrive on Earth. To achieve that condition human populations will have to be dispersed by at least 100 light years, so that one culture is not unduely influenced by the other). O'Neil concept habs/spacecrafts will be required for this since even traveling to our nearest star Alpha Centauris will take more than a thousand years.

On the other hand the O'Neil concept suffers from the disadvantage that we are adapting the environment to suit us, rather than adapting to the environment. Organic species have proliferated by adapting to the environment, as we see, even in the case of humans dispersed on planet Earth. So the colonisation of Mars, Moon, Etc should go hand in hand with the O'Neil concept. (Absolute Zero gravity however, will probably be detrimental to any organic life form in the long run?!)

2. Population growth.

*I have no doubt in a very short while, space will be filled with people
who consider it home. But if initial populations can't get a boost from
immigration from Earth, it will take a very long time indeed for any
significant numbers of people to be found in space. One problem with
relying on reproduction rather than on immigration, as you suggest, is
that there's no reason to expect significant growth. It's not
reasonable to expect highly-trained professionals such as you envision
to have family sizes consistent with impoverished 3rd World families.
They're far more likely to have family sizes consistent with those in
the industrialized West, which is actually reproducing below replacement
rates.*

Initial population will obviously have to come from earth. I put the figure of four couples, i.e. eight individuals, as a tentative figure. Probably a better figure will be say 50 couples (hundred individuals)!? I don't think reproduction is going to be a basic problem. Reproduction is built into our genetic code, while it is not built into the Space Shuttle. If the need arises and the environment can support a larger population you can bet your bottom $ that even Highly-trained professionals, will breed like rabbits. Otherwise, we indeed have something to worry about - we will have to fill the O'Neil habs with clones.

3. Cost.

*Even a 4-person program of Mars colonization would cost many tens or
hundreds of billions of dollars.*

With this kind of cost structure we are not going anywhere. It is absolutely essential to reduce cost. I don't agree that because a spacecraft is man rated it has necessarily to be very expensive. Yes, designing any craft to operate in the aerodynamic regime, like the Space Shuttle is complicated. But designing for the space environment where there are no major dynamic forces acting need not be equally complicated. Moreover the space industry has matured, something which was complex yesterday should be less complex today. To start with, design and fabrication of interplanetary spacecraft, which do not operate in the aerodynamic regime can be subcontracted to structural engineering firms or the auto sector and not to the aerospace industries. Six sigma reliability is not something to write home about today, commercial industries today, are also working in this regime.

4. Planting a tree / sowing a seed.

If you wish to plant a giant tree you saw on a trip to the Amazon Jungle, in your back yard, there are two ways to go about it. One, you can uproot the tree, and carry it to your backyard with the help of a dozen helicopters - at great expense. Or you can take a seed or a cutting, and plant the same. In either case there is no guarantee that the tree will come up (due to climatic and other factors), but at least in the later case your expense will be much less and you can cut your losses.

Organic life forms like us have tremendous ability to cope - especially when pushed to the corner. A hundred people dumped on Mars may just figure out how to survive - with material, and more important technical support (which can be reached there with the speed of light) from Earth.

Regards
Selvaraj