The illogic of Mars (was Re; New Member)

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Richard" wrote:

> Why cotton? Why not synthetics?

Forest for the trees. OK. Do you think Nylon would be easier? If so,
where do you get the adipic acid and the hexamethylene diamine?

http://www.psrc.usm.edu/macrog/nysyn.htm

Where do you get the reaction vessels? The filament machinery? The
high pressure air jet, lubricants, yarn twisting machinery, cones, and
other equipment that you need to transform a lump of nylon into
material suitable for clothes?

This hand waving, just so, response is not really an alternative.

Is it simpler to send all of this machinery to Mars so that clothes
can be made there or better to just send the clothes for the XX number
of people if XX is less than the amortization of the equipment and
transportation cost of the machinery with a useful life of YY years.

> > Seeing how these researchers are sent up there on the taxpayer's
> > dime don't you think that there would be Earthside clamoring from
> > other scientists who also want a go at a Mars mission. For some
> > scientists to stay there for their whole lives would foreclose
the > > opportunity for other, and perhaps younger, scientists.

> Scientist have to eat. They need transportation. Not to mention
> clothes, housing, etc. You are forgotting all the support
> personnel.

First off, I don't see how your response addresses the point above. Or
are you saying that the younger scientists could go to Mars to be
truck drivers in support of the scientists who got there first? I'm
not getting it. Also, I'm not sure why it would make economic sense to
send a cook all the way to Mars in order for the scientists to have
catered meals. The cost of transporting and supporting that cook seems
quite outrageous. How come ISS or Skylab didn't have cooks - they
surely would have freed the astronauts to do more astronauty work.

> > Darn, the oldsters got there first, when I was still in grade
> > school and couldn't compete for a slot. Now it's 20 years later
> > and I'm a promising young researcher and I need to be on Mars
to > > test my hypothesis, but they want me to write a research plan
and > > radio it to the scientists on Mars to conduct. Those old
fossils, > > and I don't mean the indiginous variety either, are still
on Mars > > and with them there doing the work, they don't need me. I
better > > call my Congressman or UN delegate or whatever, and complain.

> Now Tangoman. Take three deep breaths and try to compose yourself.
> Don't want you going off the deep end again.

See, it's comments like this that make me wonder, are you being
purposely obtuse or do you have trouble understanding the scenario
protraying a frustrated young researcher dealing with the implications
of your scheme. That's not my voice.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who reacts to purposely ignorant comments.

> > > By the time Mars is totally checked out, it will probably have a
> > > permenant population.

> > This I don't see, unless that research population grows to such a
> > size, that some beancounters decide that it'll make more sense to
> > ship up a cotton mill, steel foundry, and other industrial
> > equipment, rather than simply provide the supplies.

> This depends on costs. It may be cheaper tp ship stuff from the
> Asteroid Belt or Luna.

I just don't get this style of thinking. You never respond with any
reasoning, but let conditional statements suffice as your response. It
depends on this or it depends on that, well, all that does is simply
deflect the original question into the ether.

Where will the Asteroid Belt or a Lunar base get the industrial
equipment? You need an industrial infrasturcture of a fairly
sophisticated nature, and a supply chain of diverse sources, to
produce equipment that you seem to be taking for granted. Same too
with the Zubrin folks.

Do you have any idea how many steps there are between holding a lump
of iron ore in your hand to making a fork? I'm sure you can imagine
it, so why not apply that thought to the outfitting of a Mars base?

To transform your research base into a civilization on Mars will
require that the population expand beyond just the research
requirement. The rationale for all of those people going to Mars is
difficult to devise. All people on Mars will require some basic
necessities. Those necessities, for a small coterie of scientists,
will be expensive to ship from Earth, but far less expensive than
shipping multiple orders of magnitude of machining to fabricate those
necessities.

For a civilization to take root it will have to start making it's own
goods and relying less on supply from Earth. Right there you have a
drastic reduction in lifestyle. No one seems able to offer a reason
why Earth should subsidize 10,000+ people on Mars to start the this
autarkic process. Where is the self-interest?

Sure, you write that people will be needed to support the scientists.
OK, let's say that Earth is willing to subsidize those researchers for
the public good that their research produces, but where do the capital
and wages for the nylon plant and operators come from? Who are they
selling to?

I would jump with joy if some Mars Advocate had some answers to these
types of questions.

> > > Incidentally while we cannot build a beanstalk from the Earth's
> > > surface to geosynchonous orbit today, I've read that one could
> > > be built on Mars using current strength of materials.

> > Yes, the engineering is definitely more plausible, but *why* would
> > we want to?

> You talk about supplying the material for an in-depth survey of an
> entire world. Just think of all the rocket fuel it would take. A
> Beanstalk would save a lot of money.

Oh, I get it now. You mean magic. That beanstalk magically appears and
isn't included in the cost calculations like rocket fuel would be.

Where will the material for the beanstalk come from? Mars or Earth? If
Mars, how is it made? Where does all of the fabrication equipment come
from? All of the raw materials? Even on Mars, building a beanstalk
will be a hugely complicated endeavor. If you're in a city somewhere,
go find a multi-story building and, while I'm sure you've seen these
being built time and again, now pay particular attention to the whole
complex sequence of construction, the materials used, and the
processes involved. Then backtrack a bit. All of those products are
also the result of a complex supply chain.

Can you really advocate the construction, from whole cloth, of an
entire industrial infrastructure only in order to aid some researchers
on Mars?

> > > Mars being closer than most asteroids, would mean that it could
> > > supply material (even ores) as cheaply as the asteroid belt.

> > > Rick Brooks

> > Closer how, in kilometers, or in delta-v? Delta-v is the metric we
> > need to look at. Your statement also doesn't account for access to
> > NEOs that are closer in, in both km and delta-v, than Mars.
> >
> > TangoMan

> Delta-v is what counts here.

I know that. I asked it because you keep writing "closer" in a way
that leads the reader to conclude that you're thinking in distance terms.

You know, Mike Combs has been like Sisyphus and his boulder, he's been
trying to explain the whole Mars fallacy for years but I wonder if he
ever gets that boulder to the top of the hill, IOW, does he convert
anyone. He's got the facts and reasoning down pat.

Look here for his answer to your supply post scenario:
http://members.aol.com/oscarcombs/case_spc.htm#A_Staging_Post

> Are there really that many NEOs?

Yes.

> Mars many also be a useful stepping stone to colonizing the Asteroid
> Belt. And suppling material for the same.

You present a completely false dichotomy: if there is to be a
colonization of the Asteroid Belt it will have to be supplied either
from Mars or from Earth. Of course, all else being equal, Mars will
win hands down because it has a lower escape velocity than Earth.

The "all else being equal" clause is the place where others would say
magic is being invoked. Why would Mars have the same infrastucture as
Earth? Why would the asteroid belt lack resources and what does Mars
have that they couldn't supply on their own? And of course, I'm not
even addressing the assumption that we need to be on Mars before the
belt or what we'd be doing in the belt (though the threshold for the
belt is far lower than for Mars because low thrust/high ISp drives are
fine and raw materials will be easier to find (no gravity and no deep
ores) and to ship than anything from Mars.)

TangoMan