/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10405444
Easier access to resources.

the only real benefit would be having easier access to resources, but even that wouldn't be that significant of an advantage imo. for example with mars you have two captured asteroids in orbit around the planet that you can extract resources from, and in addition launch from mars itself is relatively easy due to low gravity and thin atmosphere, you could probably even build some kind of tether to make it easier.

>>10405444
no, there absoluetely isn't.

>>10405472
you can capture asteroids and have better and easier access to ressources.

>>10405486
>you can capture asteroids

And build the thing right next to Earth or Moon without sending people on 6 months travels through radiation.

>>10405486
>you can capture asteroids

No you cannot as it takes enormous amounts of delta-v to redirect the orbit of what is essentially a mountain in space. The only asteroids you can capture are tiny worthless rocks.

If you want to colonize an asteroid, then you will have to build a space station next to one.

no

just the fermentation of religion will have a new boundary to attempt and fail at again and again and again and again and again and again and maybe again for a very long time. We should be doing space station to help bolster the sense that the air down here needs to learn to clean itself around us. Like when the chinese make it dirtier, we should go up learn more and then come back. They can't possibly be goading on that level. Why not just do it that way?
A good source of objectives then could be that the worst we could encounter in a space station collapse is a collapse of like nobility scheming classes or something becuase only the rich will be able to afford it and any harms and dangers that are not earth-like can be encountered on mars too.

So it may be to prevent harm coming to the upper classes sans leisure classes. Because they go to volcanos and shit like that anyway.

>>10405444
look at it from the money perspective.

mob heads join the mob as poor men. no rich men joined the mob. they join, they prosper and they offer their services. The services move them up a ladder and they in turn move around and pay everyone around them just like in the movies and as they've heard happens from like idiots in the mob. This keeps happening and eventually a smart man says something to this dumb smart man, see rich man, and suddenly these things are important. This makes it easy for the other mob dumb leveled retards to jump in and sell other dumb mob level retardations. Like making google an international super power because girls hate having to be in real life.

So see it this way. The mob needs the money to be up in the air. Not on the ground where we are dealing with real life, not. We are dealing with the mobs right now. Like the real life mafias and no one knews them better than Trump does. That's the plain and simple of it.

We're on Mars because it's a big red dot in the sky and not the big red dot on our planet. Or the big green one on my cheek.


The spacestations would literally bring up all kinds of surveillance questions that no one is minding and would make it easier for to really just kind of start minding our own business and stop settling to at least "WANT" to beat the chinese. Settle on authority and mind your family after that. All education has purpose and it works towards your goals.

>>10405444
If space must be colonized (either on a planet or in orbit), then one advantage a planet colony would have over an orbital one is ease of expansion for when the population inevitably grows. On a planet, the materials are there to easily add an extra dome or to seal off a cave. In orbit it may be harder as there is so solid ground to easily build something on. The problem gets worse if the station that the orbital colonists live on spins (which I'm sure is a requirement unless the colonists don't mind atrophied muscles).

Sure there are advantages to an orbital colony such as easy access to solar energy and the freedom to tailor the living conditions to your liking, but it isn't as if orbital colonies are the only viable option.

>>10405546
you simply need to find an asteroid that isn't going very fast and then alter its orbit using nuclear explosions and later some rocket boosters for trajectory fine-tuning. the asteroid will be captured by earth's gravity then and stay in leo.

>>10405444
If we can impact the Martian ecosystem faster and cheaper than building a space station that meets a functionally similar purpose, yes.

>>10405579
What the fuck did I just read?

>>10405444
Why not both? In some things, logic must not dictate the boundaries of human curiosity.

>>10405653
Honestly, sounds like an AI writing based on a prompt.

>>10405546
Delta-V is not an issue because you are on an asteroid and can just keep producing the fuel you need.

"Space colonization" is a white power fantasy, hoping to repeat same colonization scenario people around the world had to suffer through when whites had free reign. I'd like to think humanity now is above this kind of exploitative thinking and we can do things that are actually important, like AVERTING FUCKING EXTINCTION LEVEL CLIMATE CATASTROPHE we are currently going through.

>>10405692
Most asteroidal material is just rocks and maybe metals. It is not fuel. And you would need to convert most of the asteroid into fuel to move it. And for what? You may as well utilize it where it already is.

Asteroid colonization is one thing, but moving asteroids around the solar system like billiard balls is pants on head retarded.

>>10405695
this but unironically

>>10405486
>you can capture asteroids
On paper, yes. In reality, not so easy. As a viable economic endeavor, HAHAhahahhahahahaAaaaaa......

>>10405444
No, you're better off deconstructing planets and turning them into rotating habitats, if your goal is to maximize living space.

>>10405745
mass driver tho

>>10405745
You can use rocks as propellant. Not exactly efficient, but it's not like you are going to run out of rocks anytime soon. So what you would do is put a giant solar farm on an asteroid, install a lot of rail guns, and then shoot them out and steer the asteroid this way.

However, most asteroids actually have gigantic water-ice reserves, so you can also just produce rocket fuel and use that instead.

>>10405824
see >>10405837

>>10405837
Only asteroids that are far from the Sun have large amount of water. But then you lack solar energy to split that water.

>>10405656
Until we have engines that can reach Mars in less than a month this is bullshit.

Elon's "plan" was just a marketing tool and if NASA goes to Mars it's going to be only for samples and flag.

Next step is Moon and large space station.

>>10405843
C-type asteroids have decent amounts of water for their mass, it should be a problem.

>>10405848
>Until we have engines that can reach Mars in less than a month this is bullshit

Number pulled out of your ass. You are just coasting most of the trip anyway to it does not matter much whether it is one month or five.

>>10405839
Is that sci-fi fairy tale supposed to be an argument?

>>10405923
There is nothing fairytale-y about it, at least not more than a city on Mars or in LEO. For asteroid capturing you would only need to slow them down. So you mass-install some sort of drives and use whatever the asteroid offers as a reaction mass. You then slow the asteroid down and make it intercept with earth orbit, then further slow it down so it doesn't escape from earth's orbit. You could easily capture an asteroid in a time frame of a few decades this way.

>>10405863
Only few people were in space for half a year or longer and they were all wrecks that had to learn how to walk again.

6 months trip to Mars is pure bullshit. It's going to end horribly.

>>10405952
Wrong you dumb fuck, flight to Mars only takes 3 to 5 months one way, and astronauts routinely spend 6 months on the ISS without significant issues.

Low gravity may be an issue for an actual colony with children, but it will not stop a mere Mars mission.

>>10405444
Why do either?

>>10405444
Honestly? Probably not.
Mars is one big meme.
Venus has more potential and even more so does the moon.

That is if we forget all about the asteroids existing, if we need fucking resources.

Verdict: fuck Elon M*Sk and his reddit cronies who believe in Earth 2.0 in ten years

>>10406047
>Mars is one big meme.
>Venus has more potential

Mars may or may not be a meme but to say fucking Venus has more potential? Mars is a garden of eden compared to that acidic hellscape.

>inb4 colonizing an atmosphere

lol

Mars is for gays and tranies
Venus is where man should fuck
Mars is virgin, cold ass
Venus is so hot

>>10406086
a post died for this

>>10406085
If you build enough solar shades you can get the CO2 to precipitate out of the atmosphere

>>10405444
Planets are arguably harder to destroy through certain kinds of disasters or warfare.

>>10406254
That is a benifit, it is hard to blow up a planet without a RKM or anti-matter. As opposed to an orbital habitat

>>10406254
Is it though? A planet is locked in its orbit, a space station, theoretically, can change position and dodge whatever danger is coming.

>>10406275
It takes a lot more energy to produce a similar amount of damage. In addition, something truly catastrophic like an impact that burns 5% of the surface of a planet vs perforating 5% of the surface of a rotating habitat have very different degrees of survivability.

>>10405985
>without significant issues

Without permanent damage maybe but sure as fuck with significant issues.

>>10406296
Then I'm sure there will be a way around this.

Like Mars' 1/3rd gravity being less stress on the body

>>10406047
>venus
>more potential than mars

Look bro, fuck your vape cloud planet with no hope for it other than gay ass balloons. Mars can have FUCKING COOL ASS LAND ROVER TANKS

>>10405936
That's the "on paper" vension.
Not a word about how this could ever be cost effective. This requiers huge investments over multiple decades for what is ultimately a marginal yield of some rare elements.
Never going to happen.

>>10405444
>In all seriousness is there any logic in trying to colonize poisonous wastelands like Mars instead of building large space stations?

A science outpost on Mars would be nice some day but that's it. For some kind of space economy space stations and asteroid mining makes more sense.

>>10407509
>marginal yield

Some asteroids have more rare elements in them than earth.

>>10405546
so build stations next to place like Ceres?
Live in perfect artificial environment and just use automated mining to get resources nearby

>>10406047
>it’s the Venus troll
Venus colonization is the Flat Earth theory of spsce exploration

>>10406328
Underground on Venus
Need energy? Heat? Acids? Just open air hole

>>10405444
Megastructure is de facto the best solution of mankind, however, they are extremely difficult to construct, while other not-big-enough stations can be hardly proved that they have the capability to support a self-sustain ecosystem. The critical issue is we still don't know exactly how much space needed to build a self-sustain ecosystem, meanwhile, we did successfully to colonize deserts and arid lands. Therefore even it sounds impossible, but the terraforming of Mars is the most feasible way for the human to build the second home.

>>10406047
>Acid and toxic atmosphere.
>Extremely slow self-rotation.
>Hellish surface with unfathomable pressure.
>Abosulutely ZERO magnet field.

Only braindead would think Venus is better than Mars.

>>10407549
We might be closer to the station part already
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vTNP01Sg-Ss

>>10406296
Significant issues begin after a year in weightlessness. 3-5 months is routine and they can walk almost immediately.

>>10405444

>>10405444
It's literally easier to travel to another star system than to terraform Mars. Also you get away once and for all from all the faggotry of earth.

>>10405444
>In all seriousness is there any logic in trying to own your own house on a large piece of land instead of renting an apartment in a commie block?

>>10405605
>Isn't going very fast
Relative to what body?

>>10407739
OPA fags are taller but other than that, accurate.

>>10407739
Hey MCR you need to fix your flag, it has one moon too many

>barren wasteland
you never know, there could be artifacts

>>10407610
The atmosphere in 50km above Venus surface is actually the most earth-like place in the whole solar system. Earth-like gravity, no radiation because of the massive atmosphere above you, and 0-50 degrees throughout the day. You could live inside a balloon that is filled with breathable air. Energy is also abundant since you can just burn carbon as much as you want. You could also use the carbon to manufacture a lot of stuff. However, this colony will definetely be depended on imports from certain ressources it can not filter out of Venus atmosphere. But here comes the big strength of the concept: It is kind of the middle ground between a space station and a colony on the planetary surface. Since the Venus atmosphere reaches up much higher, than Earth's, designing an SSTO spaceplane is actually not so hard. So you could have easy and cheap space access, while also enjoying a similar to earth level of gravity and radiation shielding. This would make it possible to relatively cheaply mine asteroids for all the ressources you don't have in the atmosphere.

>>10407558
Ceres, Vesta, Pallas and Martian moons - Phobos and Deimos

>>10407591
>we still don't know exactly how much space needed to build a self-sustain ecosystem

not much at all

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottle_garden

>>10407588
Venus underground is as hot as the surface.

>>10407838
>Since the Venus atmosphere reaches up much higher, than Earth's, designing an SSTO spaceplane is actually not so hard.

It is not height but velocity that you need. SSTO wont work on Venus just like Earth.

>>10407838
>The atmosphere in 50km above Venus
Stopped reading here, will you cloud city faggots just fuck off.

>>10405579
please let this be pasta

>>10405444
To do it before the Chinese do it.

Friendly reminder there is in fact no poison on Mars.

>>10405444
All logic says space will never be an option and we should just fucking fix the mess we started on our own one and only habitable world.

Doesn't stop brainlets on this board from fantasizing about the joys of living in extraterrestrial hell.

>>10405476
What resources? Do you plan on eating rocks?

Launch with what fuel? lmao a tether you must be retarded

>>10405843
>>10405850
>C-type asteroids have decent amounts of water for their mass, it should be a problem.
This is the current thought about where most of Earth's water came from. C-type asteroids, not comets. Hayabusa's sample return should shed some light on this.

solid ground > flimsy limited space contraption.

Nigga we finna have space elevators and shit for our big ass stations