![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One Way Trip...
Jan. 16th, 2004 10:38 amThinking on the recent announcement by President Bush, his goal is to spread humanity into "the cosmos". Actually quite a nobel goal - not quite sure if he means it mind you.
Obviously, this is going to be rather costly, ranging from anything like ORobert Zubrin's low cost "Mars Direct" at a mere $20bn through to a probably unjustifiable $1,000bn - although they are talking about a 20 year project.
Paul Davies, the physicist, apparently suggested something which I've thought for a while. If we are serious about this, and, perhaps we should be. Why not plan just a one way trip.
We know that Mars has water, it has trace elements necessary for survival - the gravity, while low, is not unreasonable. Certainly the radiation levels are higher than you'd like, but not something a little shielding can't prevent. We could work on the two way travel side of things, of course, but the important thing is that if we go to Mars we go to stay.
Would we have any trouble finding colonists?
Obviously, this is going to be rather costly, ranging from anything like ORobert Zubrin's low cost "Mars Direct" at a mere $20bn through to a probably unjustifiable $1,000bn - although they are talking about a 20 year project.
Paul Davies, the physicist, apparently suggested something which I've thought for a while. If we are serious about this, and, perhaps we should be. Why not plan just a one way trip.
We know that Mars has water, it has trace elements necessary for survival - the gravity, while low, is not unreasonable. Certainly the radiation levels are higher than you'd like, but not something a little shielding can't prevent. We could work on the two way travel side of things, of course, but the important thing is that if we go to Mars we go to stay.
Would we have any trouble finding colonists?
